9/12 March on Washington

Calabrio

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
8,793
Reaction score
3
Location
Sarasota
live912.jpg


http://www.trafficland.com/city/WAS/camera/9087/index.html

The national 9/12 March is taking place today.
Despite bad weather, despite a reluctance to be activists, despite a hostile media, turn out will be in the tens of thousands.

They want you gone.
They want you silent and out of sight.
They want you marginalized, demonized, and demoralized.
Will you let them?


Will the MSM cover this event? Will it give the participants the respect they deserve?
 
12:34pm Eastern: Police estimate 1.2 million in attendance.
ABC News reporting crowd at 2 million.

live cam

Small group of fringe, racist, kooks?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzmDOGEaexU[/youtube]
 
REASON MAGAZINE: Quick impressions of the DC 9/12 protest.
Today at 6:38pm

I just came back from spending four-plus hours with the Don't-Tread-On-Me crowd at our nation's capitol. Expect a full Reason.tv report later, but my snap impressions:

* Big crowd. Do not believe any description that says "thousands." If there weren't at least a healthy six figures there, I will permanently revoke my head-counting license.

* Nineteen out of 20 signs were hand-made. My favorite was "Stop spending our tacos. I love tacos." The most popular were variations on "Don't tread on me," "You lie," complaints about Obama's "socialism," warnings about the 2010 elections, references to the deficit or big spending, critiques of Obamacare, and (especially) cracks about various czars (including not a few that equated czars with Soviet Communism). Godwin's Corollary was satisfied on multiple occasions, including "Hitler gave great speeches, too," "the Nazis did national health care first," and someone comparing Obama's 2009 with Hitler's 1939 (alas, we didn't get to ask him whether America was about to invade Poland). Michael Moynihan did have a nice chat about George Marshall with the fellow holding a sign saying "McCarthy was right." There was an "Obama bin lyin," "Feds = treason," "Birth certificate," and "Glen Beck for president." Greatly outnumbering such things were references to the constitution, taking our country back, and so forth.

* Chants on the march included "Shut down ACORN!" and "Boot Charlie Rangel!" and "Don't tread on me." There was not a single "Hey Hey/Ho Ho" in evidence. Songs included "Glory Hallelujah" and "My Country 'Tis of Thee." The most moving chant might have been when we walked past the Newseum, with its ginormous carving of the First Amendment on the side, and the crowd spontaneously said "Read that wall! Read that wall!"

* There were some Obamas-as-Grim-Reapers, some weeping statues of liberties (and weeping Founding Fathers), and a sprinkling of V-for-Vendetta masks. The End-the-Fed, read-The-Fountainhead quotients were extremely marginal.

* By far the two most referenced politicians in signage and buttons were Joe Wilson and Sarah Palin, though maybe my eyes have become so accustomed to Campaign For Liberty shirts that I don't notice the sartorial enthusiasm for Ron Paul. I should note here that I didn't really listen to any of the speeches.

* There were almost no references in the signage and shirtage to issues of national security or cultural conservatism, although I did hear some "by any means necessary" talk about fighting terrorists from one of the speakers.

* The music, especially the politicized re-writes of stuff like "New York, New York," was dreadful even by political standards.

* By far the best dressed people at the show was a clutch of 20 or so twentysomething/thirtysomething types in tuxedos and evening gowns, singing and chanting a huzzah-ing stuff like "Freedom, not medicine!" and "Privatize Medicare!" and "Defend our insurance companies!" and such. It was those Billionaires-for-Bush pranksters, taking the piss out of the evil right-wingers by, uh, mocking the decidedly not-rich-looking crowd. The bait only really worked when they chanted "Bring back Bush! Bring back Bush!", which would be taken up by some of the crowd before they figured out the con, then they'd either laugh or make a crack about the "Ivy League kids" or "government workers" earning "time and a half" for their Saturday prank.

* Of the people I ended up talking to, the general vibe was that they were conservative, and then either Republican, formerly Republican, or independent. Every single one had unkind words to say about George W. Bush's spending and governing record, though none had protested him. None expressed trust in Republicans, and most preferred a "throw-all-the-bums-out" strategy. All but one did not care about Obama's birth certificate controversy, and those I asked thought it was foolish to bring guns to political gatherings.

