Statistikhengst
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #1
First, here's the complete video, courtesy of WAPO:
It is in HD format, so the picture quality is better. The thing actually starts at about 1 hour and 48 minutes into the video and Trump's entrance and speech are at at roughly 2 hours and 22 minutes.
Now, there are varying opinions about how the rally went, but one thing is for sure: it was very, very well attended. The Trump people estimate that about 30,000 were there, that the stadium was about 3/4 full, which the video maybe confirms. And local TV is confirming this. Other news outlets say it was closer to 21,000. I suspect that, as with most things in life, the truth lies somewhere in the middle: probably closer to 25,000 and surely some more people poured in once he was there and speaking. This is not unusual.
The rally got lots of media coverage:
Trump draws huge crowd for speech at Alabama stadium
30,000 turn out for Donald Trump's Alabama pep rally - CNNPolitics.com
Trump addresses largest crowd of presidential campaign yet while in Alabama
Donald Trump tells thousands in Alabama: We'll make US better than ever
Both FOX and MSNBC claim that the actual attendance at the free rally, which Trump paid for, was about 1/2 of the 43,000 seats at the football stadium, which would be closer to 21,000-22,000.
Trump on Alabama Rally: Itās a 'Real Happening' - Breitbart
Others are a bit more more critical:
Trumpās audacious Southern spectacle is part of his strategy
Donald Trump, Alabama and the ghost of George Wallace
This critique is from a very left-leaning source, but even the pictures in it are worth a gander:
The Absolute Insanity Of Donald Trumpās Big Alabama Pep Rally, In 17 Tweets
Just for fun, since I had to stay up late anyway last night (family stuff), I watched the rally. Now, everyone is entitled to his opinion and so I am going to give mine.
1.) For what Trump wanted to achieve, he had a big success. I am talking strategema, here:
-he went to arguably the reddest state in the deep south (Alabama is roughly an R +25 state in presidential elections, far redder than Mississippi, Georgia or Florida, just a little redder than Tennessee at current) and was able to fill a football stadium with lots of people willing to see and hear him.
-he flew in with his own 757, buzzing the stadium, demonstrating his wealth. The crowd loved it.
-he gave, as usual, an impromptu speech, which the base will of course love, but impromptu can also mean "gotcha" slip up moments. These are the moments that the opposition loves to find and exploit.
-he used "I" an awful lot. The speech was much more about him than about America.
2.) As I watched the video, and the scenes before, I notice that the crowd was very, very, very, VERY white. Occasionally, I saw a darker skinner person, but there is no doubt that the minority component at this rally was very, very sparse. And other people are noticing this as well.
3.) The one Politico link makes mention that Trump is re-awakening the spirit of George Wallace, an extreme racist Governor from Alabama who made a third party bid for the Presidency in the hotly contested 1968 election.
I quote from the Politico link:
So, yeah, there is a distinct nativist element in this that is finding resonance with racist whites, I have no doubt about this at all. On the other hand, a black minister was indeed invited for the invocation, which I found to be very good.
What Trump just did was to go to the very heart of the ideological base of the Deep South, to a state that a Democrat would not win in a GE even in a massive landslide year for the Ds, and say to his fellow GOP-contenders, 'look, I can win where the heart of our party is.' And Trump is from evil, very blue New York, you know....
So, while I personally strongly disagree with many things Trump is saying, I think he achieved his goal.
And if anyone thought that the loud noises Trump has been making about immigration are going to go away, I think this rally makes it clear that nativism is going to be the centerpiece of his campaign. He is forcing the other GOP candidates to take a stand for or against: a wall, removing all 11-12 million illegal aliens, eliminating part of the 14th amendment, etc. So, regardless of who the GOP nominee will eventually be, and indeed, it could end up being Trump, the Democrats will have all of this stuff on record and will be able to use it.
Now, before some of my Rightie friends scream here, please note that I am praising Trump. He is a shrewd businessman and also a good showman. He knows how to get stuff organized and he knows how to put on a show. And a 23,000 strong crowd in a football stadium on a hot summer night really is a good feat for him. He saw potential for a far larger crowd than initially expected and he exploited it. Good for him. I really do think that he achieved what he wanted to achieve within the GOP in terms of making one more step toward becoming the permanent front-runner for the nomination.
However, the real question, one that Conservatives all over the place must ask is: how is this going to resonate with the rest of America? Every politically savvy person here knows that in order to win a presidential election, you have to win the soft-middle that can go either way in any election. How is the soft-middle going to take all this stuff with time?
And I wonder how many Conservatives out there really think that Trump is a real Conservative. The actual concrete things that he proposes are, in reality, big-government solutions to problems. But wait, I thought that Conservatives were small-government, non-interventionist types...
By saying that he would levy a 35% tax on anything that Automaker Ford produces as long as it continues with plans to build an auto-plant in Mexico, he just suggested a very big-government, intrusive, interventionist solution to a problem, and one that Conservatives like to accuse Liberals of: taxing more to get stuff done.
And I know this is going to shock some, because he and I don't get along at all, but I notice that The Rabbi has come out strongly against Trump and is saying over and over that Trump is no Conservative. Strangely enough (
) I find myself agreeing with The Rabbi on this. When you actually measure what Trump proposes to do, you will find lots of progressivism in some of his stuff. Also, on social issues, I think it's hard to call Trump a Conservative at all. But he's made big waves, he is clearly the front runner in national nomination polling and in most all state polling (Wisconsin being the exception, to the best of my knowledge) and he surely has tapped into a reservoir of anger that is out there. Only, if you take a long, hard look at his rally audiences, we are talking mostly about white anger here. The pictures do not lie.At the same time, Clinton had a much smaller rally. Warning: do not equate rally size with electability. Mo Udall had huge rallies in 1971 and part of 1972. He didn't get nominated. There were huge events for Reagan in 1976. He didn't get nominated that time around. John Dean was getting huge crowds in late 2003. He didn't get nominated. Far more important, I think, is the actual content of the rallies themselves.
-Stat
Last edited:
