What will mean success for the teaparty turnout?

Damocles said:
I think it is short, but then I'm unsure. There were newsies trying to say it was only a "couple hundred" in Denver, but then the police report came out and they had to sheepishly change it to "over five thousand"...

With 2,300 of the events across the nation, I am sure you got your "focus group", but the reality of it is, even if you only got to 1,000,000 it was more than you expected and more than you can dismiss easily.
Click to expand...


Where are you getting these numbers? 2,300 events? 1,000,000 people? And the Denver Post had it at 5,000 since Wednesday night.

The "focus group" thing is a joke. It's a reference to W's dismissal of the 10,000,000 war protesters in 2003 as a "focus group."
 
Good Luck said:
It was a lot more than the left will aver admit to. Face it, protest marches/assemblies is not a behavior pattern of the typical conservative. That has the left confused, and frankly scared spitless. Look across the web and you'll see attempt after attempt to minimize, ridicule, and lamblast the 15th of April events. That strong a reaction is NOT the reaction of a group who truly thinks the tea parties were small and ineffective. If it was that insignificant, why aren't they being totally ignored, instead of brought up again and again about how insignificant, ineffectual, and anti-American (meaning anti-Obama, as the two are the same in their book) the protesters were.
Click to expand...
Please, please let them keep saying that the protests are insignificant. This attitude will further marginalize the liberal media and galvanized the protesters. :)
 
Southern Man said:
Please, please let them keep saying that the protests are insignificant. This attitude will further marginalize the liberal media and galvanized the protesters. :)
Click to expand...

The MSM has thoroughly embarrassed themselves over these protests and have shown them to be nothing more than Obama worshippers with their extremely unprofessional 'teabagging' campaign. None of them should be given any more credibility.
 
Dungheap said:
Where are you getting these numbers? 2,300 events? 1,000,000 people? And the Denver Post had it at 5,000 since Wednesday night.

The "focus group" thing is a joke. It's a reference to W's dismissal of the 10,000,000 war protesters in 2003 as a "focus group."
Click to expand...
The Denver post had it after their original "estimate" of "a few hundred" and after the police report came out, just as I stated. It was remarkable to me, I noted it.

As for where I get the number, I'll state that I got that number from the report on the radio. I do know that the events took place in at least 20 different localities in the State of Colorado, there were more in some of the more populace states (and I believe more in Colorado, they tried to keep them as local as possible), I do not believe that the number is unrealistic.
 
Damocles said:
The Denver post had it after their original "estimate" of "a few hundred" and after the police report came out, just as I stated. It was remarkable to me, I noted it.
Click to expand...


Uh, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you are full of it. By 4:00 pm on April 15 the Post was running with an online headline that read "5,000 attend tax day tea party at Capitol."

Edit: well if you heard it on the radio (and I won't ask which program) it must be true.
 
Dungheap said:
Uh, I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you are full of it. By 4:00 pm on April 15 the Post was running with an online headline that read "5,000 attend tax day tea party at Capitol."

Edit: well if you heard it on the radio (and I won't ask which program) it must be true.
Click to expand...
True that, it's why I said I'll tell you where I got it... I also described why I thought it is a reasonable estimate.

Let's assume there were only 20 per state, 1000 of them that would be..., with an average of 1000 people at each. Tell me how many people would there have been?
 
Damocles said:
True that, it's why I said I'll tell you where I got it... I also described why I thought it is a reasonable estimate.

Let's assume there were only 20 per state, 1000 of them that would be..., with an average of 1000 people at each. Tell me how many people would there have been?
Click to expand...


Well, I don't know what assuming that there were 20 per states (only?) is even close to reasonable in the first instance. And I'm certain that assuming an average of 1,000 per event it overreach.

Here is the only actual attempt to do a count that I have seen:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/tea-party-nonpartisan-attendance.html

It seems fairly exhaustive (even noted the 12 folks in Sitka, Alaska).
 
Dungheap said:
Well, I don't know what assuming that there were 20 per states (only?) is even close to reasonable in the first instance. And I'm certain that assuming an average of 1,000 per event it overreach.

Here is the only actual attempt to do a count that I have seen:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/tea-party-nonpartisan-attendance.html

It seems fairly exhaustive (even noted the 12 folks in Sitka, Alaska).
Click to expand...
Please, 20 per state was based on the more than 20 of them held here in CO (From the list posted before the date), and the average attendance. In more populous states there were more, in the less populated states less, but an average of 20 is more than reasonable and probably undershot it by a longshot. Some were not on the list as this was brought together by diverse groups, not one single entity. I know some were held that were not on the list, as Loveland showed up, and they were not on the Denver list.
 
Annie said:
Seems an impossible parameter now, no?
Click to expand...

Nope, history demonstrates that much more difficult objectives have been achieved with far fewer resources, for example remember that little brown man in India kicking one of the most powerful empires in the world out of his country with nothing more than a loincloth and a propensity for telling the truth ?

In the words of some hip dudes from jolly ole "time is on our side" (and so is the Constitution).

http://www.campaignforliberty.com
 
unphased said:
Nope, history demonstrates that much more difficult objectives have been achieved with far fewer resources, for example remember that little brown man in India kicking one of the most powerful empires in the world out of his country with nothing more than a loincloth and a propensity for telling the truth ?

In the words of some hip dudes from jolly ole "time is on our side" (and so is the Constitution).

http://www.campaignforliberty.com
Click to expand...

Hardly, more an indication you are going to go to the shitcan, but I for one will admit so might the rest of us, for different reasons.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

"Shed Some Light on the Fed!"

Thanks to Joe Corrao and Will Wohler for creating this cartoon in support of HR 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act. This will be a great tool with which to spread the message about the bill.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top