General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI've been thinking and thinking. Can't find an answer.
Why do YOU think Trump's inauguration audience was so small?
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,198 posts)Explains everything.
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)didn't he draw large crowds while on the campaign trail?
what happened to them?
Blanks
(4,835 posts)Just like the footage of the Iraqi people dragging down the statue of Saddam. They had tight shots and people bunched in around him.
People didn't show up to the inauguration because they were advised against it to prevent 'normalizing' his presidency.
Now, I will say that Spicer may have had a point that the internet crowd may have been bigger than they are given credit for, I don't know how difficult that is to account for and I haven't seen Jon Karl refute it on GMA. Obviously, the photos of the crowds at the Washington Monument were smaller within 2 minutes of each other (the Obama 2009 vs Trump 2017 photos) but it was cold that day.
What we need to get to eventually is that it's not the crowd size that matters, it is the lie.
We had a president impeached because he lied. I say we stick to the fact that the president lied about the crowd size.
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)I posted a picture that Katy Tur posted from the live feed of the inauguration route.
Empty bleachers everywhere.
This idiot had the nerve to comment "fake news".
I responded with several pics comparing Obama's inauguration to Trump's.
She still kept calling them fake.
bdamomma
(63,922 posts)the only thing which is FAKE is him.
Tommy_Carcetti
(43,198 posts)Key example: One of his first big outdoor events was in Mobile, Alabama at the city's football stadium, Ladd Peebles Stadium.
The stadium has a listed capacity of 33,471.
Trump originally had planned for an indoor rally, but additional demand required a larger venue so the football stadium was chosen.
Now, when they held the rally, they put the stage at the far end of one of the stadium's end zones. The seats behind Trump were all filled up, as were the seats along the sidelines at the end of the field.
The tight shot of the stage made it look like the stadium was packed:
However, when you looked out the other way, the stands towards the opposite end were completely empty:
So the stadium was really just half full, meaning there were probably about 15,000-17,000 or so people actually in attendance. But because he was cleared for over 33,000 people at the stadium, that's what Trump reported it as. And he made the point over and over and over again as if over 30,000 actually showed up, which they didn't.
But regarding the inaugural, the subdued crowd has a lot to do with the fact that Trump's approval as President-Elect was in the 30%-40% range in most polls, which is astonishing because that's when he should be the most popular. He never bothered uniting the country behind him so there was a lack of enthusiasm for him from anyone who wasn't a fervent fan of his. Also consider the fact he lost the popular vote and the nagging questions about his relationship with Russia, and there was a high amount of people who didn't consider him legitimate at all. Finally, other than the fact he's a lunatic who threatens the country, there was no great historical significance behind his inaugural like there was with Obama's. He's just one of 43 other white guys to be elected President.
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)thanks
madokie
(51,076 posts)most anyone who is honest with him/herself has come to the conclusion that the man/cretin is NUTS and unfit for the office
Thats what I think
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)madokie
(51,076 posts)otherwise he'd be on cloud nine instead of in the dumpster
All I know for sure is he is as crazy as anyone I've ever known and I've known a few crazies in my day
But that 30 percent will never see through him and his batshit loony toons so they can be just written off as crazies just like him
nolabear
(41,991 posts)1. People who voted for him voted for a man who they were told would do everything for them. They don't think they have the power to do things themselves to make their lives better (and often they're right for all kinds of reasons, many psychological). They aren't the kind to go to great lengths to travel to an inauguration.
2. Buyer's remorse. There is a certain "Oh SHIT" factor.
3. Paranoia about DC and the fear that has been instilled in them about terrorists and black people. They're afraid that something bad would happen to them.
4. The "movement" isn't a movement. It's a hostile takeover. Now that we libtards have been put in our places they don't actually give two fucks about any causes or convictions. They can slap one another on the back and pretend they won and go back to doing...nothing.
Likely there are many more reasons but that's a start.
jehop61
(1,735 posts)to travel to Washington. Most couldn't afford Inaugural balls and DC hotels. Rally's were close to home and no expenses incurred. Regular folks can't afford that.
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)Phentex
(16,334 posts)the people who need jobs aren't going to have money to spend on hotels and airfare. And I think there were a lot of closet racists who voted and they weren't going to spend their money to let the world know they were idiots.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Hard to say really, since we will never know actual voting numbers due to privacy laws I think maybe the GOP cheated and not near as many people voted for Donny Tinyhands as we are led to believe.
ismnotwasm
(42,008 posts)He won really, because millions of eligle voters choose not to vote for either candidate, not because he had some groundswell of support. He's personally embarrassing to anyone who isn't a bigot, or disturbed or possibly ignorant in some crucial way. I have not met one Trump supporter who isn't touched by at least one of those three things.
MountCleaners
(1,148 posts)if people were really enthusiastic about Trump, they'd tolerate it.
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)logosoco
(3,208 posts)but that is a pretty damn stupid reply! A lot of people actually have jobs. That did not stop folks from marching the following day.
