New Study Supports White House Claim On “Most Watched Inauguration”

inauguration_crowd_size_comparison_between_trump_2017_and_obama_2009After the inauguration, the White House was heavily criticized for President Trump’s repeated criticism of the media over how big of a crowd he attracted at his inauguration, particularly in comparison to the inaugurations of former President Obama.  As I stated at the time, I thought both Trump’s comments at the CIA and Sean Spicer’s first press conference were mistakes.  They lost the first 48 hour news cycle to a discuss about Trump’s perceived insecurities and factual assertions that were later challenged.  Newspapers have reported (with White House staff as sources) that Trump was alarmingly obsessed with the issue. It was a performance that even  stalwart supporters like Charles Krauthammer on Fox called “weird.”  Likewise, Fox News has described Spicer’s facts as “incorrect.” While it does appear that the crowd at the inauguration was smaller (which again I fail to see as a serious problem) and the figures released by Spicer on metro ridership were wrong, but the BBC is reporting  with other sources that Trump’s inauguration a study on live streaming sources that supports Spicer’s claim that the actual viewership was in fact the largest in history.

One claim may now be supportable.  Spicer said that Mr. Trump had drawn “the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration.”  Various media outlets denounced that claim with the other claims as unsupported.  After all, the Nielsen ratings show Trump at 19 percent below Obama’s audience in 2009.  Trump had 31 million.  By comparison, Ronald Reagan racked up 41.8 million.

However, in his second press conference, Spicer insisted that he was not claiming television viewership or attendance alone.  “I am saying that it was the total largest audience witnessed in person and around the globe.” Spicer insisted that you have to the 16.9 million who viewed it on CNN.  That figures is clearly relevant though CNN says that it is not very precise.  It does confirm that at the peak of CNN’s livestream coverage at 12:15 p.m., there were 2.3 million devices (desktop, mobile, connected TVs) streaming CNN’s feed of the inauguration.

However, Akamai Technologies, reported that the Trump inauguration was the largest single live news event that the company has ever delivered. It counts 4.6 million people watching the inauguration simultaneously — far greater than the prior peak of 3.8 million back in 2009).

That means that the Spicer claim of overall viewership could be true. There is still grounds for debate but it is a plausible argument that the Trump inauguration was the most watched.

In the end, I still do not get the importance given to this issue by President Trump.  As I previously discussed, the most important figure are those millions of voters who elected Trump.  A huge number of people attended the inauguration. Was it equal to the Obama inauguration in 2009. It does not appear so.  Yet, what does that really mean about the election or the new President?  By attacking the media and obsessing on the issue, the White House made this the leading story of the first week of the Administration.  The fact is that Trump has kept a remarkable number of his campaign pledges in the first week. That should have been the overriding message of the White House. Instead, it dealt with days of debate over false figures and heated attacks on the media.

140 thoughts on “New Study Supports White House Claim On “Most Watched Inauguration””

  1. Professor Turley,

    I’m not sure what the issue with you has been in the last many months? Is it you’re living in the DC area bubble and you do not fully understand whats been doing on across the USA, the Massive support for Trump, and the world or is it the case, as the one in which a Federal Judge admonished DOJ lawyers working on Obama’s illegal imagination case and ordered them never to appear in his court again for attempting to mislead his court with misinformation/etc?

    If I’d been the judge I would have had them disbarred. But in this case the readers and I are the Judge of the material you present to us with. Thus others and I may do what many are already doing and blocking websites from our computers we/I no longer trust. (Flowers for Socrates )

    Maybe you can explain yourself as to why it seems you clearly choose to present us with faulty facts and other propaganda, such as the misleading photos when you should have known what the real inauguration photos look like?

    Please watch the short videos below and you should be able to understand the case I make vs the article you presented us with.

