The main advantage of Mars is the public will probably pay for a manned mission to Mars. They won't pay for another space station nor a manned mission to a tiny asteroid. That perception could change in 5 or 10 years. NASA can't do much better than another space station oriented to space colony, unless there is a large change in leadership. My guess is tiny asteroids will get us to space colonies sooner. Second best is a tiny unsafe colony that costs a lot less than the space station, but my views are shared by few.
MY plan is telescoping tubes which can be carried to an altitude of about 500 kilometers in the cargo bay of the space shuttle. These tubes of thin metal and/or carbon fibers, extend to about 100 meters long. About 4 meters in diameter at the big end and 1.4 meters in diameter at the small end. Three to seven such tubes are nested with shock absorbers a few centimeters apart. with an air lock to each adjacent tube. Each should be equipped for survival in case the other tubes fail. A massive radiation shield binds the tubes at the big end where the colonists can huddle during a solar flare. The shield is shaped like a giant bottle cap. The big end normally points into the maximum dangerous radiation. This likely is not sufficient radiation protection, but is the best we can do near term. The colonists will have a short average life expectancy, unless we can genetically alter them for improved free fall and radiation tolerance. Neil