• 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!

How many people will be at the 8.28 Restoring Honor Rally tomorrow in D.C.?

How many people will be at the Restoring Honor Rally?


  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .
Im guessing about 20,000 people there for that specific reason. Im very glad they invoked a loving (for the most part) religion and not politics. Very good news there. BUT..... now that that seed has been planted and their hearts are for Beck and Palin..... they will close the sale later. Again.... its ALL tactics and sales.
 
What fear and "hate mongering" does he do, you know specifically and with examples?



Again, proof?

wasn't it beck who claimed that fema had concentration camps with thousands of fiberglass coffins?
Didn't he start that rumor, then backed off and helped debunk it?
 
wasn't it beck who claimed that fema had concentration camps with thousands of fiberglass coffins?
Didn't he start that rumor, then backed off and helped debunk it?

Here's how *I* think it went. He kept getting E-mail, phone calls or whatever from all kinds of nuts trying to tell him there were Fema Concentration Camps or plans were in the works for them. He got so sick of it he decided to debunk it. He failed to debunk it. LOL, does that make him a believer? I don't know.

Never heard anything about coffins...ewwwwww
 
It's on again on C-Span right now. take a look and give it your best guess.

I'm guessing 600,000

Well, the permit was for 300,000 -- so let's hope they weren't breaking the law.
 
2 Winners!!

75,000 - 100,000

The final estimate was .... 87,000 -- that includes Beckians, protestors, and tourists just walking around saying: "Good God, Gretchen, are they all like this?"
 
"Good God, Gretchen, are they all like this?"

If they are all like his supporters here on the board? I would have stayed far, far away. There's not one neocon here I'd want to meet in person.
 
So, how many people were there?

Do I win anything if I guessed right?

You can't possibly think you won, so you must be talking about the Worst Guess Ever vote.
 
2 Winners!!

75,000 - 100,000

The final estimate was .... 87,000 -- that includes Beckians, protestors, and tourists just walking around saying: "Good God, Gretchen, are they all like this?"

The final estimate from who? LOL!

NBC said 300,000.
 
If they are all like his supporters here on the board? I would have stayed far, far away. There's not one neocon here I'd want to meet in person.

How is Beck a neocon? Do you even know what that means?
 
Hazlnut latches on to the lowest number he can find and calls it "final":
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Glenn Beck Restoring Honor Rally Attendance Estimated At 78,000 – 96,000

What's funny is that you obviously can't find any legitimate source to back up the 300,000 ++ that's been floating around DP.

Hey, it was a good turnout. However, based on what I've read, if I had traveled even from Baltimore to see that event, I'd been real pissed.

At least at the old Teabagger rallies you had some interesting and funny signs to look at... 'Return to Signage' should be the theme of the next one.

I feel sorry for the parents that drove with their kids through the night to be there. I feel more sorry for their kids.

Still not sure what they restored or honored or even were about... Having America pray to Jesus-God for...return??:confused::confused:
 
I didn't offer or agree with any number. :shrug:

Just observing that it's entirely unsurprising that you latched on to the lowest number you could find and obviously will never, ever budge from it no matter what.
 
I didn't offer or agree with any number. :shrug:

Just observing that it's entirely unsurprising that you latched on to the lowest number you could find and obviously will never, ever budge from it no matter what.

Are you related to the poster you are speaking to, that you can predict with such certainty what they will or won't do?
 
Are you related to the poster you are speaking to, that you can predict with such certainty what they will or won't do?

Given that I was right, do I have to be?

Hazlnut is predictible as the tides when it comes to his favorite topic. Anyone who's been around here for his entire tenure knows that.
 
Given that I was right, do I have to be?

Hazlnut is predictible as the tides when it comes to his favorite topic. Anyone who's been around here for his entire tenure knows that.

Well, that's where we differ then. Because I know no future is written in stone. Anybody can change whenever they choose to.
 
Well, that's where we differ then. Because I know no future is written in stone. Anybody can change whenever they choose to.

You have to want to to choose it. Besides, I didn't even make a prediction. :shrug: He fell into his expected behavior pattern entirely unbidden.

Don't know why it matters to you, anyway.
 
You have to want to to choose it. Besides, I didn't even make a prediction. :shrug: He fell into his expected behavior pattern entirely unbidden.

Don't know why it matters to you, anyway.

My assumption was you'd reach the same conclusion about me, and you'd be wrong. I do adjust my thinking as facts are added.
 
My assumption was you'd reach the same conclusion about me, and you'd be wrong. I do adjust my thinking as facts are added.

I haven't interacted with you much, so why would you assume such a thing about me? I've never said a word about you that I can think of.

And, anyway, that assumption torpedoes what you just said:

Because I know no future is written in stone. Anybody can change whenever they choose to.
 
I didn't offer or agree with any number. :shrug:

Just observing that it's entirely unsurprising that you latched on to the lowest number you could find and obviously will never, ever budge from it no matter what.

Well, since all the numbers are in the same range -- your point is a silly attempt to make an issue out of nothing.

You got some different information, post it. Otherwise walk away before you embarrass yourself further.
 
I haven't interacted with you much, so why would you assume such a thing about me? I've never said a word about you that I can think of.

And, anyway, that assumption torpedoes what you just said:

No it doesn't. I'm operating in the moment.
 
Well, since all the numbers are in the same range -- your point is a silly attempt to make an issue out of nothing.

You got some different information, post it. Otherwise walk away before you embarrass yourself further.

"All?" You posted a blog mocking CBS's number and some source no one's ever heard of, and both were based on the same source: AirPhotosLive.com. So you in reality only posted a single source.

In any case, I made lengthy, reasoned estimate of the 912 rally, with illustrations and math and everything, and all you did then was what you always do when you can't refute something on the merits: you simply declared it "pathetic" and disappeared from the thread. Such a thing is your norm, so going through the effort this time around is hardly worth it. You don't actually want to do debate it. Your mind is locked on the lowest number you can find, and that's it.

Me? I don't care if two people, ten people, or a million people were there.
 
No it doesn't. I'm operating in the moment.

Yet you assumed that I would reach a conclusion about you.

And I really have no idea why. I have no idea what you think about the attendance, and I've never had reason to wonder, much less assume anything about it.
 
In any case, I made lengthy, reasoned estimate of the 912 rally, with illustrations and math and everything, and all you did then was what you always do when you can't refute something on the merits: you simply declared it "pathetic" and disappeared from the thread. Such a thing is your norm, so going through the effort this time around is hardly worth it. You don't actually want to do debate it. Your mind is locked on the lowest number you can find, and that's it.

Criticizing me for "disappearing" from the thread, assumes the thread topic and direction has value.

You assume too much.

I'll debate anything you want, but when a train of reasoning reaches what I call the Fantasyland stop. You can elect to get off, I need to keep moving on. Don't take it personally.

If you have some better numbers, please post them--I'm not "locked on" anything.
 
I find it amusing also that hazlnut chose the smallest number he could find. He doesn't seem to listen to me, but I have said it several times.....

NBC NEWS said it was 300,000.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/us/politics/29beck.html

Officials do not make crowd estimates because they are unreliable and can be controversial, but event organizers put the number of attendees at 500,000; NBC News said it was closer to 300,000, but by any measure it was a large turnout. The crowd stretched from the Lincoln Memorial to the Washington Monument.
 
Back
Top Bottom