h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Here's a highlight via Rachel Maddow -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NDzA7nChB4

"Let's save the status quo"

>>I'm getting between 800,000 and 3 million. which seems rather a large disparity.<<

Iirc remember correctly the official figure was around 1.5 million, that's what the BBC was quoting. A mate who was there said a similar number.

>Still, even if we were to accept that there were a million people there, that's less than 1% of the population. All things considered, it doesn't seem like anything to write home about.

A million people marching in a political protest is always something to "write home about". They can be marching for something completely stupid but it doesn't mean they can be easily dismissed.

I'm not dismissing them; I'm merely pointing out that 99% of the population wasn't protesting.

>I'm not dismissing them; I'm merely pointing out that 99% of the population wasn't protesting.

Which is an attempt to play-down what's happened. One million (assuming it was that number) people protesting in one place *is* extremely significant. You wouldn't stand for someone on the other side of the fence making the "99% weren't there!" argument to play down a massive protest so why do it yourself?

The numbers vary between 75,000 (as reported some event organisers) 800,000 (as claimed by other organisers) and 1,700,000 as claimed by Glenn Beck.

These protesters are sincere but don't have a rational argument, they don't understand the issues that they're so angry over, it's a mob of groups excited over various forms of far-right insanity.
The organisers are exploiting that insanity. Hence phrases like "astroturf" flying.

See the signs and hear the protesters explain why they were there: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljFKK7XvsCs



Whatever the numbers the protest can considered significant one way or another. Only the number were above 2 million -- the number that depend on Fox News to tell what they think -- can it be regarded as movement that is reflective of attitudes far beyond that ever present ignorant and noisy extreme fringe of the USA political spectrum.

for those who are believing the high numbers quoted:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909150013

anhaga

The article on Malkin's role in this is a good read, too -- http://mediamatters.org/columns/200909140039

~*~You wouldn't stand for someone on the other side of the fence making the "99% weren't there!" argument to play down a massive protest so why do it yourself?~*~

Because I *would* stand up for someone making that argument; don't *you* start shoving words in my mouth. It *is* significant that the *vast* majority of the population was *not* in protest.

A million is significant, of course - about as significant as a million in UK or a million in NZ, of course

So they are now trying to claim there were more protesters than there were of people who attended Obama's Inauguration?

>Because I *would* stand up for someone making that argument

So you think The Sun had a point when they attempted to dismiss the 2003 Anti-War protest in London because, as they said, millions more *weren't* protesting?

I don't agree with the anti-Obama-healthcare protests at all but, if there really were 1 million protesters (hell, even if there were half that), it's a *very* significant number.

"but, if there really were 1 million protesters"

That's big if.

"hell, even if there were half that"

You need halve that again to get realistic.

The crowd on the day as seen in photos -- which often use a distorting depth of field and flattering angles etc. -- failed to pack out the area identified toward the top of the page as "Ticketed Area" in this report regarding Obama's inaugeration.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-01-19-crowd_N.htm

"it's a *very* significant number"

Define "significant".
A million is a psychologically significant number anywhere. But, is a crowd of quarter of a million significant in a nation of 307,000,000?

Perhaps it is, in the context of the wilful campaign to spread bogus high estimates and sow doubt about the reliability of low numbers reported in the "MSM".

The closest thing to an official estimate says 70,000. To suggest that it is off a single order of magnitude requires a desperate and deluded mind.

I like this video..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYlZiWK2Iy8

concerning the Barney Frank video, it's important to point out (as Jon Stewart did) that the woman was calling Frank, a gay Jew, and Obama, a man of mixed race, 'Nazis'. She is, indeed, on a strange and frightening planet.

Let alone that anyone comparing a difficult healthcare reform to genocide is obviously so idiotic that the only placard they should be holding is one advertising special offers at their local sandwich shop, on their strange little planet.

I wouldn't touch those sandwiches. There's something funny in them.

>Because I *would* stand up for someone making that argument
~*~So you think The Sun had a point when they attempted to dismiss the 2003 Anti-War protest in London because, as they said, millions more *weren't* protesting?~*~

I don't know anything about that, so I'm afraid I can't answer your question.




~*~I don't agree with the anti-Obama-healthcare protests at all but, if there really were 1 million protesters (hell, even if there were half that), it's a *very* significant number.~*~

Out of context, yes. But, as Jack pointed out, when compared to the total population of *300-million*, one million really doesn't seem like very much, since they'd be outnumbered 300 to 1. Because of that I choose to stick with percentages, since it's much easier to place a number in its proper context by using percentages rather than the inherent size of the number. Therefore, considering that we're talking about less than 1/2 of 1%, I am frankly not impressed.

But are the people in favour of Obama's healthcare projects also letting the government know that they are happy with it? Just staying at home dismissing a million protesters as looneys could be interpreted as apathy, or just not caring.

Better and more eloquently put:

http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta_christinas_weblog/2009/08/calling-congress.html

("Decisions Are Made By Those Who Show Up: Why Calling Congress Isn't A Waste Of Time")

Whilst your point participatory democracy is valid...

THERE WERE NOT A MILLION PROTESTERS. WAKE THE UP.