Not sure what you mean, but I think too many people just demonstrate their “wishful thinking”. They want to convince people (themselves in the first place) that something went wrong with the parade, while it was a completely ordinary parade. People will start to discuss face expressions of the people in the 4th row, the colour of the ribbons on the left column, the weather, whatever, to find even the smallest flaws.
I think they didn’t provide a source because there are no reliable numbers. Those may still come at a later date.
I did find these sources though. They suggest that the turnout was substantially lower than expected and that estimates of attendance numbers are hotly debated.
I know you’re getting downvoted a lot, but I don’t think you’re a Trump supporter or arguing in bad faith. I know what you mean.
People on the left, like myself, were always going to call the parade a failure. It was always going to be a sad, pointless attempt at spectacle. By its very nature, it was a failure. In no world were we going to say, “yeah I hate the guy, but damn if he doesn’t know how to throw a bitchin’ parade.”
On the flipside, Trump and Maga folks were always going to call it a success. Or maybe there are reports of angry red hat people who expected a better show and were disappointed. Unlikely, though.
On what terms do you define its success or failure? Yes, attendance is one. If they expected ten times as many people, then, as you say, it’s a failure. You aren’t wrong for asking for a source.
I think your original comment was less along the lines of, “how do we know it wasn’t an amazing success, though?” and more like, “wasn’t the parade exactly as expected?”
How much of the parade did you watch? I watched none. I think most of America will say they didn’t even bother to turn on the tv, most probably forgot it was happening at all.
Compare that to the Macy’s day parade. It was a failure. He wanted it to be a big deal, it absolutely was not a big deal. Failure.
It’s literally the first line of the article: cost up to $45 million, was short on attendees, long on political speeches.
Isn’t it what all parades are? Costly and propagandish? That is their essence.
And that “short on attendees” needs concrete numbers. If there were 15 people total, I would agree without knowing how many were actually expected…
Remember to just agree with the .ml and .zip gang… they’re just being fair and objective.
caring about a domain address is cringe
Not when you understand what kind of brainless worms prefer those instances.
yeeeessssss, let the division flow through you
Not sure what you mean, but I think too many people just demonstrate their “wishful thinking”. They want to convince people (themselves in the first place) that something went wrong with the parade, while it was a completely ordinary parade. People will start to discuss face expressions of the people in the 4th row, the colour of the ribbons on the left column, the weather, whatever, to find even the smallest flaws.
Source of those numbers? If they are true, then you have serious reasons to call that a “failure” indeed. Where did you get them from?
I think they didn’t provide a source because there are no reliable numbers. Those may still come at a later date.
I did find these sources though. They suggest that the turnout was substantially lower than expected and that estimates of attendance numbers are hotly debated.
https://www.thetimes.com/us/american-politics/article/trump-military-parade-crowd-size-protests-s3pkrphr8
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/trump-protests-military-parade
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c2kqe5yv0yzt
Grab photos and do what the experts do: count heads.
Even at a glance on those photos you look like a fucking braindead idiot.
Google is your friend.
Also if you’re actually into numbers and want to care about something where numbers matter: https://electiontruthalliance.org/ and https://smartelections.us/
It’s not as entertaining and more difficult to play oppositional keyboard warrior with, but numbers are numbers. You’re not a numbercist are you?
No. It really isn’t.
So you don’t have any source except for some screenshot of a message?
Hey, I can do this all day. As long as you’re making sure you’re fighting the good fight.
I know you’re getting downvoted a lot, but I don’t think you’re a Trump supporter or arguing in bad faith. I know what you mean.
People on the left, like myself, were always going to call the parade a failure. It was always going to be a sad, pointless attempt at spectacle. By its very nature, it was a failure. In no world were we going to say, “yeah I hate the guy, but damn if he doesn’t know how to throw a bitchin’ parade.”
On the flipside, Trump and Maga folks were always going to call it a success. Or maybe there are reports of angry red hat people who expected a better show and were disappointed. Unlikely, though.
On what terms do you define its success or failure? Yes, attendance is one. If they expected ten times as many people, then, as you say, it’s a failure. You aren’t wrong for asking for a source.
I think your original comment was less along the lines of, “how do we know it wasn’t an amazing success, though?” and more like, “wasn’t the parade exactly as expected?”
How much of the parade did you watch? I watched none. I think most of America will say they didn’t even bother to turn on the tv, most probably forgot it was happening at all.
Compare that to the Macy’s day parade. It was a failure. He wanted it to be a big deal, it absolutely was not a big deal. Failure.
deleted by creator