I think it was small because even though they voted for him, they are really ashamed of him being president. (okay, that is thinking with MY brain, but that's what i came up with when seeing this question). They don't want to own it, already.
Deb
(3,742 posts)They are scared to death of terrorists. They don't fly or go to crowded places, no kidding.
Generator
(7,770 posts)And yeah all those rural people from all over aren't poor-but even I wasn't going to pay to go the women's march in D.C. Take time off work etc. And to do that you have to really be committed-the women's marchers were. Trumpers not so much. Voting against Hillary and the hated liberals was a lot easier for them. The couple Trump voters I know don't like him-they just couldn't vote for Hillary. Which is bullshit and I still say fuck them.
Buckeye_Democrat
(14,857 posts)also, to be fair, it's not like he got many votes in the DC area.
His rural supporters needed to travel there.
Yes, the picture was a joke.
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)i instantly thought Granny, Jeb, Jethro and Elly Mae
2naSalit
(86,776 posts)protesters were paid...
alarimer
(16,245 posts)Even Bush and Reagan paid at least lip service to the idea that they were President of all of us. There was no rally tour of just the states they won; no inaugural address that was just a warmed-over campaign speech. Reagan and Bush may have done things that were contrary to the interest of many, if not most people, but they both followed accepted norms of governing. Trump does not do that and I fear no other Republican ever will again if he gets away with it.
blm
(113,091 posts).
tenderfoot
(8,438 posts)eom
Iggo
(47,565 posts)LeftInTX
(25,555 posts)They are also older.
Seriously, I wouldn't find going to an inauguration appealing. It looks like a big headache. I would just rather watch it on TV.
Caveat: The crowd size doesn't say a whole lot about his popularity.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)How many PROTESTERS vs Supporters attended.
The people who attended Barack Obama's first and second Inauguration were likely a high percentage of supporters. I don't think I saw one anti-Obama banner unless it was the anti-choice people.
At the 2005 Bush Inauguration and the 2017 Trump Inauguration, I would say it was 7-10 protesters for every 1-2 supporters. In our immediate area on the parade route, it wasn't even close. We occupied 5th through 7th Street (Navy Memorial area) and those assholes heard it when their closed-window limos passed by.
If we're solely going by JUST people who supported him, that attendance number dwindles even more.
alllove
(41 posts)It was the same crowds the Bushes and Clinton had .
President Obamas was a historic event where young people who attended will be able to tell their grandkids
I was there for that.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)jmg257
(11,996 posts)All week heard DC was 'bracing for a million people but mostly protesters', made us apprehensive and we walked too much, but we had no issues taking the metro Friday AM or evening, walking around the capitol and around the parade route etc except some crowding when the inauguration actually dumped.
Definitely more people moving for the marches.
Anyway, a few hundred thousand people is nothing compared to the crowds for Pres Obama.
Guess people just aren't that enthusiastic, though those who WERE there seemed were pretty pumped.
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)jmg257
(11,996 posts)haele
(12,676 posts)The rural teapartier types don't tend to travel except on weekends or holidays - even if they could afford it.
The middle class Chamber of Commerce types don't like to go outside of their big fish in small pond environment unless there's a payoff for them, and were probably perfectly happy watching the inauguration on the DVR and would call that "participation".
If there were parades and parties within 50 miles of both these types of groups, they'd gladly participate, but unless they're well off or required to travel for business or family, conservatives don't go very far from home if they can at all help it. There'll be all sorts of excuses - work, family, money...but in the end, they would rather not go too far from where they feel comfortable.
It's the nature of Conservatism and those who feel the need to always submit to a "stronger" authority - lack of curiosity plus fear of the different/unknown.
Liberals, however - if they feel the urge to go out and do something new because something is important to them, they will find a way to get out to where they need to be and participate in some tangible manner.
Haele
Response to CatWoman (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
ismnotwasm
(42,008 posts)All those Trumpsters are on FIRE for Trump--unless their lazy asses just couldn't be bothered to go---Trump had the votes of millions of racist pricks. More than a paltry couple hundred thousand could afford to go. I think they were too ashamed by their support of a disgusting freak.
WillowTree
(5,325 posts)Few things I can think of as being less relevant to anything other than playing "My Dad's bigger than your Dad" like a 5 year old.
WHO CARES?
Runningdawg
(4,522 posts)lpbk2713
(42,766 posts)And no one wants to make an intensive investigation into the
stolen election because the (R)s have all the power now.
robbob
(3,538 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 27, 2017, 04:44 PM - Edit history (1)
Surprised it hasn't been used by Spicer to explain the small crowds (oh wait, the crowds were Huuuuge!!!!):
The day of the inauguration there were many posts here cheering on protesters who had chained themselves together at security checkpoints, and were blocking other entry points. So when I heard the turn out was small and the stands were empty, my first though was, oh well, I guess the protesters succeeded in blocking entry to the event.
Anyone know now if the protesters were part of the small turnout? If they were, I'm shocked tRump hasn't pointed a finger at them yet...