Saturday, Joel Pollak at Breitbart's Big Journalism observed that President Obama is having some trouble drawing big crowds these days, and that the national press is exaggerating the turnout at his events.
He specifically cited the situation this weekend where Politico and the Wall Street Journal claimed there were "18,000 people inside a 5,000-seat arena at an Obama event in Milwaukee on Saturday." I looked at the Associated Press's national site, and the AP did the same thing, while adding that the crowd with the made-up size was "the largest yet of Obama's reelection campaign." Really.
The contradiction was first noted by battlegroundwatch.com. Local media, including the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, reported that Obama had addressed "supporters who filled the 5,000-seat BMO Harris Pavilion, along with thousands more who sat in bleachers and stood on the pavement beyond the protection of the roof, even as wind and rain lashed down in the latter moments of the near 30-minute speech."
The pavilion was not "filled"--a local reporter for Patch.com filmed empty seats in the bleachers at the side of the arena (see above). Nevertheless, the Journal-Sentinal played it safe, putting attendance at roughly 5,000-plus, a small but respectable turnout.
That's not how national media covered it. Darren Samuelsohn of Politico reported that the president addressed "a crowd the Obama campaign estimated at 18,000 in a city park overlooking Lake Michigan" in an attempt to "lock up" Wisconsin.
Originally posted by PvtHudson
reply to post by HostileApostle
It only hold 5 thousand to begin with. Where is this 18,000 number coming from?
Originally posted by HostileApostle
I'm not sure why people are trying to deny that Obama drew a huge crowd?
PROVO -- Mitt Romney's stated desire to make the 2002 Winter Games the "Volunteer Olympics" appears to be right on track.
GAO researchers found that 24 federal agencies reported providing or planning to provide a combined total of almost $2 billion, in 1999 dollars, for Olympic-related projects and activities for the 1984 and 1996 Summer Olympic Games and the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
•1984 Summer Games in Los Angeles -- $75 Million
•1996 Summer Games in Atlanta -- $609 Million
•2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City -- $1.3 Billion
According to the GAO, about $513 million of the above was provided or planned to be provided for projects or activities such as providing security or transporting spectators. That $513 million, says the GAO, would not have been spent had the Games not been held in the United States.
The other $1.4 billion either went to or will go directly to the cities of Atlanta and Salt Lake City for Olympics-related projects such as highways, mass-transit, and capital improvements (utility improvements, buildings, arenas, etc.). Of course, these improvements will continue to benefit the host cities and states long after the Games. While the GAO found that most of these funds might have been provided to the cities or states through other federal programs, the funds could have been provided later if the cities were not Olympic hosts.
Nobody said anything about that. We're disputing the 18,000 number when the stadium only holds 5 thousand. Keep deflecting with red herrings though. I know you have no other recourse.
Originally posted by PvtHudson
As predicted, tumble weeds. No thread that's critical of Democrat partisan media or Obama gets much traction on these forums. I think it goes to show how utterly hypocritical most of the members are. Think about it the next time you see a thread raging about Fox News or Romney.
Originally posted by Tw0Sides
The only numbers that matter will happen in November.