Anyone Else Watching?

[redwood66]

Or its a response to the left's obsession with crowd size. That was who posted the pics first even here on PS.

It's not an obsession, it's a perfectly valid observation. And it's the perfect thing to poke him with. The crowds today- the millions of women marching all over the country in opposition to him mean something. But instead of acknowledging that, even to himself, he claims more media bias, says his crowds were YUGE (he ridiculously claimed over a million), and he's a popular president with a cabinet that has the highest collective IQ ever. He's delusional, severely narcissistic, doesn't learn from his mistakes, and it's going to cost ALL of us. Not just us lefties.

Traditionally conservatives aren't high turn out protesters or rally goers. It has been different with Trump and his rallies. He has had the ability to bring the people out. Many national politicians have come to my area but I had no desire to go stand in line or be in a throng of people just to see them. TV or internet is just fine. As far as the women's marches today I would not have attended one in my area had there been one. Its fine for people to peacefully march and I have heard that this one in DC was peaceful for the most part.

 

[the_mother_thing]

You do realize how incredibly sexist those statements are, right Ruby? What if a man said "Typical woman, clueless."?

Your husband was inconsiderate and thoughtless, not "just being a man".

Sexism, of any kind, needs to stop.

Wake up, Ruby, dear. This is the new world. It's time to leave all of that behind. Don't settle for inconsiderate.

THIS right here is one of the reasons I at these feminist marches and rants about "eroding women's rights", and why these days I have more sympathy FOR men. They absolutely CAN NOT win in such a hormonally-hostile climate. Do they hold the door for a woman or risk being labeled "inconsiderate"; do they invite the female colleague to happy hour with his male colleagues (so as not to appear exclusive), or not out of fear being mistaken as hitting on her; do they carry more (literal) weight as an act of kindness because he can, or ONLY his half because 'I am woman/equality' and all'? .

You don't get it both ways. You march, chant and scream demanding equal treatment, then you (and Callie) slam a man as "inconsiderate and thoughtless" for doing the same thing he likely would have for any other man when he 'doesn't wait for the wifey.'

Lastly - don't be a "pot calling the kettle black". If a man said about a woman what YOU did about Melania in this thread, you would probably demand he be drug out to the DC mall for public lynching by the marching mob.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Or its a response to the left's obsession with crowd size. That was who posted the pics first even here on PS.[/quote]

I saw a report that the "trump" pic in that inauguration comparison was also taken several hours prior to the actual event. Sometimes, the picture leaves a few facts out.

On the CIA speech, I was half-listening, but I gathered his comments about media exaggeration to be in regards to how they twisted some of his comments about the CIA ... where he was speaking ... IOW - "I support you, don't believe everything your read/see in the news."

But again, I was only half-listening to it.

 

[redwood66]

I watched the speech at the CIA and it was not all about the crowd size. It was about his commitment to them and appreciation for them.

I just watched Sean Spicer's briefing and boy was it a doozie. I think it is safe to say that the media will be called on BS stories.

 

[E B]

 

[E B]

I watched the speech at the CIA and it was not all about the crowd size. It was about his commitment to them and appreciation for them.

I'm glad to hear that. He really shouldn't have talked about it at all, though. The absolute wrong platform. The man cannot help himself.

Regarding his remarks about the intelligence communities, that's all documented. On his Twitter feed, in interviews. Putting "intelligence" in quotes. Blaming them for the leaked dossier, comparing it to Nazi Germany. Putting them down while elevating Assange's opinions. Nothing has to be spun, it's all out there. That's the thing about Trump. He's not able to stay focused, and he lies compulsively about things that can be EASILY fact checked. He knows those who won't fact check it (or claims fact checking is all biased) will eat it up, though.

 

[E B]

RINOs! Into the fake news pile they go.

 

[momhappy]

I just saw some reports that the CNN side-by-side inauguration images (2009 vs. 2017) were not an apples-to-apples comparison (they lied). The CNN image was earlier and the crowd size was incomplete at the time the photo was taken. The second photo is the actual crowd size during the inauguration yesterday.

 

[E B]

red, your edit is telling. It's exactly why Spicer, etc. are successful at what they do. They got you to go, "yeah, the media was lying!" despite the fact that what he said was, verifiably, 100 percent false.

 

[momhappy]

Apparently, the Nancy Sinatra stuff was lied about too (her saying that she was upset about Trump playing her father's music)

 

[kenny]

I try to NEVER comment on anyone's appearance, man woman old young skinny fat whatev.

It's a minefield.

I won't even comment when someone, who has announced they are on a diet, loses a lot of weight.
It may ultimately feed the sadness they'll feel if they gain it back.

