I think I’ve figured it out. We need to make Leia the antithesis of her father. Bound by attachments, but strong enough to not let them bring her to darkness.

“She was quick to learn in our training. But Leia was defined by her attachments, choosing to lead the galaxy through diplomacy, as our mother once did. Throughout her life, Leia lost everything, and everyone, but, in the end, she still chose love. A thousand generations live in you now. Leia’s legacy will guide you on Exegol.”

I’ve come to accept the fact that Padme has to be a fan-service reference, because it’s almost impossible to weave her into the sentence in any other way. That being said, I suppose it isn’t entirely fan-service, as it clarifies the type of diplomacy she favors (political). As for the connective tissue between the two phrases, it’s now a juxtaposition. Stating that Leia is defined by her attachments, and then subsequently stating that she lost all of them, yet she still chose to love, is powerful stuff. It brings the saga full-circle, where Anakin’s daughter is able to succeed in overcoming loss, and his grandson is able to save the one he loves from certain death in the first place.