Liberals crowing that 'March for our Lives crowds bigger than for Trump inaugural

Huge crowds turned out yesterday for the "Children's Crusade," AKA "March four our Lives" event. I applaud the activism of the young, their passion, and their desire to change the world - misguided though it all may be. 

But the most curious aspect of the media coverage of the events is the emphasis placed on the idea that more people turned out for a demonstration against guns than turned out for Trump's inauguration.

The Hill:

Asked about estimated attendance at the rally, which was expected to draw hundreds of thousands of people, Van Hollen told The Hill, "I can tell you for sure, it's larger than the Trump inauguration."

While exact turnout figures have yet to be released, organizers obtained a permit for 500,000 people to rally in D.C. around Pennsylvania Avenue near the White House. Hundreds of similar marches were planned worldwide.

Very impressive, to be sure. But what the hell is the point?

We're used to liberals saying and doing nutty, incoherent things. But this is perhaps the most absurd point to make about the demonstration I've seen.

Who cares? Who cares if theirs is bigger than Trump's?  If the left wants to whip it out every time there's a demonstration against or for one of their pet projects, they will always win because they are able to manipulate the masses and get them hysterical about anything. 

They got them hysterical about Donald Trump before he even took office. Trump was going to be a dictator, he was going to trash the Constitution (yeah, irony alert), he was going to blow up the world. 

I think it's far more surprising that the crowds for Trump's inaugural were as large as they were, given the media hysteria generated against him in the lead up to January 20. 2017.

Bragging about drawing more for gun control than Trump's inaugural is stupid and pointless - right up the left's alley.

 

 

Huge crowds turned out yesterday for the "Children's Crusade," AKA "March four our Lives" event. I applaud the activism of the young, their passion, and their desire to change the world - misguided though it all may be. 

But the most curious aspect of the media coverage of the events is the emphasis placed on the idea that more people turned out for a demonstration against guns than turned out for Trump's inauguration.

The Hill:

Asked about estimated attendance at the rally, which was expected to draw hundreds of thousands of people, Van Hollen told The Hill, "I can tell you for sure, it's larger than the Trump inauguration."

While exact turnout figures have yet to be released, organizers obtained a permit for 500,000 people to rally in D.C. around Pennsylvania Avenue near the White House. Hundreds of similar marches were planned worldwide.

Very impressive, to be sure. But what the hell is the point?

We're used to liberals saying and doing nutty, incoherent things. But this is perhaps the most absurd point to make about the demonstration I've seen.

Who cares? Who cares if theirs is bigger than Trump's?  If the left wants to whip it out every time there's a demonstration against or for one of their pet projects, they will always win because they are able to manipulate the masses and get them hysterical about anything. 

They got them hysterical about Donald Trump before he even took office. Trump was going to be a dictator, he was going to trash the Constitution (yeah, irony alert), he was going to blow up the world. 

I think it's far more surprising that the crowds for Trump's inaugural were as large as they were, given the media hysteria generated against him in the lead up to January 20. 2017.

Bragging about drawing more for gun control than Trump's inaugural is stupid and pointless - right up the left's alley.