It's his estimation based on the images from the event using the same techniques he did the last time. The National Forest Service doesn't make estimates public anymore.
I kind of enjoy the people holding up cell phones to take pictures and they're surrounded by millions of dollars in camera equipment, the one guy literally standing beside a big expensive TV camera and 5 different people with 10 different cameras with giant telephoto lenses attached between them. And he's holding up his camera to take a picture.
Nah the guy in the plaid tie behind the Justices is the best.
You win, that expression is hilarious.
But Bush's expression conveys more than disgust. It seems like he's experiencing some sort of existential horror, perhaps at the notion that the same party that elected him would later bring Trump to power.
Nah the guy in the plaid tie behind the Justices is the best.
You win, that expression is hilarious.
But Bush's expression conveys more than disgust. It seems like he's experience some sort of existential horror, perhaps at the notion that the same party that elected him would later bring Trump to power.
That the methods used by people who put him into power would eventually matasticize into Trump, you mean.
Bush was an important stepping stone on the path from Eisenhower to Trump. Let's not sell him short, here.
That lady: "The media needs to be nicer to Trump so his feelings aren't hurt and he feels the need to obsess over them being mean. Just because he's obsessing over something doesn't mean the media should stoop to his level."
That lady: "The media needs to be nicer to Trump so his feelings aren't hurt and he feels the need to obsess over them being mean. Just because he's obsessing over something doesn't mean the media should stoop to his level."
That lady: "The media needs to be nicer to Trump so his feelings aren't hurt and he feels the need to obsess over them being mean. Just because he's obsessing over something doesn't mean the media should stoop to his level."
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
Like for fucks sakes: Fox is appalled by this.
Didn't somebody just, like two hours ago, post how Fox just did something of a purge to make sure everybody was sufficiently on board the Trump Train? This isn't just Fox, this is Fox intentionally primed to better shill for Trump, and they STILL can't bring themselves to do it.
+15
Options
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Hooooooooow does this photo resolution exiiiiiiist?!
360 degree photo stitching. You can see it if you pan all the way left and look at the guys by the camera, there are artifacts all over the place. They also likely took pictures at multiple levels of zoom, so you're not actually zooming in on one picture, you're changing between picture zoom levels.
I do wonder how bad media companies will really have it for the next 4 years. Trump just nominated an anti-net neutrality guy to be the next head of the FCC. So they're going to reduce regulations on media companies and maybe even get rid of net neutrality. When that happens, internet providers, many of which own big media companies, can throttle people. Comcast can make it so that people only get full internet speed when they use NBC, Charter can do it with CNN. Other big media companies like Disney and CBS will have the resources to pay internet providers for access or even get into the internet provider business. So Trump's own actions could end up benefiting all these big media companies. Especially if they lax regulations enough for the big media companies to stamp out their smaller rivals.
I didn't watch the inauguration speech but read the transcript
I gotta say, when I read the part about patriotism, I absolutely read it as "when you love your country you love everyone in it, without prejudice"
It never even crossed my mind that he could have meant "nah you're justified in your prejudice" until I read some of the responses in here
It's not "you're justified in your prejudice", it's more like, "nothing you do is prejudiced, because you're patriots"
It's also the tried and true Republican mantra of "you're the real racists". Support for Trump is patriotic and patriots can't be prejudiced. Not supporting Trump is unpatriotic, thus they are ones who are prejudiced.
Not to single out UV here, but there has been a rash these past couple days of people coming in and basically saying that we should take Trump 'literally, but not seriously', ignoring the context and history of his words and actions. Especially that one line, in particular. I guess it depends on whether or not you think he's already depleted the credit you should give him (the banks refuse to offer him more).
Even the right seem kind of mad about that memorial.
Remember when Trump attacked a Gold Star family and his approval dropped like a rock?
The problem is that the right will forget about this after a month.
It's going to be real hard to forget about it when there will be a new stupid thing every week for the next 4 years and CNN having found their balls.
I'm willing to give CNN credit for individual stories and contributors....but I really don't think they deserve credit as an organization after hiring Landowski, and now replacing him with Rick fucking Santorum
He actually might have had something else on his mind, with both his parents in the hospital at the time. There was a moment when they were all walking in that he looked really really depressed. Perked up when he got to talk to Obama, then back to this dour face for the speech.
I know I just made a Politifact joke a few pages back, but when they're not doing their cute graphics and actually writing down raw facts, they're usually not so bad. The historical figures for inauguration attendance at the National Mall (which is apparently a lot more modern than I thought?)
Barack Obama, 2013: 1 million
Barack Obama, 2009: 1.8 million (generally considered a record for people on the National Mall)
George W. Bush, 2005: 400,000
George W. Bush, 2001: 300,000
Bill Clinton, 1997: 250,000
Bill Clinton, 1993: 800,000
George H.W. Bush, 1989: 300,000
Ronald Reagan, 1985: 140,000 tickets sold, but record cold moved the swearing-in ceremony indoors
Ronald Reagan, 1981: 10,000, according to the New York Times. This was the first year the ceremony was performed on the west side of the Capitol.
Reagan was kind of an anomaly since it was a new thing, I guess, but if the 250,000 number is accurate, the last four presidents all beat him at their first inauguration, and the two democrats beat him by multiples, and on second terms (which tend to show significant drops from first), they still beat him handily except for Clinton, who he only managed to tie.
Now, if we showed these numbers to Trump, his takeaway is that, "I had twenty-five times more people at my inauguration than Ronald Reagan. THE Ronald Reagan. Twenty-five! Biggest ever! Yuuge!"
Also I know they needed to get signal above the crowd and everything but I can't help but start screaming internally at scissor lifts being left that high around a crowd.
Like, I'm sure they're secured somewhere at the bottom, but goddamn. Makes me twitchy.
I know I just made a Politifact joke a few pages back, but when they're not doing their cute graphics and actually writing down raw facts, they're usually not so bad. The historical figures for inauguration attendance at the National Mall (which is apparently a lot more modern than I thought?)
Barack Obama, 2013: 1 million
Barack Obama, 2009: 1.8 million (generally considered a record for people on the National Mall)
George W. Bush, 2005: 400,000
George W. Bush, 2001: 300,000
Bill Clinton, 1997: 250,000
Bill Clinton, 1993: 800,000
George H.W. Bush, 1989: 300,000
Ronald Reagan, 1985: 140,000 tickets sold, but record cold moved the swearing-in ceremony indoors
Ronald Reagan, 1981: 10,000, according to the New York Times. This was the first year the ceremony was performed on the west side of the Capitol.
Reagan was kind of an anomaly since it was a new thing, I guess, but if the 250,000 number is accurate, the last four presidents all beat him at their first inauguration, and the two democrats beat him by multiples, and on second terms (which tend to show significant drops from first), they still beat him handily except for Clinton, who he only managed to tie.
Now, if we showed these numbers to Trump, his takeaway is that, "I had twenty-five times more people at my inauguration than Ronald Reagan. THE Ronald Reagan. Twenty-five! Biggest ever! Yuuge!"
Reagan's second one is kind of telling in terms of how popular he was at the time - the windchill that day was something absurd like -30.
"I have the biggest dick." - President Trump, for the next four years.
Counter-point
+11
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
if you don't give the press access they have to find stories somehow. they might have to dig in places you don't want them!
not everything is a power play. it's amazing someone so obsessed with power and celebrity could be so bad at managing it. I guess that sounds silly since he road celebrity to the damn presidency but I guess I'd call him one note. and that note isn't apt for the president, someone who truly does have all the power and status of the world. it's like, nothing is expensive enough to be impressive when you're in that role, all his old games don't work.
CNN's decision to not directly play blatant lies and propaganda gives me more respect for them than I've had in years.
All it took was some abuse from Idiot in Chief they helped get elected by doing exactly what they didn't do today.
I guess I should give them a thumbs up, but goddamn it would've been nice for them to show that level of professionalism when they were airing Trump's speeches unedited and unanalyzed constantly.
CNN's decision to not directly play blatant lies and propaganda gives me more respect for them than I've had in years.
All it took was some abuse from Idiot in Chief they helped get elected by doing exactly what they didn't do today.
I guess I should give them a thumbs up, but goddamn it would've been nice for them to show that level of professionalism when they were airing Trump's speeches unedited and unanalyzed constantly.
But, as that CNN bigwig explained in his not-apology, they made so much money!
Posts
In reality it's just a semi-formal outside wear from New York.
Dressed as a Completely Ordinary Male Human from the mid 20th... wait. *checks time dial again* splarg!
It's going to be real hard to forget about it when there will be a new stupid thing every week for the next 4 years and CNN having found their balls.
It's his estimation based on the images from the event using the same techniques he did the last time. The National Forest Service doesn't make estimates public anymore.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The only hard numbers I've found so far are from the Metro for total rides on inauguration day:
Trump: 570,557
Obama 09: 1.1M
Obama 13: 782K
Today as of 1PM: 470K
But Bush's expression conveys more than disgust. It seems like he's experiencing some sort of existential horror, perhaps at the notion that the same party that elected him would later bring Trump to power.
That the methods used by people who put him into power would eventually matasticize into Trump, you mean.
Bush was an important stepping stone on the path from Eisenhower to Trump. Let's not sell him short, here.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Like for fucks sakes: Fox is appalled by this.
Through the looking glass, people.
Spider lied about Metro numbers too, then
I'll wait for the transcript, but he made it sound like the Metro numbers were up from Obama's inaugural
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Nah.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
Didn't somebody just, like two hours ago, post how Fox just did something of a purge to make sure everybody was sufficiently on board the Trump Train? This isn't just Fox, this is Fox intentionally primed to better shill for Trump, and they STILL can't bring themselves to do it.
Hooooooooow does this photo resolution exiiiiiiist?!
Of course they were. Trump's started with a 5, and Obama 09 a 1. 5>1, so Trump wins.
The 13 numbers don't count of course.
We had to get something out of Roswell.
Jesus, I think there were more people marching in Denver today than there were at Trump's inauguration, if those numbers are right.
360 degree photo stitching. You can see it if you pan all the way left and look at the guys by the camera, there are artifacts all over the place. They also likely took pictures at multiple levels of zoom, so you're not actually zooming in on one picture, you're changing between picture zoom levels.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The context is of the American Carnage speech. Not...whatever today was.
This guy is playing Candy Crush I think.
Walter White?!
Not to single out UV here, but there has been a rash these past couple days of people coming in and basically saying that we should take Trump 'literally, but not seriously', ignoring the context and history of his words and actions. Especially that one line, in particular. I guess it depends on whether or not you think he's already depleted the credit you should give him (the banks refuse to offer him more).
I'm willing to give CNN credit for individual stories and contributors....but I really don't think they deserve credit as an organization after hiring Landowski, and now replacing him with Rick fucking Santorum
He actually might have had something else on his mind, with both his parents in the hospital at the time. There was a moment when they were all walking in that he looked really really depressed. Perked up when he got to talk to Obama, then back to this dour face for the speech.
Reagan was kind of an anomaly since it was a new thing, I guess, but if the 250,000 number is accurate, the last four presidents all beat him at their first inauguration, and the two democrats beat him by multiples, and on second terms (which tend to show significant drops from first), they still beat him handily except for Clinton, who he only managed to tie.
Now, if we showed these numbers to Trump, his takeaway is that, "I had twenty-five times more people at my inauguration than Ronald Reagan. THE Ronald Reagan. Twenty-five! Biggest ever! Yuuge!"
Like, I'm sure they're secured somewhere at the bottom, but goddamn. Makes me twitchy.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
And you've made it to acceptance
Welcome
Reagan's second one is kind of telling in terms of how popular he was at the time - the windchill that day was something absurd like -30.
so yeah. This is the world we live in now.
CNN's decision to not directly play blatant lies and propaganda gives me more respect for them than I've had in years.
Counter-point
not everything is a power play. it's amazing someone so obsessed with power and celebrity could be so bad at managing it. I guess that sounds silly since he road celebrity to the damn presidency but I guess I'd call him one note. and that note isn't apt for the president, someone who truly does have all the power and status of the world. it's like, nothing is expensive enough to be impressive when you're in that role, all his old games don't work.
I have no idea what he's saying. Which is par for the course with Fleischer.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
All it took was some abuse from Idiot in Chief they helped get elected by doing exactly what they didn't do today.
I guess I should give them a thumbs up, but goddamn it would've been nice for them to show that level of professionalism when they were airing Trump's speeches unedited and unanalyzed constantly.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
But, as that CNN bigwig explained in his not-apology, they made so much money!
The statement that Spicer gave was ordered by Trump.
His motorcade from the CIA meeting had to go past the protesters. He got that shit up close.
Video if you're curious.