If pushed I say something like, "Oh, you always look great."

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I remember a very old episode of the television show, "Rhoda" where the character "Phyllis" runs into Rhoda after not seeing her for a long time. (In reality the actress who played Rhoda, Valerie Harper, had lost a lot of weight and was playing a character who was supposed to be slimmer and more attractive than she had been on "The Mary Tyler Moore Show".)

Phyllis, who was supposed to be a hostile, competitive, wealthy neighbor, looked at Rhoda-slimmed down after a life of chubbiness-and said, "Boy! You really dropped a ton!"

Despite being clothed as a comment lauding Rhoda's weight loss, it was so obviously hostile.

Deb

The entire point of the thread is to judge and comment on someone's appearance at the balls, right? Isn't that what this thread is actually for?

If dissenting opinions are not allowed, the whole thread should start with "If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you".

Please show me where I "disallowed dissenting opinions".

I merely described what I do.
Describing how I am is not preaching that everyone should be like me.
... remember that Kenny-Mantra ... People Vary?

This mistake happens all the time here.

 

[E B]

I just saw some reports that the CNN side-by-side inauguration images (2009 vs. 2017) were not an apples-to-apples comparison (they lied). The CNN image was earlier and the crowd size was incomplete at the time the photo was taken. The second photo is the actual crowd size during the inauguration.

momhappy, the second photo is clearly from a different angle. The comparison photo is the same angle, taken 20 minutes apart (if not at the exact same time, there were some compared to a photo down to the exact second). You can't compare the first to the second.

Listen-- you're going to believe what you want, but the truth is that in terms of this particular metric, crowd size, participation was not close to Obama's in 2009 or even the DC Women's March today. But inaugural crowd size/enthusiasm doesn't reflect whatsoever on Trump's popularity (*38 percent approval*), so don't even sweat it.

 

[redwood66]

I watched the speech at the CIA and it was not all about the crowd size. It was about his commitment to them and appreciation for them.

I'm glad to hear that. He really shouldn't have talked about it at all, though. The absolute wrong platform. The man cannot help himself.

Regarding his remarks about the intelligence communities, that's all documented. On his Twitter feed, in interviews. Putting "intelligence" in quotes. Blaming them for the leaked dossier, comparing it to Nazi Germany. Putting them down while elevating Assange's opinions. Nothing has to be spun, it's all out there. That's the thing about Trump. He's not able to stay focused, and he lies compulsively about things that can be EASILY fact checked. He knows those who won't fact check it (or claims fact checking is all biased) will eat it up, though.

While I agree he needs to be more focused and just get over some of the small stuff, Brennan was the issue at the CIA, not the line staff. Which is why he went there in the first place. I wish he would let all the small crap go, it is distracting from what many of us want him to work on.

I just don't give a hang about crowd size. Get over it - on both sides. Its farking d*ck measuring.

 

[E B]

Apparently, the Nancy Sinatra stuff was lied about too (her saying that she was upset about Trump playing her father's music)

Are you sure? I don't see that tweet on her feed. She must have deleted it, if she had. She's not a Trump fan, though, as you'll see if you scroll.

https://twitter.com/NancySinatra

 

[the_mother_thing]

I don't know what's more sad - Chump complaining about media's reporting on the crowd size at his inauguration, or anti-Chumpers complaining about Chump complaining about media's reporting.

Maybe this should be a poll.

 

[momhappy]

No, you misunderstood, E B. I'm not comparing the photos. I completely understand that they are taken from different angles.
The report I read was that the CNN image was taken hours before (around 8am I think?) which would indicate that a larger crowd gathered for the Trump inauguration over time. An apples-to-apples comparison would be two photos from the same angle, at the same time.
I actually think that the numbers for Obama's 2009 inauguration were much higher than Trump's, so this isn't about seeing/hearing what I want to. It's about sharing a report that the images may not be what they appear - I'm open to hearing/seeing what others have seen/read.

 

[redwood66]

You can see the live National Mall Cam here.

http://www.earthcam.com/usa/dc/nationalmall/?cam=nationalmall

 

[E B]

I don't know what's more sad - Chump complaining about media's reporting on the crowd size at his inauguration, or anti-Chumpers complaining about Chump complaining about media's reporting.

Maybe this should be a poll.

Oh, this is easy! Chump's complaining by far. He's the PRESIDENT! We're lowly citizens who love watching him squirm over something he is in control of but won't bother to care much about.

momhappy- the comparison I posted was from a few minutes after 11:00pm and 11:30, I believe.

red: I agree, to an extent. But this is how to get through to him, if that's at all possible. Appeal to his vanity. Why isn't he getting the yuuuge crowds he thinks he is? He's already calling his approval ratings fake news. His own staff had to go onto CNN and give interviews to get him to listen. It's a completely new game in terms of communication with him.

