Photos: the crowd at Donald Trump’s inauguration vs. Barack Obama’s

If the inauguration were held in Wichita, or West Virginia the demographics would be different.

Metro numbers Metro Ridership: 11am, 1/20/17 = 193k Trump 11am 1/20/13 = 317k, Obama 11am 1/20/09 = 513k, Obama 11am 1/20/05 = 197k) Bush #wmata

So, Trump's numbers were exactly comparable to previous Republicans....shouldn't people already understand this? It doesn't "say" anything.

Frankly, many many more Americans saw Trump in person at rallies right in their home town while leading up to the election....like I did. So, where's the incentive to travel 1000s of miles for a ceremony....when he's indeed a president of ACTION.

a reply to: windword

The date is wrong, the photo is from his inauguration.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Indigo5

Where did I say it didn't it?

Personally, I think it's rather silly.

Eff yes...It's inane, childish, stupid, ridiculous..

If only we had a Potus who shrugged and treated it the same.

Of course Obama's crowds were bigger. And? This is apropos of what? There were several very good reasons for them to be larger, and it would have been worrisome had they not been gargantuan...

As I said...this is rather a silly topic to be getting wound up about.

If the Topic was crowd size...Absolutely.

But the topic is how the President and his supporters responded.

It speaks to issues we should all be wary of in the coming years..

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth

You are correct. I enlarged the picture, and it is indeed of the inauguration. The photographer must have made a mistake.

I was confusing this story with the Japanese picture that Trumpites were circulating of a crowd outside, waiting to enter the mall, claiming the media and the Parks Dept were deliberately colluding to make crowd look smaller. That was actually a photo from the woman's march.

I stand corrected. I bet that photographer is FIRED! HAHA

(Glad I didn't do a thread on it! haha)

No problem.
What I meant is that the photographer might have done this on purpose as the world's greatest trolling example.
I would actually find that funny if true.

a reply to: Indigo5

It speaks to issues we should all be wary of in the coming years..

On that, we are, most definitely on the same page.

It's way too early to call it a Cult of Personality, but not to early to begin to worry. ...and this wouldn't be the ATS I love if we didn't worry--hopefully needlessly.

a reply to: schuyler


Video proof of Trumps small size.

www.youtube.com...


Obama got 69,498,516 million votes with 365 electoral votes.
-Trump got 62,980,160 million votes with 304 electoral votes.


Obama is bigger. Trump clearly has a inferiority complex. I mean with those small tiny non-bigly hands I don't blame him. (literally has hands smaller then 85% of Americans men)

twitter.com...

I'm LOVING our new President! This National Parks guy was a very important man...a few hours, LOL.

""On the morning after Donald Trump’s inauguration, acting National Park Service director Michael T. Reynolds received an extraordinary summons: The new president wanted to talk to him.

In a Saturday phone call, Trump personally ordered Reynolds to produce additional photographs of the previous day’s crowds on the Mall, according to three individuals who have knowledge of the conversation. The president believed that the photos might prove that the media had lied in reporting that attendance had been no better than average.""

Full Story: www.msn.com... partanntp

a reply to: Indigo5
What does that tell us?

That the majority of humanity still hasn't learned anything from this wise counsel (or are still ignoring it); including those who claim to be Christians or claim to appreciate or value the bible highly, like the majority of Trump, Obama or Clinton voters and supporters):

Do not put your trust in princes* [Or “nobles.”]

Nor in a son of man, who cannot bring salvation.

5 Happy is the one who has the God of Jacob as his helper,

Whose hope is in Jehovah his God,

6 The Maker of heaven and earth,

Of the sea, and of all that is in them,

The One who always remains faithful,

7 The One securing justice for those defrauded, (Psalms 146:3,5-7a)

Real science, knowledge about realities compared to philosophies and stories

a reply to: carewemust

So...what did those photographs show?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
you guys still dont get it. The issue is not who had the bigger crowd. The issue is the media trying to delegitimize Trump by claiming his crowd was small, insinuating he doesnt have the support of the people.

No. You don't get it.

Trump claimed he would have more people. He didn't.

Instead of sucking that up and embracing reality the President of the United States decried the media for reporting on it, sanctioned his staff and other authorities for talking about it and then proclaimed it as fake news in an attempt to censor it.

Do you not understand that? The man's ego cannot let things go. If he's as petty as this over something as silly as crowd numbers, what do you think he's going to be like in times of an actual crisis?

a reply to: neformore

The same President thought he could bully another head of state by saying: "If you won't pay for the wall, you might as well not come." President Nieto cancelled their meeting. How do you suppose President Trump took that news?

Forty-one pages, and no sign of slowing down any, of an argument about the size of the crowds at the inaugural.

Is this the "birther" issue re-writ? In six years will some sheriff somewhere be hosting press conferences about it?

Why is this even a thing? ...and don't say it's because Trump is making it one.

In forty plus pages, I haven't seen him post once...not once.

I'd say move on, but forty one pages...and counting, seems unlikely to happen any time soon.

a reply to: neformore

Yeah you dont get it... The issue was about the media and its truthfulness. Its not in dispute that Obamas crowd was bigger. What in dispute is how the media portrayed his inauguration. Showing a photo an hour before it starts while neglecting to mention the security measures, violent "riots" and the fact Clinton won DC with like 90% of the vote.

Secondly Spicer addressed this issue and what was being referred to about the sizes, which included people watching at home in addition to the internet streams.

It had nothing to with with crowd sizes and everything to do with truth in media reporting.

Do you understand now or do I need to explain it again?

a reply to: seagull

For Trump's supporters, this is clearly a sore spot that his detractors can exploit in order to inflict pain. Trump is a sore winner. Deal with it Trumpettes.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Its not in dispute that Obamas crowd was bigger.

A fact that the media reported correctly. End of discussion.

a reply to: seagull

It might be helpful if people could wrap their heads around the point in terms of media being truthful in reporting and less about crowd size. Since that would require people to abandon an anti trump position they want to push and concentrate on the actual issue raised by the trump administration, truth in media, you are right.... Its unlikely to occur.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

Its not in dispute that Obamas crowd was bigger.

A fact that the media reported correctly. End of discussion.

Its about truth in media, which the media proved its unable to do...

End of discussion.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The media reported the facts. The President melted down. You have always struck me as being intelligent. Please deal with the facts. The President is a sore winner, and will eventually be removed from office on psychological grounds.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
the point in terms of media being truthful in reporting and less about crowd size..

The media WERE TRUTHFUL about the crowd size, but Trump and his little trumpets are having a meltdown that Obama got more people to see him than Trump.

You really should deal with that fact!