  2. There are several issues on both sides of the Muslim “Extreme Vetting” or outright ban.

    On the one hand, the US was at least partially culpable in the disaster that caused the Syrian refugee crisis. Obama drew a hard red line and then completely ignored it while that homicidal maniac Assad killed hundreds of thousands of people and drove more than 11 million people to flee. He deliberately targeted civilians and children, attacking wells as people went to draw water. I see videos of dirty, bloody, shell shocked children, too freaked out to even cry. They just sit in little plastic chairs looking hollow because their brother/mother/sister/father just blew up and they’re hurt, too. I can’t bear it that kids are in danger and I want to save each and every single one, teach them about democracy and tolerance for other religions, and show them Mr Rogers reruns and shower them with love.

    On the other hand, Syria is infamous for its passionate anti-Semitic culture, abuse of human rights, lack of equality or value of women, and training fields for terrorists. Merely traveling to Syria outside of a humanitarian mission is enough to get you on a watchlist. Reporters have discovered the ID of people from all over the world, abandoned on the road of Syrian refugees. Our intelligence community admits that many young men are merely claiming to be Srian to gain easier entry to the West. Some just want to immigrate, some want to fight, and some will never leave their Old World values behind. Our intelligence community has admitted that they have no real way to vet those without papers. Best case scenario, they would depend on Syrian databases, maintained by a homicidal maniac regime, to get information, unless an individual actually told the truth about his identity and is in our own database.

    People talk about Trump and the Republican party being an existential threat to women, Jews, and gays, but seem strangely sanguine about the mass importation of people from regions infamous for actual violence and murder against women, Jews, and gays. It’s like they believe that all those pesky prejudices would simply vanish once they set foot on our soil, whilst simultaneously believing that half the population already living on that soil are a threat to the same groups of people. How do you reconcile that dichotomy?

    How do you vet people with no papers? How do you weed out those who truly wish to embrace our freedoms and become tolerant of other religions from those who bring intolerance and hatred with them? Would a simple lie detector test be sufficient? What does it matter if we take 2 years vetting people if they have no way to verify identity or we have to rely on any Syrian information gathered by a maniac’s government?

    I have known absolutely wonderful people who fled the overthrow of the Shah in Iran. I have known Jordanians, Afghanis, Palestinians, Turks, Armenians, Egyptians, and many other Muslim countries. I live in the great melting pot, CA, have worked with and befriended many Muslims, dated a Muslim, like to “collect” learning phrases in other languages, and took different styles of Middle Eastern dance lessons for years. There is a lot that I love about different ME cultures, and no, they are not all the same. But I am not blind to the problems of the Old Countries in the ME. I also saw or heard about forced arranged marriages, accepted arranged marriages, forced abortions, a wife forced to sleep on the floor, a very real difference in how daughters and sons are treated, and some pretty serious anti-semitism. The worst anti-Semitic talk that I ever heard was from a Persian man, related to someone I knew, who illegally immigrated here across the Mexican border. He was so nice in every other respect, but get him talking about Jews and your jaw would just hit the floor. And of course I would passionately argue with him. But I couldn’t change his mind. I don’t think I’ve ever changed anyone’s mind who’s really set in their ways. It’s not my forte.

    The reason why someone immigrates has a great impact on they ability to assimilate and embrace our values. The poet, government critic, young girl escaping an arranged marriage, all have an inherent motivation to enjoy our freedoms. They don’t want Old Country ways here. On the other hand, do you know what a rare and special person resisted brainwashing from birth to despise Jews, gays, or treat women as an object they can harm at will? They exist. I’ve known them. Very kind, generous people relieved not to be living under extremism anymore. But people forced to flee to the West, who didn’t want to come here, would not be exclusively made up of the type of people who want Western values. One Syrian child hurt or killed is too much. And one American child hurt or killed will be too much, too. There is intense pressure to reduce terrorist attacks on our soil, not increase them.

    The argument is that if we cannot effectively weed out the good from the bad, then the answer is to stabilize the region rather than empty it. That might mean yet another war for a country weary of wars.

    I am truly divided on this issue, and grateful that the anonymity of this blog gives me an outlet to voice my concerns honestly.

