Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Liberal Media Consoles Itself With Comparison of Trump and Obama Crowd Sizes

Liberal Media Consoles Itself With Comparison of Trump and Obama Crowd Sizes

So what?

https://youtu.be/gPZ1UmHEEdc

The liberal media is looking for something to console itself. Anything to show that Obama’s election was bigger, better and more important than Trump’s. The latest talking point seems to be that Obama drew a bigger crowd at his inaugurations than Trump.

The New York Times reports:

Trump’s Inauguration vs. Obama’s: Comparing the Crowds

An analysis of news footage appears to indicate that fewer people attended President Trump’s inauguration than President Obama’s in 2009. The footage on this page was captured 45 minutes before each oath of office. Attendees were still entering the National Mall up until Mr. Trump’s speech.

The analysis by Keith Still, a professor at Manchester Metropolitan University in England, estimates that the crowd on the National Mall on Friday was about one-third the size of Mr. Obama’s.

Professor Still was a crowd safety consultant for the 2011 royal wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton, and has advised the Saudi government on crowds for the hajj, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca.

The initial analysis was limited in scope because footage of a larger area was not yet available. The number of people on the National Mall is typically a fraction of the total crowd that gathers for a presidential inauguration. In 2009, for example, about 460,000 of the estimated 1.8 million people who attended President Obama’s inauguration were on the National Mall.

CNN got in on the action with this handy, commentary-free video:

If your first reaction to this was “So what?” you’re not alone. First of all, it changes nothing about the election or its outcome. Secondly, there are plenty of good reasons for this.

Allahpundit of Hot Air rounds out a few of them:

Media very interested today in pointing out that Obama’s inauguration crowds were bigger

To give Obama his due, it’s no surprise that his 2008 crowd was easily the largest ever. He received the most votes of any presidential candidate in history that year, a record that still stands. He succeeded a president whose job approval had cratered, so he was greeted with jubilation by everyone not a part of the activist right. And of course he was the first black president, whose inauguration was historic beyond the usual reasons.

It’ll be a long time before any president meets that benchmark of excitement. But Democrats have institutional reasons for drawing bigger crowds in Washington too. It’s a heavily Democratic city; it stands to reason that inaugurating a Democratic president will draw many more local onlookers than inaugurating someone from the other party would.

Let’s also not forget that lots of the people who voted for Trump may not have been able to get away from daytime obligations like, you know, jobs.

The media should also be reminded that left wing activists blocked entrance checkpoints for Trump’s inauguration to prevent people from attending. Not to mention the fact that they turned downtown DC into a war zone. No one attending either of Obama’s inaugurations had to worry about being attacked by roving mobs of twenty-somethings bent on destruction.

Featured image via YouTube.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Trumps support comes from all across the country. Traveling is a considerable expense. Obambi could get the progs located just around DC and fill the place up. they are close by, either don’t work or work for the gov.

No valid comparison. As if it mattered…

OK, this is an easy one. The Washington DC area is literally filled with Ogabe supporters; about 95% is a good guess. For them, it was a local event. Trump? His supporters would have to come in from far away, and make it past all the fascists who were disrupting and blocking everything. Moreover, my guess is Trump supports have jobs. So Ogabe had a bigger crowd. Yeah, ok, great. But of those million, probably only 14 had to take time off from work.

    murkyv in reply to bobtuba. | January 21, 2017 at 11:25 pm

    DC consistently votes 90%+ for any Democrat.

    Add in that DC is over 50% black and it doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure that one out.

    And whatever the number, it was at least 400,000 more than attended Hillarys inauguration.

    FYI: Most/many federal employees in the D.C. area are granted annual leave on the day of an inauguration, due to the sheer traffic problems that D.C. has during a *normal* workday.

Maybe it’s a “quality vs. quantity” thing.

In any case, it looks like they didn’t manage to pack in as many protesters as they’d been bragging that they would. What a disappointment.

How did that whole “shut down Washington” thing go, anyway?

Reminds me of an old joke.

Q. What do you call the guy who finishes last in medical school?

A. “Doctor”

Big crowd, small crowd, his title now is “President Trump.”

Eat your hearts out, lefties.

Going tit for tat with the left on their rationalizations is probably less productive than going forward with urging implementation of new executive orders and laws – simply leave them in the dust and fretting.