* People had traveled from North Carolina, Alabama, Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, and Virginia, and Washington state.

* The view on Obama and his administration ranged from a "heading in the wrong direction" vibe to a "we're not gonna take it much longer" edge.

This is all, obviously, a partial and unscientific take, and not an attempt to encapsulate a huge event, but rather a faithful rendering of what I saw. With that caveat, I had a very hard time reconciling the human beings I talked to and observed with the caricatures described in pre-writes by the New York Times' Gail Collins ("The tea party movement activists range from geeky Ron Paulists who obsess about the money supply to conspiracy theorists who believe that Barack Obama is a noncitizen brought here by people who hate this country"), the L.A. Times' Tim Rutten ("the talk-show/tea-party right...if it has its way–will convert the GOP into an almost exclusively white, zealously religious, mostly Southern party"), and Gawker's Alex Pareene ("Glenn Beck is an actual terrorist, and the people attending his rally in DC tomorrow are al-Qaeda in America").

Political rallies are no place to seek the subtle truth, nor feel particularly glowing about your countrymen, and today was no different in that regard for me. But the meta-fact about a huge anti-Obamanomics protest eight months into his term is certainly significant, and very little of what I saw made me fear that Alex Pareene will be blown to smithereens by a suicide hijacker from Arkansas. I am confident, however, that I will soon be made to fear what I utterly failed to detect.
 
Interesting, there was likely over a million people in D.C. yesterday protesting the government and the media barely acknowledged it.
Even when they do, they misleadingly say "thousands" or just "tens of thousands."
 
Political rallies are no place to seek the subtle truth, nor feel particularly glowing about your countrymen, and today was no different in that regard for me.

about sums it up.
 
about sums it up.
No it doesn't.
Though the line that followed it would do a better job:
the meta-fact about a huge anti-Obamanomics protest eight months into his term is certainly significant

As is the fact that this 9/12 Rally was likely the LARGEST rally in front of the capitol EVER.

Yet there was virtually no media coverage.
Even after the fact, the limited reporting on the event radically understates the turn out. That kind of media bias isn't just upsetting, it's unsettling and alarming.
 
Political rallies are no place to seek the subtle truth, nor feel particularly glowing about your countrymen, and today was no different in that regard for me.

about sums it up.

You're right, it was a place to seek the glaring truth, and no, it wasn't a place to feel particularly glowing about the "men" in charge of this country. ;)
 
You are right, I was away from the computer all weekend and didnt hear of this at all on local news.
 
This is a picture I received from a friend-as you can see they aren't much beyond 3rd - most of them are on the green in front of the Capital, the one that is in front of its reflecting pool, and the density is pretty light... However, I don't know when the photo was taken, it could have been early in the day, and certainly more people could have arrived after.

But, this is a standard shot of protests taken from the capital steps- this is the type of shot I was surprised I haven't seen more of. Most of the shots show the people marching down Pennsylvania and Constitution towards the capital-that is always a difficult way to guess how many people because they are moving - the shots taken from the capital steps are easier to judge numbers, the people are more stationary, and you can clearly see the streets and pools which give you a pretty good estimate on crowd count. Or they show ground level shots of the people-you can never tell from those shots how many people were there.

But, 70,000 to 100,000 is a very decent number - especially for a Saturday. Traditionally large marches are planned for a week day because of media coverage opportunities and not on Pro Football's opening weekend.

However, who knows, it would be nice to see some non-biased numbers. The police in DC no longer give out crowd estimates...

DC-12_9-12-09.jpg
 
The trains were reported to have been shut down into the Capitol.
Traffic into DC was shut off.

All the first hand accounts state that the turn out was well into the six-figures, not counting all the people who couldn't get there.

Unfortunately, the picture you posted is too small and blurry to see detail.
It also doesn't indicate what time it was taken.

It'd be easier to discuss this had the mainstream media actually covered the event.
 
Funny, I had family in DC this weekend and they were able to move around just fine. Traffic was heavy and the subways were crowded, as you might expect for a rally involving six figures worth of people, but 100,000 seems to be a pretty reasonable estimate.

It wasn't nearly the volume of people that were present for the inaguration, that's for sure.
 
Funny, I had family in DC this weekend and they were able to move around just fine. Traffic was heavy and the subways were crowded, as you might expect for a rally involving six figures worth of people, but 100,000 seems to be a pretty reasonable estimate.
Well then..... that settles it.
:rolleyes:
 
sorry - shots from his phone - but, you can easily see the Capitol's reflecting pool - that is the first dark gray area in the crowd - between the trees. I have been on those steps a lot - it is pretty easy to tell where the crowd ends...

But, as I said I don't know when the shot was taken - it was sent to me at 11:00 - so that would be 1:00 DC time - but it could have been taken earlier and just forwarded to me at that time.

ABC seems to be going with 60,000 - FOX maybe 100,000 (they don't seem to be committing to a number). I would imagine we might not ever know real numbers. MSMs numbers have been wacky - mostly because of the ABC snafu...

As you said, if any media had done more - CNN had people there, it seemed like maybe Fox did, but I haven't seen any live footage from them - it could be I just haven't noticed. But, did the protesters get out the message well to MSM? A lot of press releases etc? MSM needs to be nudged...

Traffic was shut down on Penn and Constitution - but that is standard police practice... Subways were on Saturday schedules and I was told they were crowded, but the waits were only about 10 minutes - not for 2 hours plus like they were for the inaugural, when the heavier week day schedules were in effect.

So, I would imagine this will be a lot of who you talk to. The photos I have are from a friend who has a vested interest on the 'right' side of the equation. But, since he is a friend I would think he would try to be accurate and not try to skew the numbers in his favor, which would be more protesters, not less...

I can ask when the photo was taken later - he is in court all day.
 
But, as I said I don't know when the shot was taken - it was sent to me at 11:00 - so that would be 1:00 DC time - but it could have been taken earlier and just forwarded to me at that time.
Which is important, because the rally didn't really start until 1PM.
So posting a picture hours before the event began could be viewed as misleading.

But, did the protesters get out the message well to MSM? A lot of press releases etc? MSM needs to be nudged...
Yes they did. The MSM chose to avoid it.

I can ask when the photo was taken later - he is in court all day.
Is he a lawyer, work for the RNC, or both?
 
The event started at 11:30 according to their site... so that would have given them 1-1/2 hours to get to the lawns - about right - 1:00 would have been at the height of them getting to the capitol, but, once again, I am not sure of the time the photo was taken.

Odd-they felt MSM did a better job than conservative media getting the word out about the event...
I have to say that the mainstream media has covered this protest even better than some of the conservative blogosphere. As you know, we’ve recently gotten mentions in CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Times. Thanks to everyone for continuing to spread the word. We are only a few days away, and the momentum is continuing to build!

And this is from their site as well....

We got some great media attention today on the March on Washington. CNN and The New York Times provided fair coverage of our event next weekend. Check it out.

I wonder if main stream media saw a lack of interest after they had covered the pre-event stuff and decided not to show... It does seem strange to give the event pre publicity and then not deal much in covering it.
 
The event started at 11:30 according to their site...
From that website:
"1:00pm March ends and Rally Begins at West Front of the U.S. Capitol."

1:00 would have been at the height of them getting to the capitol, but, once again, I am not sure of the time the photo was taken.
Correct, as I said, a picture taken at 10am, 11am, 12pm could be perceived as an attempt to give a misleading image of the event.


And regardless what that 9/03 posting said, the coverage by the MSM was not strong. I can only speculate what the motivation for posting that was. Most people were not aware that the event was taking place. And the coverage during and after has been dismissive at best.
 
And regardless what that 9/03 posting said, the coverage by the MSM was not strong. I can only speculate what the motivation for posting that was. Most people were not aware that the event was taking place. And the coverage during and after has been dismissive at best.

They were talking about the pre-event coverage Cal - that is what they were discussing on those pages. They were bemoaning the fact that the conservative sites seemed to have dropped the ball getting the word out about the protest, and were commending the MSM on their pre-event coverage.

After wards is a different thing - as I stated. It seemed like main stream media didn't see a lot of response to their initial coverage of the event. If you don't think that anyone is going to show up at the party- you don't cover the party. If they didn't see a lot of hype on the conservative sites like HotAir or on conservative talk radio (which there doesn't appear to be any or much interest on those sites before the event) then they probably started to assume it was going to be a small event. They were wrong - 70-100,000 people is a big event.

But, no one covered it much - except C-Span... Fox didn't...
 
They were talking about the pre-event coverage Cal - that is what they were discussing on those pages.
Yes, I read it and acknowledged it. I said that was posted on September 3.
And I can only speculate why the group used that tone when the pre-event coverage was extremely limited, and not particularly fair.

[quoteAfter wards is a different thing - as I stated. It seemed like main stream media didn't see a lot of response to their initial coverage of the event. If you don't think that anyone is going to show up at the party- you don't cover the party.[/quote]
The organization was anticipating tens of thousands.
The Democrat groups were saying millions.
There was little doubt that turn out would be respectably high.
So this excuse doesn't hold water.

If they didn't see a lot of hype on the conservative sites like HotAir or on conservative talk radio (which there doesn't appear to be any or much interest on those sites before the event) then they probably started to assume it was going to be a small event. They were wrong - 70-100,000 people is a big event.
Even if it were only 70-100k, you're right, that was a big event.
But there was quite a bit of support on blogs and on the radio. Glenn Beck was very vocally supporting it and he has a very large radio and television audience. So again, this isn't a legitimate excuse either.

But, no one covered it much - except C-Span... Fox didn't...
You're wrong, Fox covered the event extensively.
A few hours of coverage on Saturday afternoon, hosted by Beck.
MSNBC was doing wall-to-wall coverage of Obama's health care campaign rally, his triumph of will for health care event in Minnesota.
 
The organization was anticipating tens of thousands.
The Democrat groups were saying millions.
There was little doubt that turn out would be respectably high.
So this excuse doesn't hold water.

The democrat estimate was being ignored for the blatant attempt at discrediting it -

Organizations always overestimate -

You're wrong, Fox covered the event extensively.
A few hours of coverage on Saturday afternoon, hosted by Beck.
MSNBC was doing wall-to-wall coverage of Obama's health care campaign rally, his triumph of will for health care event in Minnesota.

I didn't see the Fox stuff - I was busy on Saturday - I did see a rerun on Sunday of some of the c-span footage.

So, yes, I was wrong. Sorry...

edit - add...

Well, I went to FoxNews and searched for Glenn Beck 9/12 and came up with no recent coverage. Cal - do you have the link - I do have problems searching for their stuff in particular. I am interested because in their coverage they should certainly show crowd shots from the capitol steps... Standard stuff for rally coverage in DC. And I would think they would have fairly close counts - they should certainly know if it was about the same size as Obama's inaugural, or 1/2 the size, or 1/10 the size - they had a lot of coverage in January for that event, and it isn't too hard to look out over a crowd and say "half the size" or "twice the size" or "about the same size"...

It could be why I thought that Fox did little coverage of it... I can't find it on their site...

The only thing I found was the fact that Beck wasn't there - that he was covering from the New York studio... sort of weird.
 
September 14, 2009 - by Charlie Martin
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/how-big-was-the-crowd/

“How big is it?” is certainly one of the world’s most dreaded questions.

In fact, after the Million Man March in 1995, Congress restricted the National Park Service from even making estimates — a restriction that was maintained for 14 years and then quietly rescinded this January for the Obama inauguration.

I’m talking about crowds, of course. I can’t take you people anywhere.

There have been a lot of estimates, from the “official” one of 60 to 70 thousand, up to the rumored 2 million. Let’s see if we can make a plausible estimate with some rigor and some idea of possible error.

Yesterday, I made a back of the envelope calculation that Stephen Green picked up at Vodkapundit, simply to see if the high estimates were at all plausible. A number I picked up by Google searching told me that a pretty good crowd is about 18 people in 10 square meters — that’s about half as crowded as a crowded elevator (approximately one person per six square feet).

Wikipedia told me that the National Mall covers about 125 hectares, or about 1.25 million square meters, and simple multiplication then tells us that if the whole mall was that crowded, that would be as many as 2.3 million people. Which is one hell of a crowd. Call that an upper bound — anyone who says it was more than 2.3 million is almost certainly wrong.

Just for comparison, we’ve got the Obama inauguration, which was originally estimated at 2 million and then revised down to about 850,000. Popular Science got GeoEye to take a satellite photo.

Now, via Green, we have a number reported by Barbara Espinosa from the “people meter” on Pennsylvania Ave — a total of 1.5 million people passed by during the march. Now, that’s some kind of direct count, but we don’t know what kind — if anyone has any information on this “people meter” I’d love to see it — so let’s save that as an estimate and see what else we get.

The National Park Service actually has a methodology for crowd estimation; they just were forbidden by Congress from using it after the Million Man March came out to be less than half a million. That restriction mysteriously disappeared for the Obama inauguration, and USA Today published a useful article on it.

Turns out the Park Service thinks a crowd is about one person per five square feet, or a little more dense than I used, but they clearly use a different area for the Mall than I got from Wikipedia — they say a full Mall is about 1.5 million. So all we need is an overhead photo, and we should be able to compare easily, right?

The only problem is that I can’t find one. No one paid to have GeoEye take one (next time, dammit) and no one has published one that I can find.

Darn.

So let’s take another approach. We’ve got Barbara Espinosa’s 1.5 million count. Is that plausible?

Here we have other comparable data, in the various pictures from Pennsylvania Avenue. There is a time lapse from the traffic camera at 14th Street, roughly where E would cross 14th NW if only E actually crossed 14th. It’s overlooking the Freedom Park, and looking down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol. The White House is basically behind us from this point of view.

What that shows us is Pennsylvania Avenue full of people walking past for at least three hours. (This matches some other independent accounts, like this at the New York Times.) So more back of the envelope: it’s 1.1 miles from Freedom Park to the Capitol, and Pennsylvania is six lanes plus a middle turn lane and some sidewalks — call it 100 feet wide. That’s about 600,000 square feet, so if it were a crowd standing still, that is at least 100,000 people. We’ve got a picture of that, so that’s got to be a lower bound. We’ve also got a variety of pictures of at least the part of the Mall from 3rd to Capitol Circle and it’s pretty full — the Park Service method tells us that’s around 250,000 right there.

But the people on Pennsylvania aren’t standing still: they’re walking, marching, at something between 2 and 4 miles per hour because that’s how fast people march. Let’s choose 3 mph: that would mean a line of people marching past a single point for three hours would be about 9 miles long. In that time, there would be enough people to fill that chunk of Pennsylvania about 8 times. That’s conservative, as what I’ve heard from people actually marching is that it was pretty packed; it wouldn’t be hard to believe the 1.5 million number either.

That’s 800,000 people.

The Park Service method, filling just the Capitol end of the Mall, is 250,000, but we have many reports of much overflow, and we also can figure that they wouldn’t have marched past for three full hours if there were only that many.

The legacy media estimate of 60-70 thousand is ludicrous: we have pictures of twice that. Still, it’s been reported, so we’ll keep it.

That’s a pretty wide range. To summarize:

Rumored number 2 million
“People meter” count 1.5 million
Eight “Pennsylvania Avenues” full of people 800 thousand
Grant Memorial area by Park Service method 250 thousand
Legacy media reports 70 thousand

Average all of those and we get 900,000 plus (924,000). Throw out the outliers, we get 850,000. And remember that the 1.5 million was a real count; it’s inherently a more believable number. Our estimate should be “pulled” upward by that.

Conclusion: probably well more than 850,000 in the crowd.

Which is a lot of people.
 
An Impression Of The Protest
http://www.transterrestrial.com/?p=21884
…from Matt Welch, who wandered out to the mall to see it..