    1. KarenS,

      enjoyed reading your thoughtful post. It’s not black or white – many variables as you pointed out. One of my fav chefs in TN is a Muslim from Syria – delightful and loving person,husband, father. He’s been trying for years to get his family over here.

      I think those who have Green Cards should be allowed to return to the US – to get a card one must be vetted, hell, a friend of mine from Germany who married an American and moved here went through a very tough, and demeaning process (invasive medical exam) though she is Western, blonde and blue eyed. They are very thorough.

      And, yes, work on stabalization of the region so people can remain with their families in their own culture. Of course war mongers like Graham and McCain and the rest of the war machine will fight this.

  3. “In the end, I still do not get the importance given to this issue by President Trump.

    You’re being played, and you’re taking the bait just like the MSM.

    Keep your eye on the ball.
    The rapidity of his actions, the sheer number, and the minutiae like the inaugural size are overwhelming and distracting the opposition.

  4. Still no blogpost from Jonathan Turley about Trump’s Executive Orders, especially after the many blog posts and concern about Obamas Executive Actions. Why?

    1. Yes and also the blog is getting a faintly pro-Trump vibe with his latest posts. The post about celebrating the inauguration was disappointing to say the least.

      1. “Faintly”? I’d say it was a Trump haven. What happened to Turley? Very disappointing.

  5. Joe,

    I don’t think you need to accuse people of being racist for pointing out the reality of Obama’s policies. Obama rounded up Muslims and was the deporter in Chief of Hispanics. Jeesh He put children in cold rooms and did night raids of both legal and illegal immigrants.

    It’s why many of us have such a difficult time talking with Obama/Clinton people. You seem absolutely unaware of what your own candidates engaged in, or if aware, you never have the courage to say it’s wrong. You just say anyone bringing up inconvenient facts is a racist.

    This is what I was trying to say to Issac. We need citizens who can be truthful about the “leadership” of USGinc. and we need people who care about others, even when we disagree. Otherwise, you just work for the oligarchy and perform the function of divide and conquer. Why work on their behalf? They don’t care about anyone or anything except money and power.

    1. Not trying to accuse anyone of racism but acknowledging the fact that many will be spared because they have pale skin and the right religion. Brown skinned people will be the ones that are rounded up or stooped at the airports.

  6. Wonder how long people around here are going to insist that Obama is worse than Trump. That train of thought might persist for those that have very pale skin and are in no danger of being rounded up.

  7. Trump wants to be liked and respected. And he is very concerned about all the efforts to delegitimize his presidency. HRC winning the popular vote through NY and CA bothered him on a very deep level.

    Those who do not understand the electoral college claim that Trump won on a technicality, that Hillary is the “real” President. Of course that is not true. But no other issue is as guaranteed to get a continued and prolonged response from the POTUS.

    He took all the jeering memes along the lines of “see, nobody likes or wants you” and battled it.

    Internet bullying and partisan politics are part of his life now. He has to learn how to be more effective.

    A better response would have been to say that many people wanted to be part of history to see the swearing in of the first African American President in history. That was a meaningful moment for people, regardless of politics. For his own inauguration, why stand far in the back to see it in person when you can get a better, more comfortable view on TV? It’s appropriate, given his history on TV. And he thought he did well when you take into account all viewers.

    And leave it at that. Not another word on the subject. He could leave it to his supporters or media relations to come up with a snappy comeback meme. He needs to stay out of it. He’s got bigger problems like the economy and ISIS to deal with, and his popularity is improving.

    But I think he will struggle dealing with issues like this in his Presidency. Fairness has nothing to do with it. It comes with the job.

    1. A very thoughtful comment! I have to wonder; I mean Trump has had to deal with the public before, look at the snark he got during the primaries, so there is a little bit of me that suspects he is using this occasion like he uses others, to gain something (look over there??), but nevertheless, I think you have a point about his sensitivity under these particular circumstances and as always your innate sense of fairness in drawing Trump the human is compelling.

