this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2025
391 points (98.3% liked)
BoycottUnitedStates
513 readers
165 users here now
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's literally the first line of the article: cost up to $45 million, was short on attendees, long on political speeches.
Remember to just agree with the .ml and .zip gang.. they’re just being fair and objective.
caring about a domain address is cringe
Not when you understand what kind of brainless worms prefer those instances.
yeeeessssss, let the division flow through you
I think they didn't provide a source because there are no reliable numbers. Those may still come at a later date.
I did find these sources though. They suggest that the turnout was substantially lower than expected and that estimates of attendance numbers are hotly debated.
https://www.thetimes.com/us/american-politics/article/trump-military-parade-crowd-size-protests-s3pkrphr8
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/trump-protests-military-parade
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c2kqe5yv0yzt
Google is your friend.
Also if you’re actually into numbers and want to care about something where numbers matter: https://electiontruthalliance.org/ and https://smartelections.us/
It’s not as entertaining and more difficult to play oppositional keyboard warrior with, but numbers are numbers. You’re not a numbercist are you?
No. It really isn't.
Hey, I can do this all day. As long as you’re making sure you’re fighting the good fight.
What does this have to do with the source of your figures? Are you so Republican that you literally just make up numbers or use memes or comments from unsubstantiated sources as your entire basis of truth?
What was your favorite part of the parade?
You seem to have a lot of opinions about a parade you didn't watch and don't care about.
Grab photos and do what the experts do: count heads.
Even at a glance on those photos you look like a fucking braindead idiot.
I know you're getting downvoted a lot, but I don't think you're a Trump supporter or arguing in bad faith. I know what you mean.
People on the left, like myself, were always going to call the parade a failure. It was always going to be a sad, pointless attempt at spectacle. By its very nature, it was a failure. In no world were we going to say, "yeah I hate the guy, but damn if he doesn't know how to throw a bitchin' parade."
On the flipside, Trump and Maga folks were always going to call it a success. Or maybe there are reports of angry red hat people who expected a better show and were disappointed. Unlikely, though.
On what terms do you define its success or failure? Yes, attendance is one. If they expected ten times as many people, then, as you say, it's a failure. You aren't wrong for asking for a source.
I think your original comment was less along the lines of, "how do we know it wasn't an amazing success, though?" and more like, "wasn't the parade exactly as expected?"
How much of the parade did you watch? I watched none. I think most of America will say they didn't even bother to turn on the tv, most probably forgot it was happening at all.
Compare that to the Macy's day parade. It was a failure. He wanted it to be a big deal, it absolutely was not a big deal. Failure.
You do realize how this just doesn’t follow logically right? I don’t think I’ve ever once watched the Macy’s day parade ever. I sure as hell don’t think that most Americans watch it. That doesn’t mean that the Macy’s day parade is a failure. The person you’re talking to is asking for any sort of source. Only one person in this thread has even bothered to discuss this properly with that person. The truth of the matter is that you need factual numbers to discuss this. You can’t go off of feelings or Twitter replies or comments in overwhelmingly democratic communities. You need an actual source with factual numbers. Until there is something like that then it’s pointless discussing whether the parade was a failure or not.
23 million people watch it last year. And it out performed all other entertainment specials.. Thus making the Macy’s parade the most successful.
Hey look, what I said was accurate.
Hey look! You proved my point a second time!
Anecdotal evidence means nothing! The person I responded to said that they didn’t watch it and most people probably didn’t, that makes it a failure. Literally the source you provided (hey look, a source!) shows that most Americans not watching a parade doesn’t make it a failure, and that anecdotal evidence is the worst kind of evidence, in this case leading to a completely incorrect conclusion by Aeao.
Previous years it was upward toward 50 million. Its more of the decline of television in general. For example This video has 1.4 million views alone. The televised numbers arent reflecting how many people prefer watching it in online these days.
And before you say "but 50 million is only 15% of the population that's not most!". But having 15% of the population consistently watch an event year after year is exceptional the only thing that draws in more americans annually is the superbowl.
You are completely missing the point. I explicitly said “That doesn’t mean that the Macy’s day parade is a failure” in response to “most Americans” not watching something. Even 50 million Americans watching an event is not “most Americans”, even 150 million isn’t “most Americans”. What Aeao said is clearly not a correct way to measure the success of something, which you have demonstrated (and which I said in my original comment). Macy’s day parade isn’t a failure even though most Americans don’t watch it nor think of it. So why is that standard being applied to this parade, which we don’t even have numbers for.
