"Crowd-size" important enough for a press-conference

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, Gloss said:

With this snowflake attitude coming from the Donald, are they going to take his alpha male card away?

He lost that card pretty early on in the election cycle. it's actually quite funny watching "alpha males" defend a President who is the most thin skinned we have ever had.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

Those bleachers are filled with the ghosts of the Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln and the original Pilgrims who have all come back from the grave to celebrate the coming of President Trump #alternatefacts

And unborn babies slaughtered by  the evil Cecile Richards and planned parenthood 

[OriZ 3,157]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

Possibly true.

 

The thing is I'm sure there are a lot of reasons, and none of it really matters. Yes people make some jokes about it at his expense but if it wasn't the attendance at the inauguration it would have been something else. People are going to make fun of Trump, possibly more so than Obama or other prior Presidents. We have freedom of speech in this country, there are a number of unhappy people, and he is kind of a natural target (Former reality show celebrity, orange hair, loud mouth). However, he and his cabinet can at least TRY to make themselves less of a target by stopping the childish responses to the "media attacks". He needs to just ignore it and do his job, and let his actions speak for themselves. Every time he, or members of his administration, cry/whine about "unfair treatment" it just gives people more things to poke fun at.

 

I do agree with you there.

 

1 hour ago, bcking said:

Here are some examples of the facts:

 

1. The inauguration was not the most viewed IN PERSON in history (Where it falls in the rankings is a matter of OPINION, but it is FACT that it was not number 1)

2. More televisions tuned into the inauguration than did to Obama's inaugurations (Here you go! A fact you might actually like. Though "tuning in" doesn't necesssarily mean supporting, or even actively watching. Our office break room TV was tuned in and no one was there every time I walked by the door)

3. The inauguration was NOT viewed by more people on television than any other in history (Reagan had more)

 

Spicer stated, with emphasis (PERIOD!), that it was the most viewed BOTH in person and around the globe. "Around the globe" could be a matter of opinion (Online numbers are hard to quantify). In person is not a matter of opinion. It was absolutely not the most viewed in person. 

 

At this point I feel like this is a broken record. 

 

I appreciate you being the only one to actually provide examples. However nobody in this forum disputed any of your points. That's not the topic at hand though, once again you guys(maybe not you, but Ready kind of did in his response to my comment referring to me not ganging up no matter who it is, not what others did to Obama) are trying to create your own topic instead of just sticking to the one we already have. We all know it wasn't the most viewed in person. Where we disagree is whether or not it is a FACT that they lied about that, and I do not consider there to be only one truth there.

 

You guys seem to be locked on to your own interpretation of events which you now renamed "truth", I'm not here to tell you which is the truth and which isn't because I don't know, I'm just pointing out there's other possibilities out there you don't seem to be open to accepting. We're not dealing with hardcore facts here, this isn't forensics, it is a matter of everyone's opinions. It's just like some of ya think the ultimate truth, there's no other option, is that he was elected because of nationalism. No room to even consider healthcare, I guess lower taxes did not matter, the economy and jobs didn't matter(mind you my opinion there is well known so I'm not saying he's going to improve that, just that people voted for him with the belief he will). Trade deals - irrelevant.... Wanna talk about Alternate facts? to some it's all about the wall and immigration and Isis and nationalism and white power. Be my guest but that does not constitute as "facts" or "truth" in my book, it does count as an opinion, just as the interpretation of what was said or meant by Spicer is not an absolute truth but an opinion. 

 

If you're looking for a world where there's absolute truths I'm afraid you're going to need to look further than earth because life is not black and white. Plenty of gray.

 

 

3 hours ago, Transborderwife said:

Second biggest. Reagan was first https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN15600S?client=safari

 

It gets a little more complicated when you add live streaming into the mix:

 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2017/01/trump-inauguration-streaming-audience-234056

 

http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/how-many-people-watched-trump-inauguration-vs-obama-comparisons-tv-streaming-online-viewing-web-traffic-numbers-ratings/

[smilesammich 10,727]

3 minutes ago, OriZ said:

 

I appreciate you being the only one to actually provide examples.

 

having a hard time are we oriz? or are you giving us examples of alternative facts now?

[smilesammich 10,727]

5 minutes ago, OriZ said:

 

It gets a little more complicated when you add live streaming into the mix:

 

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2017/01/trump-inauguration-streaming-audience-234056

 

http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/how-many-people-watched-trump-inauguration-vs-obama-comparisons-tv-streaming-online-viewing-web-traffic-numbers-ratings/

also, might do you some good to read about those live streaming numbers..i see you've already given yourself links to investigate. get crackin.

 

 

[bcking 3,157]

14 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I do agree with you there.

 

I appreciate you being the only one to actually provide examples. However nobody in this forum disputed any of your points. That's not the topic at hand though, once again you guys(maybe not you, but Ready kind of did in his response to my comment referring to me not ganging up no matter who it is, not what others did to Obama) are trying to create your own topic instead of just sticking to the one we already have. We all know it wasn't the most viewed in person. Where we disagree is whether or not it is a FACT that they lied about that, and I do not consider there to be only one truth there.