      1. The Intercept ‏@theintercept 4h4 hours ago

        Trump’s Muslim ban is culmination of War on Terror mentality but still uniquely shameful by @ggreenwald
        Trump, the narcissist, is not sensitive about the needs of others.

        1. Joe,

          I agree with you, and on this rare occasion, disagree with BB. Although I agree with BB that Karen made a very thoughtful comment, I don’t think Trump is sensitive about the needs of people who aren’t useful to him. This ban on Muslims from the 7 nations the US has destroyed is wrong, stupid and should be stopped right now.

          As others have pointed out, he isn’t even restricting Muslims from nations who did attack us on 9/11, nations with which he (like Clinton and Obama) has financial dealings. It is wrong to single out whole groups of people. It’s also an example of how business dealings overrule consistent policy (albeit this is a bad policy to begin with). This is no less pay to play than Clinton and denying people safe haven after USGinc. destroyed their nation hardly speaks well of Trump.

          1. You can disagree with me anytime Jill 🙂

            My comment about Trump’s sensitivity just meant “overly sensitive to perceived personal slight” (I didn’t express it well). A very human condition that is somewhat rare in more seasoned politicians. I don’t see Trump being sensitive to the needs of others. Obama wasn’t either, but with a more snobby poise.

            I always admire Karen’s fair mindedness but am not equally sure Trump merits it nor, for that matter, that that is exactly what she is saying.

            1. BB,

              Thanks and the same to you! I re-read what you wrote and you were clear. I just took it wrong. Sorry.

  8. Issac,

    Your hatred for people whom you consider beneath you works well for the oligarchy. The last thing they want is people who will reach out to others and help out. Divide and conquer is their strategy. I don’t know why you can’t see this.

    The economy did not go well for the vast majority of our population under Obama. It will not go well for the vast majority under Trump. Obama supporters seem to live in a permanent state of alternative facts about his reign. It is really weird to read what you all say because it is quite honestly, counterfactual.

    We need to be citizens who can truthfully assess the “leadership” of this nation, past and present. We need to be citizens who, while really disagreeing with each other, still care enough about the welfare of others that we will join together to preserve the Constitution.

    1. “The economy did not go well for the vast majority of our population under Obama. It will not go well for the vast majority under Trump.”

      The economy was ruined under Bush. The economy had been resting on its laurels since the late sixties. The tech revolution delayed what is happening right now. Many other countries are getting it right as they have no choice. They aren’t laboring under the illusions so many Americans are. Reagan delayed the technology advances that Carter implemented by allowing SUVs to be classified as trucks regarding emissions and mileage. The rest of the world tightened up and the US loosened up. This has been the case for many decades. The dysfunction of labor, corporate, and government all working against each other is seen as some perverted form of independence by some. The manufacturing wage in Germany is 10% higher than in the US yet Germany, proportionately population wise, is kicking the *ss of the US along with most other countries. They have learned to cooperate labor, corporate, and government. The US will always be at a disadvantage if it continues with this unhealthy confrontation with a strong central government.

      The economy was great under Clinton because he happened to be coming along at the right time and that was the tech revolution. Bush inherited a great momentum and squandered it all on lowering taxes and two disastrous and costly wars. The effects of this nonsense will be felt for some time, however, Obama was the guy into whose lap it all fell. If you can’t understand that there is no way you can understand anything. Since inheriting the mess Obama stopped the bleeding, stabilized things, and started a shallow incline upwards.

      Trump will inherit this positive momentum just as Obama inherited the negative momentum of Bush. Call it hatred, I call it frustration, but the emotion is a direct result of the shallow understanding of too many Americans, the dupes, those that can’t see beyond the end of their nose.

      You use the word counterfactual to defend liars that use the words alternative facts. The facts are the facts. Obama was what Obama was which was a result of the mess he inherited along with Republican obstructionism. That produced some good and some bad. The majority of Americans think quite highly of him, unless of course you find alternative facts. One thing, not yet a fact, is that DDT is despised and questioned by well over half of Americans. He hasn’t done anything disastrous as yet but he is moving in that direction. Some of what he says bears listening to but most of what makes up DDT at the moment is just plain disgusting for the President of this, the most powerful country in the world, that is missing the next boat.

