• Trump used Obama inauguration image as cover for @POTUS twitter
    83 replies, posted
[QUOTE=TheJoey;51707156]to maybe some photos i've seen but definitely not the bottom in the quote. edit: like i understand the turnout was lower than even bush jr's (from what i've read) but there's a little misinfo going on. even at the expense of a good laugh.[/QUOTE] It matches up pretty well, the largest empty spaces are present in both of the images and very plain to see.
[QUOTE=Arthamus;51704006]The second image was at least two hours before the inauguration began. [t]https://i.gyazo.com/59feed321eeb75d121b752a474e77f3d.jpg[/t] [t]https://i.gyazo.com/e7deb857f3e6e294856dd3d69633fed1.jpg[/t] What are you trying to accomplish?[/QUOTE] Look up the time lapse. The crowd is small as fuck lol
Are people forgetting one of the reasons turnout was so high for Obama might have had something to do with him being the first black president?
[QUOTE=Killer900;51707630]Are people forgetting one of the reasons turnout was so high for Obama might have had something to do with him being the first black president?[/QUOTE] Are you forgetting that Trump's press secretary went out yesterday and claimed his crowd was bigger? And of course Obama had a bigger crowd - he was more popular and it was a historic moment people wanted to be a part of. In my book it's okay to make fun of it as long as Trump seems to actually give a shit about who had the bigger crowd.
The size of the crowd there in of itself is irrelevant and doesn't really matter. The problem is, the Trump administration - on day fucking one - blatantly lied about its inflated size and publicly condemned [I]journalists[/I] who said otherwise. Why is that so hard for some people in this thread to understand? The issue isn't about the size, it's the administration's reaction to it.
[QUOTE=Killer900;51707630]Are people forgetting one of the reasons turnout was so high for Obama might have had something to do with him being the first black president?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoobSauce;51700539]It also really helped that Obama is a decent human being who strived to be a competent leader.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Chonch;51704245]What the fuck does it matter how many people turned out? The popularity contest part of the campaign is over. [/QUOTE] This is a reasonable response. [quote=Sean Spicer]This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration — period — both in person and around the globe. These attempts to lessen the enthusiasm of the inauguration are shameful and wrong.[/quote] This is not. Learn the difference, don't make a fool of yourselves.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51707981]The size of the crowd there in of itself is irrelevant and doesn't really matter. The problem is, the Trump administration - on day fucking one - blatantly lied about its inflated size and publicly condemned [I]journalists[/I] who said otherwise. Why is that so hard for some people in this thread to understand? The issue isn't about the size, it's the administration's reaction to it.[/QUOTE] it's not about the size, it's about how trump failed to use it
[QUOTE=!LORD M!;51703670]I was mocking those medias with an agenda who have had deceptive angles and views of crowds when reporting, making them look larger. Only a fool would believe it was not sarcasm.[/QUOTE] There are legitimately people making those arguments though. One thread on The_Donald cited [url=http://i.imgur.com/AGNMCNa.jpg]this picture[/url] and called it [I]"the real crowd size photo"[/I], as well as [url=https://out.reddit.com/t3_5pebqm?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.reddituploads.com%2Fe107684548d142b391b295eb50c0da86%3Ffit%3Dmax%26h%3D1536%26w%3D1536%26s%3Daff3bddd4742e9006eaf43add983a584&token=AQAA5JuEWOiZ6tQTgV5dA7oHFqHKclLOhV4om_bBpsOQlvw02nLQ&app_name=reddit.com]this photo[/url], both of which are from angles that obviously can't show empty spots. Meanwhile others were citing [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdantUf5tXg]this timelapse[/url] and claiming that it [I]"cuts out before the place fills up"[/I] despite the video clearly showing the crowds dispersing at the end. You really should not be surprised when people can't tell Trump support arguments from parody. Anyway, I fell for it too and made this before scrolling down to see that you were sarcastic. So for anyone interested, there is demonstrably no significant zoom: [img]http://i.imgur.com/2YK32yw.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;51708354]There are legitimately people making those arguments though. One thread on The_Donald cited [url=http://i.imgur.com/AGNMCNa.jpg]this picture[/url] and called it [I]"the real crowd size photo"[/I], as well as [url=https://out.reddit.com/t3_5pebqm?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.reddituploads.com%2Fe107684548d142b391b295eb50c0da86%3Ffit%3Dmax%26h%3D1536%26w%3D1536%26s%3Daff3bddd4742e9006eaf43add983a584&token=AQAA5JuEWOiZ6tQTgV5dA7oHFqHKclLOhV4om_bBpsOQlvw02nLQ&app_name=reddit.com]this photo[/url], both of which are from angles that obviously can't show empty spots. Meanwhile others were citing [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdantUf5tXg]this timelapse[/url] and claiming that it [I]"cuts out before the place fills up"[/I] despite the video clearly showing the crowds dispersing at the end. You really should not be surprised when people can't tell Trump support arguments from parody. Anyway, I fell for it too and made this before scrolling down to see that you were sarcastic. So for anyone interested, there is demonstrably no significant zoom: [img]http://i.imgur.com/2YK32yw.gif[/img][/QUOTE] How people can blame zoom in a picture where there's a very clear reference (in this case the Capitol Building) is beyond me.
