• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Glenn Beck Rally Sparks Debate Over Crowd Size

MrVicchio said:
Hey Hazlnut, how many showed up at Sharpton's Rally?

Oh, jomv, nice bigotry there eh? Did you know MLK Jr had family on stage with Beck? Bet you didn't know that did you?
Click to expand...

She doesn't count because she is pro-life.
She was also getting hate mail before the rally but I guess that's ok by the left. Freedom of speech and religion only applies to people they agree with.
 
liblady said:
that's what it looked like.....but i can't help but wonder WHY? all beck did was ramble......it was kinda weird, really.
Click to expand...

So,.. you think Beck rambled. Maybe he did.
What about everyone else who spoke?
 
disneydude said:
What you are failing to appreciate is that the stadium is also several stories tall. Look...I understand that everyone wants to make their cause look bigger than it is. Every group does it. But looking at the actual photos and numbers, it is clear that this crowd was smaller than the typical crowd at a U of M football game (100k). 87k is probably very accurate. Its still is a sizeable crowd. Just not the inflated figures that Beck wants people to buy into.
Click to expand...

How many qualifiers are you going to put on this, DD, as each time you post about capacity, it's shown to be wrong?

And in fact, my commentary on this is about you folks who seem to be terribly vested in diminishing the cause as much as possible.
 
MrVicchio said:
Hey Hazlnut, how many showed up at Sharpton's Rally?
Click to expand...

Why, did Beck try to count them as part of his rally?

Oh, jomv, nice bigotry there eh? Did you know MLK Jr had family on stage with Beck? Bet you didn't know that did you?
Click to expand...

Did you have any sources about the crowd size or are you just going to continue to change the subject?
 
hazlnut said:
Why, did Beck try to count them as part of his rally?



Did you have any sources about the crowd size or are you just going to continue to change the subject?
Click to expand...

You have a study that everyone but you, and Dan Rather realize is crap.

And I note that you don't know how many showed up at the Sharpton gig, I'll let you know, it was about 3k.

3k.
 
I read on a liberal blog, that they asked the parks department and although they don't release official figures, they still estimated unofficially there were 350,000 there. The reason the parks department doesn't release those figures anymore, is because they were accused of low balling the crowds.
 
RightinNYC said:
Which would be relevant if people stood on each others' heads.
Click to expand...

Exactly! and that is the fallacy of Harshaws attempts to overestimate the numbers. 100k fit inside U of M stadium. When you compare the two crowds, they are fairly similiar in size. You can't just take the stadium and say it fits within a certain area, when you don't account for the fact that the stadium is several stories high. It would be exactly like you say, taking the same area and having the Beck crowd standing on each other's shoulders several stories high.
The fact is.....the pictures don't lie. Any attempt to make the crowd larger than 100K at the max are just stretching it.
The 87K figure estimated is most likely accurate when you look at the photos.
 
disneydude said:
Exactly! and that is the fallacy of Harshaws attempts to overestimate the numbers. 100k fit inside U of M stadium. When you compare the two crowds, they are fairly similiar in size. You can't just take the stadium and say it fits within a certain area, when you don't account for the fact that the stadium is several stories high. It would be exactly like you say, taking the same area and having the Beck crowd standing on each other's shoulders several stories high.
The fact is.....the pictures don't lie. Any attempt to make the crowd larger than 100K at the max are just stretching it.
The 87K figure estimated is most likely accurate when you look at the photos.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understood my point.

The height of that stadium is entirely irrelevant, as two people standing next to each other take up nearly the same amount of space (if not the same amount of space) whether they are on the same plane or not. Thus, your repeated reference to the height of the stadium is entirely irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
You have a study that everyone but you, and Dan Rather realize is crap.
Click to expand...

Really, because you have yet to post anything refuting it.

You've had ample time to search for something, so I'm assuming you did and couldn't find anything.

So, instead of doing the Honorable thing and admitting this, you take the cowards way out and try to change the subject.

I have no idea how many people were at any other rally or protest that day. My understanding is the 87,000 is an estimate for the number of people who were at all events. Why is that so hard to accept? That's a decent amount of people. Why can't you accept it and move on?

You got something credible to refute the CBS study then post, otherwise cut the childish crap, it's boring.
 
disneydude said:
Exactly! and that is the fallacy of Harshaws attempts to overestimate the numbers.
Click to expand...

And exactly where did I "attempt" to do this? If you're right, why do you have make things up?