Henry Vanderbilt sends an analysis of the crowd size via email. He says it’s clearly six figures — hundreds of thousands:

I’ve taken a look at the available hard data on the crowd size at yesterday’s DC Tea Party, and (FWIW), by two different crowd-count methods based on two different data sources (one of these including the New York Times report). It’s definitely “hundreds of thousands.” Not “millions”, no, nor mere “tens of thousands” as all the major media outlets are putting it. Hundreds of thousands. Two analyses follow in detail, to allow criticism of the methodology and addition of better data.

Analysis 1: This gives a range of 240,000 to 320,000 marchers down Pennsylvania Ave, and is based on the time-lapse march route video plus measurements of the route taken from Google Maps. The time-lapse sequence was taken from a webcam over Freedom Plaza at 14th St and E NW, looking ESE down Pennsylvania Avenue toward the Capitol. The time-lapse video is 41 seconds long (0-40), is labelled as covering 8 AM to 1130 AM on 9/12/09, and thus scales at just over five minutes real-time per second of video. The video shows the march starting out of Freedom Plaza at 17 seconds (~9:30 AM) with the tail end leaving the plaza at 36 seconds (~11:10 AM). Google Maps sat view, meanwhile, shows Pennsylvania Ave. to be just over 220 feet wide (eight traffic lanes plus sidewalks) along the march route, and the length of the march route from the exit of Freedom Square to where the road reaches the Capitol West Lawn to be just over 4400 feet. The video seems to indicate marchers filled both road and sidewalks for the entire march route for most of the time of the march, FWIW.

The video does not seem to provide enough resolution, spatial or time, to directly measure the rate of advance of the march. The speed with which the route initially fills up shouldn’t be used (the fast ones always end up out front) nor the speed with which it empties (the slow ones are at the back). I’ll make the assumption here that the march averaged 1 mph - large dense peaceable crowds tend to have much internal friction and move slowly, 1-2 mph in my experience; I think 1 mph is mildly conservative.

So we know the crowd took ~100 minutes to march past the east end of Freedom Square on a route ~220 feet wide, and we’re assuming they averaged a 1 mph rate of advance. That would make the entire crowd about 8800 feet long by 220 feet wide (had the route of march actually been that long). In other words, the crowd occupied about 1.94 million square feet at their march density, at an assumed march speed of 1 mph.

We now need a second assumption: how tightly packed the crowd was as they marched.

I estimate that a really tightly jammed crowd (stage-front at a concert) takes about two square feet per person. A dense elbow-to-elbow crowd on the move is three to four square feet per person, and a polite relaxed crowd on the move is six or more square feet per person. This marching crowd seemed very densely packed in the overhead video, but from various closeups I’ve seen it seemed more like 6-8 square feet per person. 1.94 million square feet divided by six square feet per marcher gives about 320,000 marchers; divided by 8 gives about 240,000 marchers.

To sum up, the width of the march route and the time for the march to pass one point are known. The two main assumptions in this crowd estimate are the average speed of the march and the average spacing of the marchers. 1 mph and 6-8 square feet per person seem mildly conservative estimates; based on those we get a crowd size of multiple hundreds of thousands.

Note too that this march-route estimate does not cover anyone who arrived at the march destination by other routes.

Analysis 2: This one gives a range of 330,000 to 500,000 demonstrators in front of the Capitol, and is based on the NYT description of the crowd (”A sea of protesters filled the west lawn of the Capitol and spilled onto the National Mall) plus the first photo in the story at the Daily Mail, showing the Capitol West Lawn during the protest, plus measurements taken from Google Maps sat view of the area.

The overall West Lawn of the Capitol area is a square just over 1500 feet on a side. Between the Reflecting Pool, the Botanic Gardens building, and various other obstructions, I estimate about 75% of that area is actually available for a crowd. That’s comes out to about 1.7m square feet.

The National Mall, meanwhile, consists of eight squares of about 600 by 600 feet each, (about 360,000 square feet each) in a line west to the Washington Monument. I will assume for this analysis that the crowd described by the NYT extended only to the first of these eight blocks, giving us 1.7m + 360K square feet, or about 2 million square feet of crowd.

