The Calculus Behind Hillary Clinton’s Big Environmental Endorsement
LCV’s decision to back Clinton, which angered the Bernie Sanders campaign, shows why a stellar green record is not enough.
<For better or worse, left-leaning organizations tend to endorse based on who’s most likely to win, not who shares their values the most,” said Hurowitz, who is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy.>
And the differences among the Democrats are small compared to their collective gulf with Republicans. The main GOP White House candidates are vowing to roll back Obama’s climate-change regulations, expand access to drilling on federal lands and waters, and back Keystone.
LCV, in announcing the endorsement Monday, evidenced no hesitation about Clinton. The group flagged Clinton’s work on climate change while secretary of State, her renewable-energy plan laid out over the summer, her opposition to Arctic offshore drilling, and other policies.
“When it comes to fighting the climate crisis, the stakes couldn’t be higher—and we are confident that Hillary Clinton is the right person for the job,” said Gene Karpinski, president of LCV Action Fund, in a statement. “With her proven history of leadership, strong environmental record, and a campaign committed to building a clean energy future, Hillary Clinton is without a doubt the most effective leader to stand up to Big Polluters and push forward an aggressive plan to tackle climate change and get it done.”
http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/92287/calculus-behind-hillary-clintons-big-environmental-endorsement
= new reply since forum marked as read
Response to Cha (Reply #3)
Response to Historic NY (Original post)
Response to ColesCountyDem (Reply #5)
