I was surprised by the MILLER naming, but have no issue with it. Like some others I would think a destroyer would have been more in keeping with tradition, and appropriate, but I think long term it will be worn with pride by her crew. As for carrier naming with the Nimitz and Ford classes, STENNIS and VINSON should have never happened (and other politicians in other classes). The presidential names have been fine to date, but like Evau8er above I have worry over some future names that may be done for politics. Most the recent carrier names were presidents, many with ties to Naval aviation or Naval service in their careers (BUSH, FORD, pending JFK).
To avoid politics entirely, perhaps a return to "real" names of distinction. Recycling ENTERPRISE is fantastic, WASP and KEARSARGE are spoken for, but RANGER, CORAL SEA, SARATOGA, INDEPENDENCE, LANGLEY, KITTY HAWK and CONSTELLATION, etc. are available as are MIDWAY and HORNET and others but probably not best to confuse them with the museum ships.