Did Hillary Clinton attend the climate change march?

[karynnj]

53. Actually she could - imagine that she had put out a statement and even showed up

to hold a sign for FIVE minutes. Think of the attention that would have given the protest. It is true that many would have then complained that too much attention was given to someone who had little to do with the event, but that would have been an insignificant, sour grapes type comment.

Hillary is in a fantastic position on this issue and many others. There are many who would LOVE to believe her even if her record has been less than perfect or even good. The same goes for all the minimum wage/ economic justice issues. It might annoy many, who could point to things like the 2001 bankruptcy bill (which failed, but where she was wrong) but the fact is that at the moment, no one else (other than Obama) has the position and spotlight to make as strong a case on issues like this other then Clinton. (Obviously, people like Sanders, Sherrod Brown and Warren have more consistent records - but they can not command the media spotlight she can.)

This is both an asset and a responsibility. One thing I faulted the Clintons with in late 2002 and early 2003 was that they did not use the megaphone, that they alone of the Democrats had, to argue that we should not rush to war, when in fact, the inspectors were finding nothing that made Iraq a threat.

Now, she is in the same position. I heard some of Clinton's speech at the DNC's women's event recently and she really did speak of things we more associate with Warren and Sanders. This is a good thing and she linked in to winning in 2014. I am obviously not a big fan of the Clintons - having believed in them at one time only to be disillusioned. However, she has a big opportunity to use the position she has - inevitable front runner and media darling - to speak of why people need to vote for Democrats in 2014. Then, if she continues the same themes into 2016, she will have earned the right to "use" them by having actively promoted them when the media gave few people speaking of them any oxygen.

The same could be true of environmental issues, but that might not be their plan. Where the Democratic side of economic issues poll very well, there is a long term negative correlation between support of environmental regulation and the state of the economy. Not to mention, even in the best economic times, the environment has not polled high as something that drives votes.

Here the Clintons really have a pretty mixed record. There were many valuable, environmental friendly, executive orders issued in the last year or so of the Clinton Presidency, but Bill Clinton had an awful record in Arkansas. This - unlike woman's issues, children's issues, education, healthcare etc - was NEVER a core issue for either Clinton. There are people, including John Kerry, Al Gore, John Heinz, Joe Lieberman etc who led on this and for whom it was a core value. No one can lead on every issue and it might be that Hillary does not want to align herself with the protesters on this issue.

So, back to whether she should have appeared - my guess is "NO". Part of the reason is that her position is likely going to be more nuanced than the marchers and she faced people asking why she seemed to have backed the Keystone pipeline. I suspect that the Clintons, as in 2008, are tightly controlling her appearances. I doubt they want her at an open rally where people could shout out questions she does not want to answer.