      As far as the oligarchy, DDT is the leader of the oligarchy. Just look at his cabinet picks. DDT was born into royalty and privilege and has never stopped fawning over the rich and mighty. It is an undisputed fact that his wealth is a direct connection to the rich and mega rich. His dad may have developed lower rent housing but DDT has never done anything for anyone other than the rich, mega rich, and himself. It is a mathematical fact that 80% of the money returned to taxpayers due to his tax breaks will be to the top 20%. Think about that for a while. If it walks like an oligarch, acts like an oligarch, it just might be an oligarch.

      1. Isaac,
        I previously pointed out to you that a historically speculative boom in the stock market started to crash in March 2000.
        I know you’re not exactly a history buff, but Clinton was in office in March 2000.
        The inevitable recession started in March 2001, two months after Bush’s inaugeration.
        I’ll try to cut and paste these facts, and others, and post when you keep rewriting history.
        Since you basically write the same, lame, tired, blindly partisan crap, one preprinted set of corrections should cover most of your serial, boring distortions.
        I doubt if I’ll ever take up residency in a foreign country.
        If I ever did, I wouldn’t be stupid and arrogant enough to continually whine and bitch about how fu**cked up that country, and lie about its history.

        1. Again, you are wearing blinders. The ‘historically speculative boom in the stock market’ was a result of the tech industry fueling the American and world economy. The tech boom started during Clinton’s first term and he rode the wave. Clinton did not create the wave, he simply came along at the right time. Had the boom started a few years earlier Bush senior would have learned to surf. Clinton did his thing and reaped the economic upswing. After the tech boom started about a year or so out of the recession caused by Reaganomics, job security was enhanced and people started to buy big ticket items, first cars and then houses. Check the statistics and you will see this to be so. The tech boom rocketed with garbage in and garbage out until the top of the bubble popped 2000/2001. At this time the economy could afford a little gas escaping as a new industry had been established. Where people used to buy pencils they now were hooked on tech stuff. Near the end of Clinton’s administration and into Bush saw the real estate market artificially buoyed up with irresponsible mortgaging and incredible stupidity on Wall Street, case in point the default swap derivatives scandal. Some Brit clown from MIT was applauded for stretching the economic neck out even further. Read up on that. Both the Democrats and the Republicans were to blame. However, it was the idiot Bush that reduced income by lowering taxes absolutely unnecessarily and starting two wars-bungling both of them. Bush turned a modest surplus into an overwhelming deficit and set the stage for a downward spiral. This is what Obama inherited: decades old momentum of the erosion of the manufacturing class, a devastating failure of a money for the top 1% making experiment, lower taxes from those who don’t need the money-only an idiot would believe that if the business owners had more money they would go out and hire more people-you hire more people when the demand is greater-trickle up not down. Bush tanked the economy by doubling the damage, perhaps tripling the damage. It is a case of degrees. Things can be bad, really bad, really really bad, or DDT bad. As with the miracle chemical DDT we won’t know until long after.

          Most of what you write is argumentatively useless. Do a little research. Then write something.

          1. Isaac,
            “A little gas escaping” from the stock market is not the same as a 40-45% stock market crash.
            I’ve invested in stocks for over 40 years….you or anyone can check out thw extreme degree of speculative mania in the mid- to – late 1990s.
            I’m not talking about indices….the Dow, the S&P, or NASDAQ.
            I’m talking about levels of valuation never seen before, even in “the Roaring 20s” before the Great Depression.
            If you can find ANY period in stock market history that sported the level of excessive P-Es, Price to Book, Price to Dividend ratio that existed prior to the 90s mania, produce it.
            If you don’t have a clue what those terms mean, you’re not qualified to say that it was
            just “a little” gas let out of the market.
            About every 10-20 of your comments, I have called you out on your distortions and fanatical partisanship.
            And your repetiveness….if you ever look up the defination of “pentultimate”, look up the definition of “trite” as well.
            When I call you on blatant factual errors, that is not “argumentatively useless”,
            It is to you, perhaps, given your disrespect for factual accuracy and blind partisanship that you feel “entitles” you to spout off about issues you PRETEND to know something about.
            You claim Trump’s IQ is 107….OK, expect, what’s your source for that claim.
            Do you have ANY basis for that claim?
            It is not “useless” or inappropriate to ask for citations/ sources from THE EXPERT ON EVERYTHING.
            Sorry if that troubles or inconveniences you.
            You once claimed that there was an 8 year recession under Reagan.
            When I challenged you on that obvious lie, you then shifted gears and said, well, Clinton had to deal with the recession that Reagan caused.
            isaac, there are not only people who immediately KNOW that bullsh*t, and those who aren’t sure if it’s BS can readily check the record.
            Then you come back with this crap about basic fact checking/ correction is “useless”.
            Sorry if that trips you up, but when feel free to revise facts and rewrite history, expect to he called on it every now and then.

  9. Crisake Turley, you are really going tabloid. What about the gag orders for the government departments? Aren’t you the big stick against hobbling free speech? What about the singling out of Muslims? You are obviously pandering to that lower level of Americans who fell for this disgrace and voted in this complete idiot.

    This nonsense about crowd size and the lies it brings out of DDT and Spicer is not important. DDT and his dupes know how to lie with a straight face and then support the lies with ‘alternative’ facts and general BS. The issues here are the ones that concern the legal aspects of the bigger moves. Since you are a lawyer and tabloid wannabe, try upping the importance of the issues a little. This blog is heavily populated with lawyers, as well as general idiots. Talk to the lawyers, let the dupes dissipate.

    1. Trump Playing Rope-a-Dope with the Media (

      “Trump used Twitter much like a matador uses a red cape to engage and enrage the bull. The media took the bait and obsessed over what Putin and the Russians might have done to influence the election. Republican #NeverTrumpers like John McCain and Lindsey Graham chased the red cape too, adding fuel to the media stampede.

      “Meanwhile the president-elect was busy assembling his cabinet and other key advisors. Sure, this was covered by the media but given scant scrutiny compared to stories of election hacking and Russian chicanery. The media and their accomplices in both parties pounded away at the hacking story while Trump leaned against the ropes, absorbing the blows, conserving his energy, biding his time Waiting for the next round.

      “The media was flailing. Their punches were not connecting with Trump. Americans, consumers of the media, were not impressed. Only 6 percent of the public “have a lot of confidence in the media.” The dopey media was getting roped.

      “Then came inauguration day and a NY Times story, right on schedule, comparing inauguration audience sizes in an effort to show how unpopular Trump is compared to their revered Barack Obama. Trump immediately took to Twitter, denouncing the story and reiterating his mantra about fake news and dishonest media.

      “The media took the bait and ran with the story all inauguration weekend, into this week.”

    2. Here you go Issac. This is for all the dupes who thought Obama was just such a wonderful guy. Here’s the legacy he passed on to Trump:

      you may reach this link at Glenn Greenwald’s twitter. I understand that Trump supporters are too stupid to even read but you Obama supporters, being far superior to other people, will be able to read it.

      1. The question to be asked is, ‘Are you one of the dupes that will believe DDT when he takes credit for an improved economy, lower jobless, more stability, something accomplished by Obama in spite of the treasonous obstruction of the GOP?’ Just as Obama was blamed for the catastrophe that was the three stooges as the momentum is something that lasts two, three, four years, Obama will not be given credit for the positive momentum that will extend into the DDT administration. Of course dupes will miss this but hey it takes all sorts. Unfortunately dupes, that believe anything that triggers a trigger, make up a far too sizable portion of the electorate.

