Page 1 of 1

Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 6:48 pm
by Lord Jim
Women's March draws thousands as Trump term enters second year

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Thousands of protesters turned out across the nation for the second Women's March on Saturday, marking the first anniversary of President Donald Trump's inauguration with rallies aimed at channeling female activism into political gains in elections this year.

The coordinated rallies in Washington, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and about 250 other cities are a reprise of the mass protests that marked the beginning of Trump's presidency. Sister rallies were also planned in Britain, Japan and other countries.

"We will make our message heard at the polls this fall," Emily Patton, a rally organizer, told thousands of demonstrators at the Reflecting Pool on Washington's National Mall. "That is why we are urging people to register to vote today."

Many of the protesters wore pink knit "pussy hats," which were created for last year's march as a reference to a comment made by Trump about female genitalia, The caps quickly became a symbol of women's empowerment and opposition to the new president in the early days of his administration.

"We want to continue the fight to resist this president and the policies we're against," said Sara Piper, 59, a geologist from Reston, Virginia.

One of the biggest marches is expected in New York, where 37,000 people had signed up on the march's Facebook page. But the number of participants in this year's rallies is likely to fall well short of the estimated 5 million who marched on Jan. 21, 2017, and made that one of the largest mass protests in U.S. history.
More:

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/0 ... /23338719/

I'm not finding much yet in terms of turnout numbers, (the marches on the West Coast are just getting started) but the event organizers in Chicago are claiming a huge turnout:
More than 250,000 descend on downtown for second Women's March in Chicago: organizers

Organizers about 11:30 a.m. said the city informed them they've exceeded last year's crowd of 250,000.

"I have just been informed that we are as big as last year," said organizer Ann Scholhamer, over the cheering crowd and the whir of a helicopter overhead. "And people are still coming."

Saturday’s event, March to the Polls, began at 9 a.m. Saturday with recorded videos and music in Grant Park, with an entrance at Congress Parkway and Columbus Drive. It is being held in solidarity with hundreds of similar events in Washington, D.C., and across the globe this weekend.
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/0 ... /23338719/

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 7:54 pm
by Lord Jim
This is absolutely hilarious:
Trump touts 'unprecedented economic success' in Women's March tweet

President Trump on Saturday acknowledged the thousands of people taking part in Women's March demonstrations across the country, saying it was a "beautiful" day for people to "celebrate the historic milestones and unprecedented economic success" under his term.

In a tweet acknowledging the marches, which were planned for the one-year anniversary of Trump entering office and aimed primarily at protesting his rhetoric and policies, Trump urged people to focus on economic successes since he became president.

"Beautiful weather all over our great country, a perfect day for all Women to March. Get out there now to celebrate the historic milestones and unprecedented economic success and wealth creation that has taken place over the last 12 months. Lowest female unemployment in 18 years!" Trump tweeted.

People took to the streets in cities across the U.S. on Saturday, including Washington, D.C., to protest the president's past rhetoric and policies regarding women and civil rights.

The marches were modeled after the demonstrations that took place a day after Trump entered office last year, which attracted millions of people around the world.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... arch-tweet

So if the turnout for the marches (the fundamental purpose of which is to protest Trump's behavior and actions as president) are large, Trump and his minions will claim it's because of all the people who he encouraged to show up to celebrate his "achievements"...

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:04 pm
by BoSoxGal
I thought about doing Boston, but spent the day with my niece instead, breakfast out and a long visit to a new playground (new to us) where she played with a dozen kids for almost 2 hours while Bear and I just chilled (literally, it's pretty chilly here today).

I'm there in spirit, but still don't want to do the crowds and shortage of bathrooms - at my age and in my condition, that's a no go. Possibly my 'in the flesh' protesting days are over.

Ridiculous that the Pussy-Grabber-in-Chief would take credit for the marches. He's a twisted FUCK.

Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:05 pm
by RayThom
"Beautiful weather all over our great country, a perfect day for all Women to March. Get out there now to celebrate the historic milestones and unprecedented economic success and wealth creation that has taken place over the last 12 months. Lowest female unemployment in 18 years!"
I assume this is sarcasm on Lord Dampnut's part but with him it's hard to tell. It's right up there with the Inauguration crowd size.

Madness or stable genius?

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:23 pm
by Lord Jim
I assume this is sarcasm on Lord Dampnut's part
That is my hope too, but I think it's equally possible that when Baghdad Sarah is asked about the marches' turnouts that she tries with a straight face to give this as the explanation...

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2018 1:34 am
by ex-khobar Andy
We were two of the 1650 (official count from the organizers based on RSVPs so my estimate was a little more, maybe 2500) marching in Columbia MO today. Close to or maybe a little less than last year; but it really was not as well known because I didn't know we were doing it until yesterday.

A lot of older people, our age. I am pretty sure that many of them were marching and shouting 'Hey, Hey, LBJ - how many kids did you kill today?' nearly 50 years ago.

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:00 am
by Scooter
Image

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:28 am
by kristina
I went to the Sonoma March this year. It looked like about a thousand people.

Last year I went to the Oakland shuffle/rally (so many more people than expected that we couldn't really walk).

As happenened last year, I came away with more hope for the future than I had when I got there.

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:52 am
by ex-khobar Andy
kristina wrote:
As happened last year, I came away with more hope for the future than I had when I got there.
100% with you on that, Kristina. As I said above, a lot of older people there; but the vast majority were college age into their 20s, I would guess. Yes, hope for the future.

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Sun Jan 21, 2018 6:22 pm
by Lord Jim
Here's a link with a lot of crowd estimates and photos:

https://heavy.com/news/2018/01/womens-m ... t-by-city/

Tati went to the one in San Fran, (she also went last year) they're estimating 80,000 attendance...

It looks like some cities were way down from last year while others stayed close to the previous year's numbers...





(Note- I originally posted this in the wrong thread...)

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:10 am
by Bicycle Bill
"Beautiful weather all over our great country, a perfect day for all Women to March. Get out there now to celebrate the historic milestones and unprecedented economic success and wealth creation that has taken place over the last 12 months. Lowest female unemployment in 18 years!"
Trump tweeted.
This proves that Trump is just like Apple.
They both put “i” before everything.
Image
-"BB"-

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2018 5:49 am
by ex-khobar Andy
I saw several variations on this theme:

Image

It appears that since the whole Stormy Daniels story broke, she has decided that perhaps she need not go to Davos after all. This is possibly not a coincidence.

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2018 7:16 am
by Lord Jim
Speaking of Melania...
Melania Trump won’t be attending the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and some are speculating that her cancellation is a “subliminal message” to her husband, Donald Trump.

For one thing, it came on their 13th wedding anniversary, and Inside Edition notes that the first lady has kept a low profile since the allegations that her husband paid $130,000 in hush money to a porn actress who uses the name Stormy Daniels.

Historian Kate Andersen Brower, who specializes in America’s first ladies, told CNN that Melania Trump’s decision to cancel a major trip is unusual for a variety of reasons.

“It’s pretty unusual, but in modern history, we haven’t seen a couple like this,” she told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “I’m thinking back to Hillary Clinton, when she famously went with President Clinton to Martha’s Vineyard at the height of the impeachment, the trial and things around it.

“It’s a kind of power that a first lady can yield over her husband. And we haven’t had a situation quite as fraught like this since the Clintons, even going back to President Kennedy and his wife, when rumors swirled around their relationship.”

Blitzer pointed out that on the anniversary of Trump’s inauguration, the first lady posted a picture that didn’t feature her husband. He also wondered if there was any meaning in the fact that Melania did not mention the president by name in a statement saying the past year has been filled with many wonderful moments.

“It’s unusual, and I think this goes back to a first lady we don’t hear from a lot,” Bennett said. “But she is A-plus in subliminal messaging. Not a mention of her husband, of the thousands of pictures taken of the two of them this last year. Interesting that she would pick that picture, and it doesn’t mention the president.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/me ... 592a0dafad

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2018 2:47 pm
by Sue U
Blitzer pointed out that on the anniversary of Trump’s inauguration, the first lady posted a picture that didn’t feature her husband. He also wondered if there was any meaning in the fact that Melania did not mention the president by name in a statement saying the past year has been filled with many wonderful moments.

“It’s unusual, and I think this goes back to a first lady we don’t hear from a lot,” Bennett said. “But she is A-plus in subliminal messaging. Not a mention of her husband, of the thousands of pictures taken of the two of them this last year. Interesting that she would pick that picture, and it doesn’t mention the president.”
It's not "subliminal" at all; it's classic passive-aggressive behavior. I can only imagine how much she must hate her life right now.

Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:07 pm
by RayThom
Who will leave the White House first -- FLOTUS or POTUS?

Melania has been married well over ten years to The Donald. A prenup divorce settlement would have to be working quite favorably for her right now, and with no confidentiality clause. If she left the noted and bloated womanizer today she could go public and easily become spokesperson for #MeToo or TimesUp.

I feel she's stronger than she appears -- she just doesn't know it yet.

Re: Women's March 2.0...

Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2018 11:14 pm
by BoSoxGal
She’s in a position to broker a really excellent financial settlement for herself by bartering her silence and/or continued show of support. She’ll never lose her kid - he never wants to be bothered. I have no sympathy for her because she knew exactly what she was marrying. But I hope she gets a great lawyer and screws him the only place that matters to him - the bottom line.