This is the image that the article is about. [img]http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/18332/production/_93722199_mediaitem93722198.jpg[/img] This is the image that everyone in the thread is about. [img]http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/00DE/production/_93722200_comparisonsocial.jpg[/img] The one in the article is basically stock photo tier which makes sense as to why it didn't matter when it was used for the twitter background. The second one is a comparison about crowd sizes that was not used on the twitter page. Shake my damn head that's petty of you guys
[QUOTE=Sally;51709532]This is the image that the article is about. [img]http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/18332/production/_93722199_mediaitem93722198.jpg[/img] This is the image that everyone in the thread is about. [img]http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/00DE/production/_93722200_comparisonsocial.jpg[/img] The one in the article is basically stock photo tier which makes sense as to why it didn't matter when it was used for the twitter background. The second one is a comparison about crowd sizes that was not used on the twitter page. [B]Shake my damn head that's petty of you guys[/B][/QUOTE] Then I suppose you think Trump is the pettiest guy ever?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51709603]Then I suppose you think Trump is the pettiest guy ever?[/QUOTE] I actually don't care
[QUOTE=Sally;51709607]I actually don't care[/QUOTE] Not even enough to shake your head? Seems like you have what's called a ~double standard~.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51709610]Not even enough to shake your head? Seems like you have what's called a ~double standard~.[/QUOTE] You just don't get it. [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1549633[/url] That's the thread that this discussion made sense. This thread became basically a separate thread to discuss the same thing instead of talking about what actually happened. So again, its petty for how this conversation is being continued where it doesn't have its reason to be here other than a separate thread to throw some crap in.
[QUOTE=Sally;51709635]You just don't get it. [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1549633[/url] That's the thread that this discussion made sense. This thread became basically a separate thread to discuss the same thing instead of talking about what actually happened.[/QUOTE] So it's petty... because it's the wrong thread? I suppose the connection was "Trump wanted a picture of success to inadvertently some intern put up a picture of Obama's inauguration crowd, leading to a comparison with Trump's". Is that really out of line? And look at Trump's reaction, simply just lies on top of alternate facts and accusing the media of being biased and evil. [I]That's[/I] petty, and you don't even care a little bit?
[QUOTE=Chonch;51704245]What the fuck does it matter how many people turned out? The popularity contest part of the campaign is over. We have livestreams and social media technology now that makes it completely unnecessary to physically attend any event like this. Comparing numbers and photos like this is just pointless nitpickery IMO.[/QUOTE] Because Trump and his press secretary blatantly [I][B]lied[/B][/I] about it? You don't get to just present demonstrably false information to the public like this as the president of a global superpower.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51709651][b]So it's petty... because it's the wrong thread?[/B] I suppose the connection was "Trump wanted a picture of success to inadvertently some intern put up a picture of Obama's inauguration crowd, leading to a comparison with Trump's". Is that really out of line?[/quote] The picture used from Obama's inauguration is again stockier, if it wasn't raining I am very sure the same picture could of been replicated for Trump. It wouldn't require the stated size of Obama's crowd to do it. Contrary to what is being implied in the thread by constantly discussing the two pictures of the crowd's from 09 to 17 as if that's actually what was posted on the twitter feed. If you think about it, I'm pretty sure your response to my post is the only conversation made here in this thread about that twitter background. That's petty [quote]And look at Trump's reaction, simply just lies on top of alternate facts and accusing the media of being biased and evil. [B][I]That's[/I] petty, and you don't even care a little bit[/B]?[/QUOTE] How can you claim to understand that I seen it was petty for being brought up in the wrong thread, then go on to make this claim as some desperate attempt of showing hypocrisy. and that's bum
[QUOTE=Sally;51709679]The picture used from Obama's inauguration is again stockier, if it wasn't raining I am very sure the same picture could of been replicated for Trump. It wouldn't require the stated size of Obama's crowd to do it. Contrary to what is being implied in the thread by constantly discussing the two pictures of the crowd's from 09 to 17 as if that's actually what was posted on the twitter feed. If you think about it, I'm pretty sure your response to my post is the only conversation made here in this thread about that twitter background. That's petty[/quote] Maybe it's because that twitter background wasn't all that interesting, but Trump's reaction has been? Also that thread you linked to before was created "long" after this one started to veer onto that topic. And maybe Trump could've replicated that crowd (though probably not, it was in DC after all and Trump isn't very popular), who knows, but it doesn't matter. Trump got his press secretary to lie about the crowd's actual (not hypothetical) size on national television. That's what's petty. [quote]How can you claim to understand that I seen it was petty for being brought up in the wrong thread, then go on to make this claim as some desperate attempt of showing hypocrisy. and that's bum[/QUOTE] I honestly can't tell what you're saying here - maybe it's my limited English proficiency, but I can't seem to make out what you're trying to say. Could you rephrase it?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51709798] I honestly can't tell what you're saying here - maybe it's my limited English proficiency, but I can't seem to make out what you're trying to say. Could you rephrase it?[/QUOTE] Even as a natural English speaker, I can tell you that I have no idea what he's trying to say.
Whats great is that this was literally a non-story until Trump decided to make it one
[QUOTE=Sally;51709635]You just don't get it. [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1549633[/url] That's the thread that this discussion made sense. This thread became basically a separate thread to discuss the same thing instead of talking about what actually happened. So again, its petty for how this conversation is being continued where it doesn't have its reason to be here other than a separate thread to throw some crap in.[/QUOTE] So what would you rather have? A 3-page thread of people criticizing Trump's use of a nondescript stock photo on his Twitter? You don't think that would be petty? Maybe if he had his press secretary go on national television and state that it was their own picture from the best inauguration in history period both in person and world-wide, we might have cared. Trump made his inauguration crowd size much, much more relevant by blatantly lying about it, and it is relevant to this thread because this topic also touches on Trump's image and how it compares to Obama's. Trump 'stealing' Obama's Twitter picture is just not as egregious as lying on national television about his prez-penis size.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.