Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Ratings Must Have Been Through the Roof
Because no matter many times I Google it, no matter how many different ways I phrase the question, I cannot find out how many people watched the president’s speech at Mt. Rushmore. Which leads me to believe the ratings must have been incredible.
Remember when the media was swooning over the low-attendance numbers for the president’s rally in Tulsa? Those “low” rally-numbers were quickly, and effectively, countered once we learned of the gigantic number of people who watched on TV and online. So it’s no mystery why they’d keep a lid on the Mt. Rushmore numbers…I’ll bet they were through the roof!
Published in General
I’ll take your conclusion as very likely indeed. But you’ll find plenty of articles about Mrs. Trump’s dress. I admire her choices and enjoy her sense of humor with dressing for public appearances. She really seems to enjoy having fun with clothes. They are always appropriate, reflect the occasion, are immaculate and fit precisely. She knows what she’s doing and I believe is grossly underestimated.
Going to YouTube, searching for “trump rushmore”, filter for posted over the past week, filter for over 20 minutes long, sort by view count, grab the view counts from the first three pages or so, summing them, I get:
14.6 million
(YouTube may have messed with those numbers.)
Of course that doesn’t include other formats, such as Facebook, cable, dish, etc.
But, but, but ….. the polls ….
Trump spoke at Mount Rushmore? What did he say? Are they tearing it down?
Maybe Biden will go all Peter Robinson and demand, “Mr. Trump, tear down this . . . this . . . you know, the thing.”
He was dark and divisive. That’s what I read anyway.
They would like to tear it down since it’s a different four guys who are there now than were there when Obama spoke.
She always looks lovely and current. I love that she had her WH portrait done wearing Dolce and Gabbana – she is a modern woman with good taste. I hate to diss Michele Obama – she is a lovely woman too, but her attire just didn’t quite do it. I’m a girl and I look at those things. I guess different designers – different tastes.
No – in fact they found a rock that showed similarities to Trump’s hair…………….
This is atop a large outcropping stage right that is large enough for another president’s bust. Trump may have a shot at it.
Thanks, noD! I was looking for that when you posted it.
I missed the flyover by our armed forces – I’ll have to find it on you tube (or you tude…..whichever way)!
I guess someone at C-SPAN still loves America:
Michelle’s clothes never seems to fit well, aside from designer or style. And her posture is poor.
5.7M watched on Fox News. C-Span isn’t metered.
Different take on numbers: Today one of the talk shows pointed out that someone went on campuses and asked students to approximate how many unarmed black men had been killed by police in the last year. Most admitted they didn’t have any idea, but when they tried, they guessed hundreds or even thousands. The actual number is NINE, and whites twice as many (although a bigger percent of the population). So they act and protest without even being curious about the scale of anything. Bad police could be sifted out but how many people died or lost everything in all the fires and rioting? The press could go into the facts and lay it out any night they wanted to, and they don’t. Reporting the reactions and not the reality is kind of a brain-washing.
CoolidgeEridemus
Different take on numbers: Today one of the talk shows pointed out that someone went on campuses and asked students to approximate how many unarmed black men had been killed by police in the last year. Most admitted they didn’t have any idea, but when they tried, they guessed hundreds or even thousands. The actual number is NINE, and whites twice as many (although a bigger percent of the population). So they act and protest without even being curious about the scale of anything. Bad police could be sifted out but how many people died or lost everything in all the fires and rioting? The press could go into the facts and lay it out any night they wanted to, and they don’t. Reporting the reactions and not the reality is kind of a brain-washing.
how many police have been killed? how many blacks killed by other blacks?
And one thing of note on recent First Ladies: Michelle was always held up as a model wife and mother – even in that relatable/humanizing mold of being the stern parent protecting her children while keeping her husband ‘together’. And always a fawning press placing her on magazine covers and noting her clothes, and those arms, right?! Mrs. Trump, in contrast hardly gets press, and when she does it’s of the critical type that implies she dislikes her husband, is in need of an intervention or rescue, or is a porcelain princess. But a bias press, what else is new?
We watched it live, the whole thing. Loved it. Thrilled to it. I pray fervently Mr. Trump is reelected.
Asking college students about anything can be amusing. They estimate that 25% of the population is gay, for example. Then you could start asking about who we fought the revolution against. One girl in a video I saw suggested “Texas.”
Hugh Hewitt had a NY Times reporter on his show this week about the speech. It is hilarious as the reporter tries to finesse the answers. Hugh is good at this. He used to ask new interviewees a couple of questions to get an idea of their politics (back in the days when it wasn’t so obvious). He asked one woman reporter a couple of questions then asked her if Alger Hiss was a Soviet spy. She hung up on him. Here is the transcript.
https://www.hughhewitt.com/the-new-york-times-peter-baker-on-president-trumps-mount-rushmore-speech/
Look, broadly speaking, I didn’t cover that particular speech, so I want to be careful about overstating on the coverage of that particular speech. I do think in general, though, we are at this moment of Rorschach test where people are seeing the same even through obviously different eyes. And you know, the President is, in fact, of course, playing to this, there is a culture war. And he is playing to that. He’s trying to say look, these people are taking down our history, and it’s, whether you’re talking about the confederate statues, or he’s also bringing in, you know, George Washington, Christopher Columbus, or you know, even Abraham Lincoln and so forth. And he is talking about, you know, the backlash, or at least trying to stoke a backlash to sort of the protests in the street and the statues coming down that have been happening in the wake of the George Floyd case. And it’s a really interesting and indelible moment where people are seeing these through radically different eyes. No question about that.
What a weasel!
Regarding ‘killed by police’, are these stats for shootings only or all?
The rhetoric since Trayvon and Ferguson has been “police are targeting and shooting and killing blacks”.
Floyd resisted arrest and he wasn’t shot.
I’m not defending Chauvin.
What is ‘flatten the curve’?
college student: it’s about getting zero infections
Oh no, Don. It can’t be that. Google would never cook numbers. That would be almost the same as suppressing search results. Google would never do such a thing. Their corporate motto is “Don’t Be Evil.”
Must have been Russian bots. Yup. I’ll bet that’s it.