We will never get these pathetic narcissists to admit they’re in a cult and that their ideas are the result of ignorance, stupidity and/or laziness. We can’t let them lead the narrative.

DINORightMarie | January 21, 2017 at 5:41 pm

Those Occupy Democrat photos are already debunked.

Different shots, angles, distances, times of day, etc.

There would not be as many people there, because the buses weren’t booked to bring in supporters, like those paid to go, and be transported by the leftists to the event.

I am just glad they FINALLY arrested those rioters and vandals, who the press call “protesters.” Took ’em long enough!

They are so hung up on words and appearances, rather than acts and reality. No wonder they are so out of touch. It will probably get worse and eventually the whole lot will resemble Occupy Wall Street, a mess of politcal correctness, virtual signalling, and ineffectiveness. The best thing they do is make things worse for all.

    Oregon Mike in reply to Valerie. | January 21, 2017 at 6:40 pm

    Just watched it. The guy does ramble, but boy does he know how to connect. He made lots of friends in that room.

    And, I bet he reads their briefings….

So size matters?

DINORightMarie | January 21, 2017 at 5:55 pm

Start at 1:20 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svlCj6r7wgA

Spicer on FAKE NEWS!!!

image is the provenance of the non-performer.

Henry Hawkins | January 21, 2017 at 6:00 pm

It is not necessary to explain the irrelevant.

When Trump was getting 15-20-25 thousand people at his rallies the MSM said that the size did not matter…

Lego Insurrection | January 21, 2017 at 6:12 pm

Lol, the photo used as an example of Trump’s inauguration is from just after dawn. Look at CNN’s own Gigapixel photo of the actual event and tell me that crowd was not Yuge.

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/

Fake news.

Spicers comments put the whole attendance thing in question. hard to contest the toll receipts.

Looks like more fake news from the prog media. Why would I be surprised?

Also, DC is 90% black. It’s not surprising that a lot of locals turned out for the inauguration of the first black president.

The party that worships at the altar of Government turns out a bigger crowd to see their King anointed?

BFD

Who woulda thunk it?

Obama’s election was historic (being the first African American president), so in a city that’s 50% African American and more than 90% Democratic, that’s going to be a big draw. That seems like it should be fairly obvious.

A better question is, how many who did come to Obama’s inaugural were ultimately disappointed by him. Obama had a very high approval rating when he was elected – 69%. By 2010 it had fallen to the high 40s, and for most of his presidency, remained in the 40s and low 50s.

A) the entire dispute is just about appearances, so it’s meaningless.

B) without a certified time-stamp on the photo, it’s meaningless too.

LIVE STREAM: New White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer Delivers First Statement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ubOUgWXr5g&feature=youtu.be

So Barack Obama got more people at his first inauguration than Trump did at his. Well, I suspect that Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-tung and Benito Mussolini got more people at their public rallies than showed up to Donald Trump’s inauguration. In fact, those guys may have gotten more people in attendance than Barack Obama did. Does that make them better leaders?

Ignore the important stuff. Spend all of your time and energy on meaningless trivia.

    I kind of want to keep this in my special “Flashbacks” folder for when President Trump accomplishes what he’s set out to do and Americans begin to feel real change in their pocketbook. If he succeeds, and I so hope he does, his second inauguration will be a blowout that makes Obama circa ’09 look miniscule by comparison. Obama’s crowds dwindled throughout his presidency (remember the comparison shots of his first apology tour speech in Germany and the enormous contrast of his next speech there where the media outnumbered the audience?); I suspect (and hope) that Trump’s experience will be the exact inverse of this. Results matter, and should those manifest as expected, Trump’s popularity will soar.

Think of all the government employees who went to Obama’s. Just proof that the federal workforce can be pared by at least 10%.

    murkyv in reply to MIK. | January 21, 2017 at 11:32 pm

    And think of how many doing the protesting yesterday and today who are probably government employees

Never had an interest in attending an inauguration (or a rally for that matter)….that said, if I were ever going to attend one I would not be caught in the crapshow that is DC right now.

There are openly hostile people there with a mission to create problems for strangers that don’t pledge fealty to their cause.

I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking that DC is not a great place to be this weekend.