      2. That’s just it Jill. Obama/HRC supporters refuse to read anything that offers a different POV. And the WashPost, NYT, etc. is fully aware of this so they will publish anything they want with almost 0 backlash. Well, let them stay in their bubble – maybe it’s “safer” that way.

        Thomas Frank wrote an excellent article on WashPost’s punditry taking down Bernie:

  10. Of course, Krauthammer is disappointed one his favored repub choices for president did not win, but like most of the party, they’ve all come around to feed at the Trump trough. Because at its essence all politicians and pundits are in it for themselves. Trump just can’t hide it as well.

  11. The original claim was stupid, untrue and ungracious. It both looked bad to lie about the physical size of the crowd verses the crowd that came to Obama’s first inauguration and it was bad. Why? Because people aren’t looking for more govt. liars. I know from talking to Trump supporters, that many people voted for him because they believed he was a straight shooter.

    This was clearly a lie. It passed from being a mistaken impression once everyone had a chance to look at the crowd size and see it wasn’t true. *Note to Kellyanne-there is no such thing as “alternative facts”. There are alternative understandings or opinions which are resolved by reference to actual facts. If you don’t like fake newz, don’t engage in it

    Also, I think this was a slap in the face of people who attended. Many, many citizens attended because they were proud they had elected Trump. Comparing the crowd size to the number of people who came to Obama’s inauguration because they were proud they had elected him is just stupid. It’s also rude. Trump should have been thanking the people who did show up while making an attempt to reach out to people who did not vote for him. He acted like a perfect donkey!

    The additional information which shows a great number of people watching the show is something which can be proven and thus is a fact. Still, I think it is sad that anyone would obsess over crowd size. Trump has no idea how many people watched his program in horror or with pride. Instead of worrying about this BS and worse, lying about it and making a scene, why not thank people for having voted and attending, leaving it at that? Show some class.

    1. Yes, you summed it up beautifully. But to go a little afield of that, Trump is what he is. He will not be as gracious or as adult as your examples and we can’t expect it, those are at least partially his limits. Yet we need to be careful not to underestimate what he is doing either simply because it is a style so different from what we have become accustom to.

      I go back and forth on this. I’m certain that Trump uses some of this drama queen stuff, with considerable calculation, for his own ends yet at the same time actually is prone to ego attacks and over sensitivity. Sort of like a reverse comedian that exploits his own character traits for humor (not much humor in it with Trump) but still gets offended when the crowd laughs.

      When Obama first moved into the White House, while he was starting to sell us a bill of goods about his health care fiasco, and news started leaking out about what a give away it actually was to giant insurance companies, everyone was saying, “Oh don’t worry, Obama is just playing 3 dimensional chess. Eventually, as the plan lost one good feature after another and finally even any strong public option, and the sell out started to peak up above the surface, those same people stretched the chess game analogy to absurdity. 11 dimensional chess, no less. Quite obviously Obama was never an 11, or 9 or 6 dimensional chess player, much less a 3 and I have to believe the same human limitations will apply when trying to understand Trump.

  12. Puhleeze. Quit being an enabler of a pathological liar who has Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Trump is nothing more than a mentally disordered person who only cares about himself. They create lie after lie without any evidence except that “they know” it’s true.

    “In a sense, narcissists are out of touch with reality. They are not mentally ill, like a psychotic; they are just unwilling to acknowledge truth that doesn’t match their preferences. While normal people can weigh events rationally and draw fair conclusions about themselves, narcissists do not. They lack the objectivity to live with reasonable insight because their need for self exaltation does not allow them to accept that their perceptions might not be the ultimate truth. Their idealized view of themselves blinds them as they try to make sense of life, particularly the elements in themselves that might be imperfect or that might require adjustments (and they never want to make adjustments).”

    “Some lies maintain the facade of the False Self: the perfect, superior self the narcissist thinks she is or pretends to be. On a more conscious level, lies are central to:

    * Staying in power and keeping things under control
    * Keeping the flow of narcissistic supply (adulation by others, which are like ambrosia to the NP)
    * Satisfying the grandiose, entitled self
    * Avoiding any shame if their status is not as high in reality as they think it should be
    * Minimizing the onerous possibility of having to concern himself with your needs.