You can’t even make the claim for this parade because there aren’t any numbers. And Aeao saying things like “I didn’t watch, did you?” To imply that it wasn’t successful is just disingenuous.
Since someone probably thinks I’m defending this fucking parade, I have to explicitly explain this. Imagine a trumper comes up to you and says “the no kings day protests were a failure, hardly anyone showed up”, how are you going to prove them wrong? Pictures, videos? Statistics of the actual numbers of people that participated? Ok, now what happens when a trumper says to you, “trumps birthday celebration was a massive success”. What are you going to do then? Where are the photos and videos (they sure aren’t in this post, nor in the article this post is about). Where are the numbers? The article only calls out that they expected 250k. It provides no other numbers.
Saying “I didn’t watch it, so this is a failure” is the exact same thing as me saying “I didn’t watch the Macy’s day parade so it is a failure. It’s an idiotic conclusion using anecdotal evidence that does nothing to prove anything. All it does is make the person making the claim look like they don’t care about facts and simply make up conclusions based on no evidence.
Let me cut thru the fat and just explain why your argument is ridiculous. I'll put politics and jokes aside.
I love a battle semantics more than most. I once brought a $100 dictionary to my HOA pool to explain "dusk" to the security guard.
Let me explain why your argument is silly.
You want numbers to prove it was a failure, correct?
Okay. We will have them in a couple days when they are available. However in the meantime YOU need to define your parameters if you are going to argue. What exactly is a "failure" to you? How little viewing/attendance is the threshold for this argument? When is a parade a failure exactly?
If you want to argue what is or isn't a failed parade and you want proof... Fine, but we need your goal posts, we need to know you describe as a failed parade because numbers are just numbers. What's your metric?
Just to make this clear, you are doing the exact same thing that conservatives do; make a claim with no evidence to prove so, when questioned divert and/or provide anecdotal evidence, and then when pushed further state that it's the questioner's job to provide the evidence. You're acting like you're better than conservatives and then doing the same bullshit they do. Be better.
I never once asked you for evidence. That's a flat out lie. I asked for parameters. What do want as evidence? What do you consider proof to be? What numbers do you consider shows a failed parade?
It's very simple. You don't even have to research. It's entirely your opinion I'm asking for. Not proof. Wheres the goal post? It's a reasonable question.
You’re the one not providing figures and saying it’s a failure dude. It’s not my job to define failure, you’re the one making the claim. Not to pull out logical fallacies but this is the biggest case of “burden of proof” I’ve ever seen. I don’t really give a shit how many people went to the parade, it’s a huge waste of money and a joke no matter what.
You are the one making crazy claims without proof. Either wait for the proof or don’t be mad when others point out that you have no proof. I’m just helping out the poor other soul that pointed out your ridiculous claims that serve only to make democrats and people supporting the protests look bad. You know how they make us look bad? Because what happens when someone shows up and says “the no kings day protests were a huge failure” and you provide the nice stats that are already available showing it’s a success, and then that same person says “the birthday parade was a huge success” and you have zero facts to back that up! You literally only make it look like you’re incapable of being unbiased.
It's exactly your job to define failure. You asked for proof. Tell me what proof looks like. What do you consider proof?
lol it is not dude, holy shit conservative playbook much? You’re the one claiming failure and yet you can’t even define it because you don’t have figures!
I haven't claimed anything. i don't think I've even called it a failure.
I have plenty of proof tho. What proof would you like?
Let me try an illustrative example:
Prove to me the planet Jupiter is huge
That leaves the question "what proof are you asking for exactly?! What's needed to prove huge to you? What are the goal posts and I can provide information to prove it's huge... If I only have "prove it" I'm not sure what to hand you...
That's how it gets silly
"The parade was a failure"
"Prove it"
"What exactly do you want proven? Failure is an opinion so what's the metric we are working worth? What proves a failure of a parade? I mean it was viewed by significantly less people than the Macy's day parade? I hated the idea of the parade and complained it was happening but somehow still forgot it was happening at all... Does being forgettable count as failure ? It had less turnout than expected... Is that a failure? It cost millions of dollars and even the people arguing it wasn't a failure admit they didn't watch it or care it happened at all... Is that failure?
What exactly do you want proven? I'll prove it I just need to know what I'm researching for you?
You (and apparently 11 others) have completely misread my comment. I explicitly said "That doesn’t mean that the Macy’s day parade is a failure. Macy's Day Parade is clearly absolutely a success. And guess what, there's metrics to back it up. My point is that just because I do not watch it doesn't mean that it's not a success. There are zero metrics provided by Aeao nor by the article to substantiate any sort of conclusion about trump's parade one way or the other. Until those statistics come out, anything anyone says about the failure or success of the event is just spreading misinformation.
I deleted my commnet, but you're still silly to call Trump's parade anything but a fiasco.
Think of it this way. If the military had looked tough, the top posts would be about how scary the Army was and how threatened people feel. If Trump had gotten the crowds he wanted he'd be all over the media today crowing about how popular he is.
Or to put it another way. If you live near the local football field you can tell instantly when the hometeam has lost, simply by the way people leave the stadium. No one in MAGA world is taking a victory lap
I don’t really see the correlation here. The article doesn’t make any of the claims you do, nor does Aeao. The article just makes some vague claims and Aeao has about 15 logical fallacies in just as many comments. This has nothing to do with whether or not the parade was actually a failure and everything to do with the fact that just making shit up and claiming anecdotal evidence is evidence means you are no better than the conservatives you’re trying to make look bad. In fact it weakens your position a ton.
To make this clear I am not saying trumps parade was good nor bad, because unlike other commenters here I wait until I have actual evidence to make claims. I do not give one shit whether his parade was good or bad in this conversation because that’s not the discussion here. The discussion is about whether you can make a claim like “I didn’t watch this, you didn’t watch this, I don’t know anyone that did watch it, so it’s a failure”, which is an absolutely ridiculous argument to make, which is why I used Aeao’s own Macy’s day parade example against them. It shows how ridiculous of an argument it is.
Aeao is busy now asking me to provide what I think failure is, which is directly out of the fascist and conservative playbook of flipping the conversation around. I’m not the one claiming it was a failure. We don’t even know what the actual numbers are, how are we even supposed to define failure? You seem to be defining it by how much the orange turd is bragging on the internet. Lembot 0003 seems to be defining it based on how ordinary it was. Aeao is defining it based on whether they watched it or not, which is clearly anecdotal and much less based in fact than anything else provided here. That’s my point.
Edit: just to make one more point: Aeao was making a claim. Their claim is not supported by the linked article with facts or figures or even pictures. I block all trump and musk keywords on lemmy, so I’m not going to see anything else you are considering to be “failure” in regards to other posts being at the top. It’s not my job to go find that info. I’m not the one making the claim it’s a failure. Either rolling stone needs to provide it (which would be good journalism) or Aeao needs to provide it, which clearly they can’t do because those figures don’t exist yet and all they seem to want to do is argue with anecdotal evidence.
1)You said I made 15 comments. I want your explanation on that exaggerated count
i want you to list all 15 logical fallacies you said I made.
You said asking you to define what "failure" means to you is "directly out of the fascist and conservative playbook". Give me examples of fascists and conservatives asking for that clarification.
you said I need to provide proof. Sure, what proof would you like?
I want answers to those questions but I'll continue explaining my point that you clearly missed.
I need a metric of what is and isn't a failure from the people disagreeing because otherwise there's nothing to say. Right now there are plenty of reputable news sources saying low turnout but no real hard numbers and honestly when numbers do come out they will be estimating. Does that count?
Let's assume an exact count tho, I'll make up numbers to illiterate the problem with your arguments. Let's pretend they are accurate .
100,000 people. Is that a failure or a success?
What about 10,000?
What about 1,000,000?
That's just people who attended and maybe you're counting people who watched at home?
150,000 hypothetical people watched at home let's say. Is that a failure or a success?
That's the point you are purposely turning away from. When we say it was a failure we mean it was significantly less viewers than anticipated and significantly less than other major parades.
What are you asking for? What's your metric? That isn't an unreasonable question it's vital for this discussion. What are you asking for?
You, for whatever reason, are vastly overcomplicating it.
I'm old enough to remember Bush Jr. landing on that aircraft carrier dressed like Fighter Pilot Barbie. People on the Left derided him, but we all had to admit that he'd made a powerful statement and really touched a lot of people
You say you need 'facts,' and I say that people were building complex machines long before they had calculus. Sometimes the evidence of your own eyes is enough.
Or do you think that six months from now people will change their minds and start talking about what a great parade it was?
I've offered proof you haven't been able to articulate what proof you want.