Crowds at rest take less room than crowds on the move; I therefore assume a range of 4 to 6 square feet per person in this crowd. The above-pointered picture in the Daily Mail seems to support the 4 square feet end of this range, but it was taken from just east of the Reflecting Pond and shows the front portion of the crowd - the crowd density likely drops further back. However, there is also uncertainty about just how far back the crowd goes - at least one attendee claimed in a blog comment that the crowd described by the NYT extended the entire length of the Mall. Applying the 4 to 6 square foot range to the West Lawn plus first block of Mall area seems reasonable for now, absent better data. This gives us an estimated 330,000 to 500,000 demonstrators in front of the Capitol yesterday.

Obviously there are significant error bands in both of these estimates. There’s also room for better data; in particular I’d be interested in any marchers who accurately timed their march from leaving Freedom Square to first arriving at 3rd St where the West Lawn starts, as well as any more info on how far back along the Mall the crowd extended and how dense the crowd was.

I think it’s already very clear, however, that “hundreds of thousands” is the correct description of the size of the 9/12/09 DC protest.

I wasn’t there, but the pictures I’ve seen look like a lot of people. This is the kind of analysis that it would be nice to get from journalists, but most of them went into the profession because (among other reasons) they were told there would be no math.

[Bumped]

[Monday updates]

Bruce Webster has thoughts and pictures. And the Gormogons have turned the analysis up to eleven. They think there are on the order of a million people.

[Mid-afternoon update]

Another analysis over at Pajamas Media. Again, on the order of a million.

This entry was posted on Sunday, September 13th, 2009 at 4:01 pm by Rand Simberg a
 
Monday, September 14, 2009
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjMxZjZjYjFjYjE0NzBhYzk0Y2M2ZmQxZjFjY2Y3ZGE=
The 912 March: 'Stunningly Normal' [Mark Hemingway]

There's still a lot of people trying to spin what happened at the March this weekend, everything from the numbers to media accusations the crowd was "angry" and "seething." Nick Gillespie's remarks about the march were spot-on:

I confess to having no way of checking or even evaluating these stats, but from my view of the proceedings (and having attended various events over the years), my sense is that 60,000 is way low and 2 million a stretch by a huge factor. Crowd counts are notoriously difficult and always pumped up or down for various reasons.

That said, the three takeaways I had from the event comport with Welch's from yesterday's post: First, the crowd was truly huge. Second, the crowd was from all over the place (both geographically and ideologically). And third, the crowd, well-behaved and stunningly normal in the main, was genuinely pissed off at out of control spending and government policies. "Stop spending," was the basic answer to any questions about what Congress and the president should do come tomorrow. Throw the bums of either party out come next fall was the second most-common answer.

Everything Nick writes completely jibes with my experience. I've been covering marches in D.C. for nearly a decade and I will eat my hat if the march wasn't well into six figures. Secondly, if you see a few crazy signs at the march on some left-wing blog and decide that it was a bunch of kooks on the mall, you're dead wrong. (I'm looking at you, Rod Dreher.) I covered the March for over five hours, walking from Freedom Plaza to the front of the Capitol, back down to the reflecting pool and from one side of the mall to the other. During that time I saw only two birther signs, and yes, a few swastikas — but, ahem, those were also exceedingly rare. I spoke to dozens of people, and yes, they were all "stunningly normal." Bottom line: If elected officials — GOP included — want to ignore what's going on here on the basis that it's a bunch of fringe crazies, they do so at their own peril.

UPDATE: Rand Simberg has the best discussion of the crowd size I've seen, with a low-end estimate of 240k and a high-end estimate of half a million. (Via Moe Lane.)
 
So, cal - got those links into Fox - it should be easy from the live coverage to get an idea of size - they have to have the shots from the capitol steps - it is standard issue...

It is easy to look out and see how far back the crowd goes - if it goes to 3rd or 4th or beyond -
 
So, cal - got those links into Fox - it should be easy from the live coverage to get an idea of size - they have to have the shots from the capitol steps - it is standard issue...

It is easy to look out and see how far back the crowd goes - if it goes to 3rd or 4th or beyond -

You can find this stuff on the intenet as fast as I can.. probably faster, because you and your friends are staying up late trying to spin it.....

YouTube - 9/12 Protest / Tea Party in Washington, DC - Glenn Beck - Fox News
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top