100k fit inside U of M stadium. When you compare the two crowds, they are fairly similiar in size. You can't just take the stadium and say it fits within a certain area, when you don't account for the fact that the stadium is several stories high. It would be exactly like you say, taking the same area and having the Beck crowd standing on each other's shoulders several stories high.
The fact is.....the pictures don't lie. Any attempt to make the crowd larger than 100K at the max are just stretching it.
The 87K figure estimated is most likely accurate when you look at the photos.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you missed Right's point. There's no one hiding underneath anyone else. The people are occupying about the same amount of space they would if the stands were flat. They may be slightly more dense than they would be if there was no slope, but only slightly, and certainly no more than the 1 per 2.5 sq ft contemplated by the USA Today/Obama inauguration capacity estimate.

Seriously, dude, why is it so blessedly important to you that as few people as possible attended this thing?
 
Uh, this always happens. Crowd sizes are always underestimated by the media. Obviously, though, Beck is interested in inflating his own ego/popularity so he is just as ridiculously overestimating as most probably are underestimating.
 
hazlnut said:
Really, because you have yet to post anything refuting it.

You've had ample time to search for something, so I'm assuming you did and couldn't find anything.

So, instead of doing the Honorable thing and admitting this, you take the cowards way out and try to change the subject.

I have no idea how many people were at any other rally or protest that day. My understanding is the 87,000 is an estimate for the number of people who were at all events. Why is that so hard to accept? That's a decent amount of people. Why can't you accept it and move on?

You got something credible to refute the CBS study then post, otherwise cut the childish crap, it's boring.
Click to expand...

You have an unanswered point or two yourself, though I hardly expect you even to acknowledge it.
 
Dupe . . .
 
hazlnut said:
Which ones, please, enlighten me.
Click to expand...

Go back and read. Or, if it suits you better, make excuses and deflections. Up to you.
 
RightinNYC said:
I don't think you understood my point.

The height of that stadium is entirely irrelevant, as two people standing next to each other take up nearly the same amount of space (if not the same amount of space) whether they are on the same plane or not. Thus, your repeated reference to the height of the stadium is entirely irrelevant.
Click to expand...

No....I understood your point exactly. You simply proved what I was saying. The height of the stadium is entirely relevant. If the stadium is several stories high...you are going to have a lot more people in a space, then you would is it were simply one layer of person. Its like you said. If the people were standing on each other's heads several stories high, then posting the stadium in a space would be relevant. You can hold a lot more people in a several story high stadium is exactly the point. Spread those 100k people out over the area and you would have roughly the size of the crowd that Beck and Harshaw are trying to say is 300k, 500k, 1.2 million. The bottom line...the pictures don't lie. The numbers just don't add up to what people want them to be.
 
disneydude said:
No....I understood your point exactly. You simply proved what I was saying. The height of the stadium is entirely relevant. If the stadium is several stories high...you are going to have a lot more people in a space, then you would is it were simply one layer of person. Its like you said. If the people were standing on each other's heads several stories high, then posting the stadium in a space would be relevant. You can hold a lot more people in a several story high stadium is exactly the point. Spread those 100k people out over the area and you would have roughly the size of the crowd that Beck and Harshaw are trying to say is 300k, 500k, 1.2 million. The bottom line...the pictures don't lie. The numbers just don't add up to what people want them to be.
Click to expand...

No, you don't, DD, and this is lame. No one in the stadium hangs over anyone else. The slope is so people can see, not to get more people in. It's the same space it would take up if the stadium were flat.

And I'm going to have to ask you to point out where I said the crowd was 300K, 500K, or 1.2 million. If I said so, you should be able to show it, so let's see it.
 
liblady said:
that's what it looked like.....but i can't help but wonder WHY? all beck did was ramble......it was kinda weird, really.
Click to expand...

You already know more about it than me. I golfed instead of watching it. I reclaimed my follow through...worked on bringing down my handicap...and restored a significant amount of power to my drives.
 
disneydude said:
No....I understood your point exactly. You simply proved what I was saying. The height of the stadium is entirely relevant. If the stadium is several stories high...you are going to have a lot more people in a space, then you would is it were simply one layer of person. Its like you said. If the people were standing on each other's heads several stories high, then posting the stadium in a space would be relevant. You can hold a lot more people in a several story high stadium is exactly the point.
Click to expand...


You say you understand my point, then you show that you don't. Why don't you go back and look at that picture and count the number of tiers. When you get done, compare it to a stadium like this:

yankee-stadium-picture.jpg


In Yankee stadium, people are seated in such a way that there are multiple people in each vertical column. In your stadium, they're not. A group of 100 people standing on flat ground will take up similar space to a group of 100 people on slightly inclined ground or ground with steps build in.
 
I finally figured out why the Dem counters are coming up short. They're counting all minorities as 3/5 of a person. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom