“So many things I could have done, but crowds got in my way.” — Apologies to Joni Mitchell, It’s “clouds.”

All this fuss once again about the size of crowds has graced the presidential campaign trail.

Though it isn’t the first time, this issue somehow has been elevated in importance because it’s supposed to demonstrate how the candidates and their campaigns are resonating with voters.

Many can recall former President Donald Trump proudly insisting that the numbers who showed up for his inauguration in January 2017 were the highest ever. Yet Democrats, countered with photos suggesting much greater sized crowds in Barack Obama’s party in 2009.

Most recently Trump has accused the Kamala Harris campaign of using artificial intelligence fakery to blow up numbers at a rally for her and running mate Tim Walz, So it is apparent that crowd size means a great deal to Donald Trump.

This public relations battle made its way to these parts Wednesday when Vice Presidential candidate JD Vance showed up to make a speech on Trump’s behalf in Byron Center. Writer-activist Amy Siskind  posted a picture of the event and observed, “About 100 people showed up for a JD Vance event in Michigan… 90 of whom were media.”

Other political observers and pundits have remarked that Trump’s numbers at rallies haven’t been large, suggesting his popularity is waning.

The local, state and national media, meanwhile, hasn’t said much about it.

From where I sit, I can’t help but recall the crowds depicted in my favorite political ad of all time — The one with huge masses of young people gathering on behalf of Senator Bernie Sanders in 2016, powered by the Simon & Garfunkel song “All Come to Look for America” from the 1968 “Bookends” album.

But it didn’t really do Bernie any good. His two campaigns were thrown under the bus by his own party.

That begs the question: Does crowd size really matter?