When it comes to the Women's March numbers, that IS important. Significant. Should not be minimized.

 

[siv1]

Re: Anyone Else Watching? The Inauguration

I don't know how a thread I started about the Inauguration turned into talking about the size of the crowd.

I was going to make a comment, but I have restraint over myself and don't have to post everything I think.

 

[momhappy]

You can see the live National Mall Cam here.

http://www.earthcam.com/usa/dc/nationalmall/?cam=nationalmall

Interesting images - thanks for sharing, red

 

[the_mother_thing]

Apparently, the Nancy Sinatra stuff was lied about too (her saying that she was upset about Trump playing her father's music)

Are you sure? I don't see that tweet on her feed. She must have deleted it, if she had. She's not a Trump fan, though, as you'll see if you scroll.

https://twitter.com/NancySinatra

It appears youre both right but with a twist: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/01/20/nancy-sinatra-slams-cnn-for-anti-trump-spin-on-story-about-her-humorous-tweet.html

And don't jump me for the Faux News link; it was the first on the results list, and I am feeling lazy.

 

[momhappy]

Re: Anyone Else Watching? The Inauguration

I don't know how a thread I started about the Inauguration turned into talking about the size of the crowd.

I was going to make a comment, but I have restraint over myself and don't have to post everything I think.

What's wrong with talking about crowd size

 

[redwood66]

red: I agree, to an extent. But this is how to get through to him, if that's at all possible. Appeal to his vanity. Why isn't he getting the yuuuge crowds he thinks he is? He's already calling his approval ratings fake news. His own staff had to go onto CNN and give interviews to get him to listen. It's a completely new game in terms of communication with him.

When it comes to the Women's March numbers, that IS important. Significant. Should not be minimized.

I guess I just don't see force and attacks as a positive way to come to an agreement. From either side. The stark contrast of the sycophantic media during the last 8 years and the rabid dog approach toward Trump makes me distrust anything I read or hear. It has been obvious and the people see it. Polls regarding media show them very low in the eyes of the people. Yes he deserves some of the coverage because of what he says and tweets but not to the extent it has been.

 

[E B]

red: I agree, to an extent. But this is how to get through to him, if that's at all possible. Appeal to his vanity. Why isn't he getting the yuuuge crowds he thinks he is? He's already calling his approval ratings fake news. His own staff had to go onto CNN and give interviews to get him to listen. It's a completely new game in terms of communication with him.

When it comes to the Women's March numbers, that IS important. Significant. Should not be minimized.

I guess I just don't see force and attacks as a positive way to come to an agreement. From either side. The stark contrast of the sycophantic media during the last 8 years and the rabid dog approach toward Trump makes me distrust anything I read or hear. It has been obvious and the people see it. Polls regarding media show them very low in the eyes of the people. Yes he deserves some of the coverage because of what he says and tweets but not to the extent it has been.

But that's not what I said, and I think the distinction is important, both in terms of this convo and the way we debate here in general. Regarding this particular conversation, I said it was Trump-specific- info directed toward him, not you. This isn't just my opinion, it's the opinion of the people who are or have been closest to him. It isn't enough to just tell him, you have to show him.

To a broader point, it seems that the same thing seems to be happening now that happened during the election: jumping to Trump's defense despite someone claiming s/he didn't actually support him. Why? Because attacks on Trump seem to feel like attacks on Republicans in general, or on you and your political feelings. It isn't. It is Trump specific. He won, he now holds the highest office in the land. And when he lies, he doesn't just lie to libs, he lies to you too. Don't let him because just he has an R behind his name.

Now, there will be choice words for congressional Republicans, and plenty of them. But that's another topic(s) for another day, maybe in another forum.

 

[kenny]

More people show up when the person is more liked.

IOW, crowd size is related to popularity.

 

[siv1]

More people show up when the person is more liked.

IOW, crowd size is related to popularity.

Or on welfare

 

[Calliecake]

More people show up when the person is more liked.

IOW, crowd size is related to popularity.

Or on welfare

Oh please. Your comment is disgusting.

 

[siv1]

It's honest.

 

[the_mother_thing]

All the bickering about the freaking crowd (Obama vs Chump) sounds like a bunch of catty high schoolers, aruguing over who's more popular, how many people showed up at one party vs another.

I am not particularly interested in someone winning a popularity contest; I AM interested in actions, getting things done, etc.

This nonsense is a distraction which serves NO ONE!

 

[E B]

It's honest.

Citation?