Given 2 days to think, Hillary Clinton outdoes her opponents in responding to #BlackLivesMatter

Martin O'Malley and Bernie Sanders went to the progressive conference Netroots Nation over the weekend to try to establish themselves as the progressive alternative to Hillary Clinton. They ended up performing poorly in their confrontations with #BlackLivesMatter activists. Monday, in a Facebook Q&A, Clinton seized the opportunity to come off as more progressive than her would-be progressive challengers:

(Facebook)

The two Democratic presidential candidates who appeared at the conference, Martin O'Malley and Bernie Sanders, got confronted by progressive activists affiliated with the #BlackLivesMatter movement. And neither of them responded terribly well: O'Malley accidentally echoed the opponents of #BlackLivesMatter, while Sanders's crankiness didn't exactly ease frustrations with him or his supporters.

Hillary Clinton got to skip out on all of that drama. And when she finally got asked how she would have responded, during a Facebook Q&A on Monday afternoon, she didn't just have the benefit of the extra 48 hours and a polite questioner — she (and her campaign) had the advantage of being able to think through the response as it was typed. So it's hardly surprising that Hillary's typed response was more respectful to the #BlackLivesMatter movement than O'Malley or Sanders's attempts to respond to the protesters:

Of course, it's impossible to know whether Clinton would have been as calm and respectful if she'd been on stage instead of O'Malley when protesters took the microphone Saturday for an impromptu presentation on the deaths of black women in police custody. But her response is consistent with her campaign so far: Clinton has a "tough on crime" history, but her 2016 campaign has made a visible effort to embrace reforms in criminal justice and policing, and to talk about racial disparities in doing so.

This doesn't mean that #BlackLivesMatter protesters will never come after Hillary Clinton at some future event. But what happened over the weekend doesn't appear to have been a wake-up call for her campaign; rather, it was the culmination of something they appear to have been preparing for.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via