Well lets look at the voting populations of the DC, Northern Virginia and Maryland. All Liberal Democrats. Lets also consider the threat that must of us feel we would be attacked by some crazy liberals like the ones that were attacking people Thurs. Night, would you want your kids exposed to that?

Even the Women march was offensive and I would not want my kids to experience that either. Best thing to do is stay away from DC, period.

We won the election and we want to get down to business. Don’t get caught up in the noise. Action speaks louder that perception which is all the liberals are. Actors….making a living on pretending, not living life. When reality kids them in the butt, they have a tantrum or just OD on drugs or alcohol.

    “or just OD on drugs or alcohol.”

    The sooner the better.

    My list of “wish people would have a stroke and die in pain” is growing.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Barry. | January 22, 2017 at 10:02 am

      I keep a list of liberals I plan to bite if I ever get rabies.

        Hmm, I guess I’ll have to request all rabid coons captured get turned loose down east, in the hopes…

        Don’t worry though, just bite fast, then we’ll get the treatment started on you.

CNN was on this morning, (not my choice) and the reporting was obvious smear on Trump. Let me turn the filter off and say what the liberal reporter was actually saying “My bu** still hurts”, “My bu** still hurts”, “My bu** still hurts”!!!

Something else mentioned on another blog: Look at the color saturation and brightness of the two photos. The “Obama” photo is darker, which gives the impression of more people.

Also, look closely at the photos, particularly the shadows. The Obama photo was taken in bright daylight, yet is “inexplicably” darker then the Trump photo, which was taken under overcast skies.

Not that the “mainstream media” would resort to lying or anything…

What I hope happens to the Trump administration is that they put their heads down and get to work. If something this insignificant is occupying Trump and Spicer’s time, then we are in for a long 4 years.

    You must have a short attention span if you have not noticed the get “down and get to work” part. If you can find a record of any president getting more done in the days leading up and the first few days after the inauguration, I’d like to see it.

    Fighting a dishonest media needs to be done first and always. A lesson every republican needs to take note of.

      inspectorudy in reply to Barry. | January 22, 2017 at 1:57 pm

      Luckily you are not the new president. Trump could have used this time to blast the Dems for slowing down his appointments and putting the national security at risk because of it. We have seen these childish arguments about every event held in DC for the last twenty years. They are meaningless and only divert attention from the real issues facing us. Trump should save his ammo for the big lies from the msm and not the narcissistic ones like this. The lie about the MLK bust was one worth bringing up but crowd size is as important as the size of his fingers!

        Fortunately, Trump and his advisors paid no attention to people with zero political sense, or those who’s advice was meant to be damaging.

        Hint: Trump won, and ignored the political advice of the nevertrumpers. I’ll go with actual results over fevered fantasy.

        Childish is not a word nevertrumpers should use.

          inspectorudy in reply to Barry. | January 22, 2017 at 4:58 pm

          I have noticed that any criticism of Trump ALWAYS brings out the word “Nevertumpers”. I voted for him dim wit and want him to succeed. I offer advice that I think would benefit his administration/ our country and do not act like a sycophant that he can do no wrong.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | January 23, 2017 at 10:11 am

          I’ve noticed any criticism of the criticizers always drives them crazy, spouting of about “sycophants” and “trumpettes”.

          So, maybe nevertrumper is wrong, my apology. Easy to get confused. But then my original comment was in regards to Trump taking advice from you. You have been offering it all over the internet for months, here and elsewhere. Fortunately, Trump ignored it and was able to win.

          You positively loathe the man. OK by me even though I do not share the opinion. Claiming you voted for him doesn’t change anything. Your advice was wrong, always wrong. As it is here.

          A small sample of your advice, bearing in mind where trump was able to win with his “dummy” campaigning:

          “This woman is as dumb as a stump but she knows that she will NEVER win LA and has no plans to go there. On the other hand DT goes to CT and he knows he will NEVER win there. Who is the dummy? We have 80 days until the election so why does Trump go to the places where he cannot win but ignores the places where he might win? He should get his a$$ back to FL, OH, VA, and PA and stop with the trying to win over the black vote.”

          “The woman is going to walk into the WH because he doesn’t have a clue what to do.”

          My favorite in light of your argument here:
          “How in the hell can he be president if he can’t take advice? ”

          I have more if you wish to continue.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend