Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I watched both Canadian (more of this) and American coverage - the slant in the commentary was the problem and that was the media's responsibility. There were loads of pictures of the area from high up so you could see how many appeared to be there. But there was also a constant stream of comments about how it seemed there weren't many there. There were certainly enough people but I suspect there were still a lot trying to get in - security was slow and protesters blocked several entry points I believe.
All that said though, other than the fact that the commentary stunk, I don't really know why it matters how many were there, one way or the other - as long as those who wanted to be there were able to get there and to get in where they could see. Obama's first inauguration attendance number was more than an anomaly because of what we were not supposed to notice or care about .. 'his uniqueness'. His second was fairly lackluster.
I could not find a channel that was not constantly comparing everything to Obama, his tenure, his inauguration, his everything. The only time things were true and fair to Trump was when they stopped talking. I think that is much more critical to note than the actual number of attendees.
But, honestly, what everyone may need to get used to is that this is the age of pretty good coverage (with respect to the pictures, not the commentary) so many were watching at home - they also didn't have the funds to go with hotel prices so high, etc. - on tv or the internet. I know I got a better vantage point and probably could hear the proceedings better from in front of my tv than I would have had in person - and I was warmer and drier too.
Even if the actual numbers in attendance were lower than they were for some other President's first inaugurations, that certainly didn't mean that Mr. Trump didn't have a LOT of support and admiration yesterday as we watched him take his oath (from afar). Many of Trump's supporters live nowhere close by and a lot were at work - it was a 'holiday' I understand in much of DC but not so elsewhere.
Tell all that to Trump and see if he abandons his childish pettiness
Silent majority people don't make a lot of waves but when we do it usually registers but we have some really dumb people in the USA who didn't get the message. Hope they wise up soon.
Keep on calling us names. That's the best motivation for the reason Hillary lost. D. C. is about the last place I want to be.
The truth will set us free. Trumps speech was truth. I am happy he won. And when you look at that county map of all the counties he won in America, most of American geography voted for him. I think that makes the news agencies working against him look really dumb. You would think their ratings would give them a clue.
Bolded above. You are correct and those people are blindly supporting the Predator-in-Chief. Seems the suporters are just as wacky as their childish leader.
Certain personality traits where pathological lying may occur include:
- Narcissism or self-centered behaviors and thought patterns.
- Selfishness.
- Abusive attitude.
- Obsessive, controlling, and compulsive behaviors.
- Impulsivity.
- Aggressiveness.
- Jealous behavior.
- Manipulative behaviors.
15 Signs And Symptoms That Help Identify A Pathological Liar :
1. Pathological liars know just one thing… lies. Any situation they are in they lie. These guys use their verbal skills to good effect in different situations. Yeah, a large number of pathological liars are smooth talkers.
2. Pathological liars love to create a comfort zone for themselves. In a bid to get there, they cook up tales and stories with manic conviction.
3. Pathological liars love attention and may go any length with their lies to get it. These guys are aware of the fact that lies and deception get them a fair deal of attention and so they seek refuge in lies all the time. A pathological liar takes pride in grandiose acts achieved through fake sentiments and lies.
4. Pathological liars have a keen sense of perception and are seldom caught lying. If they sense they are going to be caught, they weave another story to cover up their lies.
5. Pathological liars suffer from low self esteem which is why they use lies as a means to feel better about
6. Pathological liars create an environment that helps them score brownie points with the opposite sex. They often feel good about themselves when their lover feels sad for them through the lies they have spoken. For liars every accomplishment through a lie feel like achievement.
7. Pathological liars may be suffering from a primary mental disorder that may stem the amount of lies spoken on a regular basis.
8. Pathological liars live in a world of fantasy. They love to create a false world among people they know and get a high once people fall for their lies. The only time a pathological liar’s ego is hurt is when lies are not believed.
9. Often when these guys lie, they are not scared of consequences that may arise at a later stage. Pathological liars fragment lies in accordance the flow of the conversation or situation and feel no remorse.
10. Pathological liars may exhibit behavioral changes with different people, especially people they have not known for a long time.
11. Studies reveal most pathological liars have specific addictions that compel them to lie. Drug addicts, gamblers, and alcoholics my lie to seek an exit from the harsh reality their friend and family are aware of.
12. Pathological liars use camouflage and deception in personality traits displayed with different people. These guys can mould themselves to be submissive or dominant when need arise in accordance with the situation encountered.
13. Pathological liars rely on convincing fake narratives to engage the person or persons they are talking to. Their stories involve a theatrical element to evoke a response. Often stories about exploits and bravery are fake to the bone. Every time they meet different people the concept and centrifugal element of their stories remain same while all other aspects change.
14. Pathological liars may get on the defensive if questions put forth are not in their comfort zone and they are not able to cook up a suitable lie to the question.
15. A pathological liar loves to have the last word. These guys love to prove their point even if they know they are wrong and the other person is right.
Tell all that to Trump and see if he abandons his childish pettiness
I think there is a pretty good chance that there was indeed a larger audience (when one includes all foreign and domestic broadcasts that covered the inauguration) at this ceremony than there was even for Obama's first one. There were probably not as many on the Mall itself but the audience was much larger than that. The issue here is that the media was focussing only on who was there in person and that was not fair.
Again though, I don't think it matters how many people watched or were there. Just as I hope the same holds true for the 'marches' in the US and elsewhere today. What matters is that the inauguration was held, that it went well, that the candidate who won the election was duly sworn in (and apparently didn't even have to have a backroom ceremony to make that legal!).
I am not totally sure that those who think Trump is the idiot here quite understand what the real issue was. The real issue is, in my estimation, that the networks slanted the commentary and they did frame the pictures along with doing that to intimate that there weren't even as many people there in person as there probably were and I never heard one mention that the worldwide audience was immense! But I will put it on Spicer and anyone else who spoke for Trump, and on Trump too, for not making that so perfectly clear that it could not be warped by everyone now. They obviously have something to learn about making sure their points are as clear as possible so the story cannot be messed with afterwards.
The MSM has NOT played fair during this whole campaign and they didn't do much better for this event - though I did notice moments where they used more 'skill and cunning' to veil their slurs, using more subtlety than normal - I am not sure I would call that much improvement though. Trump is trying to give them another chance after they treated him (and the audiences - and that means even you anti-Trumpers, maybe especially you) badly for so long - but I would not blame him if he begins to pull credentials soon if they keep this up. But, that doesn't mean that Trump's side doesn't need to figure out a better way to 'communicate' either. They will get the hang of it soon I hope. This was just day 1.5.
Why would Trump waste his time on insisting on his own reality? This is a red flag for something scary!
Could very well be. If Trump can convince his supporters to believe anything he says (and it appears to be the case) then when there is something serious to deny, he has them trained to believe whatever he says. They say the Nigerian Prince scams are deliberately obvious because they are looking for targets most easy to persuade.
well frankly Trump Was the one who started all this. CNN went out of its way to not embarrass him, they decided not to even talk numbers and I saw them telling guests not to too.
Then TRump started more lies all over again, lied about crowd sizes, and then lied about who started his fight with our security services....
"disgraceful" is what he called the intelligence services.. and then he went on to accuse the media of making it sound like feud...
How do we trust Trump under any serious circumstances when we already know he will always lie to make himself look good.
He is doing this now to setup up the media as liars when they call for him to be impeached. He is discrediting every group that may challenge him in the future...
I think there is a pretty good chance that there was indeed a larger audience (when one includes all foreign and domestic broadcasts that covered the inauguration) at this ceremony than there was even for Obama's first one. There were probably not as many on the Mall itself but the audience was much larger than that. The issue here is that the media was focussing only on who was there in person and that was not fair.
I actually doubt that.
This is anecdotal, I know, but I went to a movie theater, that was sold out, to watch the inauguration in 2009. Out of curiosity, I checked this year, and the theater was not showing the inauguration.
Also, there were "probably" not as many on the Mall? How about there were DEFINITELY not as many on the Mall.
You sound like Trump when you question something that is obviously a fact.
At least make an excuse, like "D.C. and it's suburbs are filled with liberals," or "it was raining." Don't say there is some doubt about whether Trump or Obama had more people attend his inauguration.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