 

You guys seem to be locked on to your own interpretation of events which you now renamed "truth", I'm not here to tell you which is the truth and which isn't because I don't know, I'm just pointing out there's other possibilities out there you don't seem to be open to accepting. We're not dealing with hardcore facts here, this isn't forensics, it is a matter of everyone's opinions. It's just like some of ya think the ultimate truth, there's no other option, is that he was elected because of nationalism. No room to even consider healthcare, I guess lower taxes did not matter, the economy and jobs didn't matter(mind you my opinion there is well known so I'm not saying he's going to improve that, just that people voted for him with the belief he will). Trade deals - irrelevant.... Wanna talk about Alternate facts? to some it's all about the wall and immigration and Isis and nationalism and white power. Be my guest but that does not constitute as "facts" or "truth" in my book, it does count as an opinion, just as the interpretation of what was said or meant by Spicer is not an absolute truth but an opinion. 

 

As you said, lets stick to the single topic at hand so I'm not really going to respond to most of that last paragraph. 

 

So if you are saying you agree that it was not the most viewed in person, then you are right we are just focusing on what Sean Spicer and Donald Trump said.

 

Donald Trump said, paraphrasing here (can't find a direct quote and don't have time to watch the video to quote it myself) that there were "up to a million and a half people at the inauguration". Now Donald may be a smart man, because he clearly added some doubt into the statement which makes it fall into the 'opinion' category (He is technically right that "up to a million and a half people" were there. Heck up to a billion people were there..). So he wasn't lying technically, he was just greatly exagerrating things which is par for the course. 

 

To me, my biggest issue is with Spicer. I believe he lied. By you saying he didn't lie I assume the point that we disagree is on the sentence I already quoted:

 

"That was the largest audience to witness an inauguration, period. Both in person, and around the globe"

 

The word "Both" does NOT mean you combine the two subjects to create a "total". It means that the statement applies to two things, and you then proceed to list those two things. So instead of saying "It was the largest audience to witness an inauguration in person, and it was the largest audience to witness an inauguration around the globe" you are able to contract it by using the word both. Both by definition means that the statement applies to the two subjects in the same way. "I studied invertebrate zoology, both in the wild and in the lab" means that the statement I gave - "I studied invertebrate zoology" applied to two situations.

 

So when he made that statement he was partially giving an opinion (Largest audience around the globe, since that hasn't and likely will never been proven as fact or not), and a falsehood (Largest audience in person). Unfortunately when it comes to truth/lies a "partial truth" is more of a lie than it is a truth. He lied about one thing, and gave an opinion as a fact as another. One I'm fine with (giving an opinion as fact), the other I'm not.

 

Now you could also argue that he MEANT to say that it was the largest combined. Sure he could have. He could have also meant to say that God came down from the heavens and blessed Trump in person. Unfortunately Sean Spicer's entire job is about being clear with a message, so he can't keep saying things and "meaning" another. I would also argue the way he was talking about the media portrayal of the turn out implied that he was speaking specifically about the in person turn out (since the photos were obviously focused on in person turnout) and he talked about how biased they were etc... He was clearly talking about, and trying to refute, the claims of a poor in person turn out.

 

EDIT: I'd also add that I have issues with using the word "witness" to reference people "around the globe". To me witness applies to people who are actually present. I did not "witness" the Iraq war because I watched scenes of it on TV. But that is a grammatical issue I can let slide.

 

 

Edited January 24, 2017 by bcking

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

3 hours ago, Transborderwife said:

Second biggest. Reagan was first https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN15600S?client=safari

Except they did not have Internet and such back then . The fact remains more worldwide watched Trump's inauguration than any in history. 

[Transborderwife 4,666]

24 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Except they did not have Internet and such back then . The fact remains more worldwide watched Trump's inauguration than any in history. 

The population was also smaller, people would gather together for events like this, there are other logical arguments 

[bcking 3,157]

Can someone remind me of the TV numbers?

 

From what I've seen, Trump estimated around 31 million viewers. Obama in 2013 only had 20 million, but Obama 2009 had 37 million. Reagan had 41.2 so that would put Trump at third. Comparing his first inauguration to Obama's second is a little unfair since second terms are rather less exciting.

 

Now online is difficult, but online still existed in 2009. CNN for example reported 17 million for Trump, but 21 million for Obama 2009.

 

In order to really quantify it we would need to compare data from ever website from 2009 to 2017.

 

At the end of all that, even if it was the "most viewed", it would probably be best to adjust for the world/US population change in 8 years, and potentially also the number of computers with internet access between 2009 and 2017.

 

In the end it would be meaningless. However going back to the beginning - As of right now that statement is merely an opinion.

[bcking 3,157]

 

36 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Except they did not have Internet and such back then . The fact remains more worldwide watched Trump's inauguration than any in history. 

Please provide factual evidence for your fact. I'd like numbers from every online news outlet for viewership in 2009 at Obama's first inauguration to Trump in 2017.

 

Since we are on the topic of lie vs. opinion vs. fact - I would rate your statement as opinion.