    So how can someone consciously lie like this? NPs have no empathy. They require narcissistic supply–what’s a little lie when your very survival, is at stake? And besides, they think, rules apply to other people. Under these circumstances, telling falsehoods is probably uncomplicated and effortless. Watson says, “Overall, their frank manipulation of others may be part of a ‘by hook or by crook; mentality to accomplish their goals.”

    1. FoonTheElder – after Obama was elected President the DSM dropped narcissism as a mental disorder. Trump can no longer have Narcissistic Personality Disorder. It doesn’t exist.

    2. Talking about HRC? A perfect example of narcisistic, entitled, behavior devoid of any reality. Self-promoted delusion.

  13. Violent Democrats began burning down cities a few years ago. After this election, violent Democrats rioted against democracy. Every sane person expected violent Democrats would try to ruin the inauguration and engage in more violence. And that is what happened. If you are a supporter of Trump, why would you want to put your safety and security at risk in an effective war zone created by violent Democrats just to watch the inauguration live?

    I don’t know or care how many people attended the inauguration. It doesn’t affect policy so the whole thing seems silly to me. But it seems completely logical to assume, given Democrats propensity to engage in violence, that fewer people would want to put themselves in harm’s way by attending the inauguration.

    1. There will be many many peaceful protests in the future. The kleptocrat is trying to steal the \Native Americans land in North Dakota because he has a monetary interest in the pipeline.

            1. Alejandro…
              – The CNBC link you posted re Trump’s sale of ETP us DATED Dec. 05, 2016.
              It states in the article that he must have sold
              the shares sometime since the summer of 2016.
              Washington Post and Viz Journals both reported on Nov. 23, 2016
              that Trump sold ETF in the summer of 2016.
              -“Trump’s shares
              had fallen to
              ( “Smartphone just froze up…can’t scroll up or down, or exit).
              Anyway, every source I’ve seen that specifies a time period says that tge sale happened in the summer of 2016.

              less than $50, 000 by the timw he sold in the summer of 2016”

              1. Back in business with smartphone…
                The 11-23-2016 WaPo reported that Trump’s shares had fallen to less than $50,000 by the time he sold in 2016.
                Biz Journal article, also dated 11-22-2016,
                also repoted that the sale occurred in summer 2016.
                CNBC was behind the 8-ball in reporting the sale with their article TWO WEEKS after the sale had already been widely reported on Nov. 23.

  14. I just watch small segments of the inaugeration coverage, and don’t care what the viewership/ attendence was.
    IMO it’s a trivial side issue best left untweeted.
    I scanned online news sources this morning, and the Washington Post highlighted some interesting stories.
    “Why Trump’s con can’t last forever” and “Leaks coming out of the Trump White House cast the president as a clueless child”.
    The WaPo is one of the news sources I read ( one of about a dozen).
    I’m not going to spend all weekend debating the merits, and prioritization, of these and similar WaPo stories.
    The point I would make is that the dire warnings I’ve seen (here and elsewhere) about the incipient “fascism” of the Trump administration, starting with intimitation and muting of the free press, seem premature.
    Some already “know”, one week into the Trump administration, that freedom of the press is on the way out and that the new administration will give rise to a fascist USA.
    I don’t have their fortune telling abilities that envisions these calamities.
    But I don’t see any indication that the MSM feels particularly threatened.
    ( Maybe they do feel threatened, and are just exhibiting tremendous courage 😏😒😊 by criticizing a regime that will turn America into a fascist state.)
    The same ( courage in the face of fascism) may be true for the 2.9 million who marched in protest of Trump last weekend.
    If the claims of a shackled media and the developing fascism are to have any credibility, it will likely take more than one week of an incoming administration and and paranoid suspicions to back up those claims.

Comments are closed.