Edited January 24, 2017 by bcking

[Transborderwife 4,666]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

 

Please provide factual evidence for your fact. I'd like numbers from every online news outlet for viewership in 2009 at Obama's first inauguration to Trump in 2017.

 

Since we are on the topic of lie vs. opinion vs. fact - I would rate your statement as opinion.

 

[Dakine10 5,452]

59 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

 The fact remains more worldwide watched Trump's inauguration than any in history. 

      Do you mean 'fact' in the traditional sense of the word, or fact as it's currently used, seemingly to mean whatever someone wants it to mean?

[OriZ 3,157]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

As you said, lets stick to the single topic at hand so I'm not really going to respond to most of that last paragraph. 

 

So if you are saying you agree that it was not the most viewed in person, then you are right we are just focusing on what Sean Spicer and Donald Trump said.

 

Donald Trump said, paraphrasing here (can't find a direct quote and don't have time to watch the video to quote it myself) that there were "up to a million and a half people at the inauguration". Now Donald may be a smart man, because he clearly added some doubt into the statement which makes it fall into the 'opinion' category (He is technically right that "up to a million and a half people" were there. Heck up to a billion people were there..). So he wasn't lying technically, he was just greatly exagerrating things which is par for the course. 

 

To me, my biggest issue is with Spicer. I believe he lied. By you saying he didn't lie I assume the point that we disagree is on the sentence I already quoted:

 

"That was the largest audience to witness an inauguration, period. Both in person, and around the globe"

 

The word "Both" does NOT mean you combine the two subjects to create a "total". It means that the statement applies to two things, and you then proceed to list those two things. So instead of saying "It was the largest audience to witness an inauguration in person, and it was the largest audience to witness an inauguration around the globe" you are able to contract it by using the word both. Both by definition means that the statement applies to the two subjects in the same way. "I studied invertebrate zoology, both in the wild and in the lab" means that the statement I gave - "I studied invertebrate zoology" applied to two situations.

 

So when he made that statement he was partially giving an opinion (Largest audience around the globe, since that hasn't and likely will never been proven as fact or not), and a falsehood (Largest audience in person). Unfortunately when it comes to truth/lies a "partial truth" is more of a lie than it is a truth. He lied about one thing, and gave an opinion as a fact as another. One I'm fine with (giving an opinion as fact), the other I'm not.

 

Now you could also argue that he MEANT to say that it was the largest combined. Sure he could have. He could have also meant to say that God came down from the heavens and blessed Trump in person. Unfortunately Sean Spicer's entire job is about being clear with a message, so he can't keep saying things and "meaning" another. I would also argue the way he was talking about the media portrayal of the turn out implied that he was speaking specifically about the in person turn out (since the photos were obviously focused on in person turnout) and he talked about how biased they were etc... He was clearly talking about, and trying to refute, the claims of a poor in person turn out.

 

EDIT: I'd also add that I have issues with using the word "witness" to reference people "around the globe". To me witness applies to people who are actually present. I did not "witness" the Iraq war because I watched scenes of it on TV. But that is a grammatical issue I can let slide.

 

 

 

I will give you that, Spicer needs to start speaking clearer. I will also agree(and have already agreed) Trump seems to have a character issue where he doesn't always know how to pick and choose his battles and is obsessed with winning anything, no matter how big or small. What you said now is what I was trying to get to - you can easily claim everything you wrote, it's not hardcore facts, it's opinion. Now, if you personally don't "buy it" that that's what he meant and that he wasn't trying to lie that is fine. I kept saying I'm not telling you what the truth is, I honestly have no idea. I know I'm expected to have an idea and for it to be the idea you guys have, but well I just don't at this point. I don't like to be so quick to judge. All I'm saying is be open to other possibilities, now and in the future, and acknowledge opinion and fact/truth is not the same thing. It seems to me that you have done that, so we're good. I think at the end of the day the bottom line is this; We  can all agree(at least those of us that bothered looking at the data) that it was in fact a huge event. Whether it was the biggest, 2nd biggest or third biggest it was BIG. I feel like for people to try and minimize it they should not be surprised when Trump hits back hard, it is how Trump is, and if someone tried to minimize or mock my accomplishments(again, whether you like him or not it was huge and that's an accomplishment everyone wants to be able to take pride in) I probably wouldn't react in kind. 

 

At the end of the day it is what it is. Everyone seems to be moving on from it including Trump and the media so probably time for us to as well.

Edited January 25, 2017 by OriZ

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

 

Please provide factual evidence for your fact. I'd like numbers from every online news outlet for viewership in 2009 at Obama's first inauguration to Trump in 2017.

 

Since we are on the topic of lie vs. opinion vs. fact - I would rate your statement as opinion.

You want me to do what ??  My father was an MD. Had a God complex

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

32 minutes ago, Dakine10 said:

      Do you mean 'fact' in the traditional sense of the word, or fact as it's currently used, seemingly to mean whatever someone wants it to mean?

I mean Fact. I do not mean fact as in I did not have sex with that woman