Opinion

Inauguration Crowd Size: Missing Context

Evan Boudreau Freelance Writer
Font Size:

We’re six weeks into Donald Trump’s presidency and the silly topic of inauguration crowd-size is still in vogue.  The media has accurately and incessantly debunked declarations by the Trump administration that 2017 was “the largest audience to witness an inauguration.”  However, the same media has yet to offer an apples-to-apples comparison of the 2009 and 2017 inauguration crowds.  Context has been severely lacking.

Despite the rise of Airbnb, Trump’s inauguration booked 3,689 more rooms than Barack Obama’s 2009 inauguration (1.8 million attendees).   More shockingly, the hotel occupancy rate for George W. Bush’s 2001 inauguration (300,000 attendees) outpaced Obama’s 2013 inauguration (1 million attendees) 89 to 81 percent.  The data strongly suggests a large portion of inauguration attendees live locally.

Democrats outnumber Republicans 12-to-1 in Washington DC, where Trump won just 4 percent of the vote.  Eighty percent of DC tourism comes from 14 states, several in the northeast; however, just two of those states are solidly Republican.  While northeastern cities generally have easy travel-access to DC, Trump won the election primarily from rural support, a voting class at a comparative traveling-disadvantage both geographically and economically.  Moreover, Inauguration Day, a federal holiday in metropolitan DC, fell on a Tuesday in 2009.  Federally employed residents, predominantly Democrats, received a four-day weekend, and had the option of attending the inauguration of the first African-American President the day after Martin Luther King Day.  Trump’s inauguration occurred the Friday after Martin Luther King Day.

Although second-term inaugurations are typically less attended than first-term, a notable exception is Bush, whose 2005 attendance increased 33 percent despite an approval rating drop.  The primary reason is rainy weather.  Heavy rains were forecast days in advance of, and the morning of, the Trump inauguration.  The National Mall appeared 20 percent denser between 11:15AM and 12:01AM, suggesting a surge of late-arriving attendees purposely waited out the rain.  An umbrella ban, partially and confusingly reversed late, may have suppressed turnout as well.  Studies show every inch of rain decreases voter turnout by one percent, twice as much as snow.  Though the 2009 inauguration was 28 degrees, cold weather has no effect on voter turnout.

The DC Metro tweeted that 2017 morning ridership was 37.6 percent of 2009.  However, Metro ridership has declined annually since 2009, including 9 percent in 2016 alone, despite DC tourism increasing 23 percent over the same period.  Unlike 2009, UberX and Lyft, the DC Circular, and the DC Streetcar were transportation options in 2017.  Even limousine businesses reported increased sales.  Additionally, studies conclude rain always decreases bus and train ridership, while cold always increases bus ridership and often increases train ridership.

Weeks before the Trump inauguration, DC braced itself for tens of thousands of protesters.  Though most protesters were expected to demonstrate peacefully, a few threatened chaos.  Security checkpoint were stalled or shut down by both peaceful protesters and rioters.   Some were stuck in line for over five hours, not even allowed to leave their line.   Others able to escape stalled lines simply gave up and went home.  Nearby DC Circular stops were not served due to smashed bus shelters.  Altogether, 230 protesters were arrested: None were arrested in 2009.

Fact-checkers and media reported attendance of 250,000 and 600,000 for Trump’s inauguration.  The 250,000 estimate originated via tweet from Dan Gross, a Democrat, who spent Inauguration Day morning trolling the incoming administration, but never disclosing how he calculated the estimate a mere three minutes after Trump took the Oath of Office.  Gross offers some humorous retweets and snark, but no scientific explanation.  Gross did retweet the Metro ridership statistics, which themselves indicate 676,800 attendees (37.6 percent of 1,800,000).  Considering 250,000 tickets were issued around the Capitol Building alone, and aerial photos depict larger crowds than either Bush inauguration, reporting the 250,000 estimate seems unjustifiable.

The 600,000 estimate is inferred from Dr. Keith Still, who analyzed aerial photos of the National Mall 45 minutes before the swearing-in ceremonies of 2009 and 2017.  This questionable methodology seems akin to counting Super Bowl fans seated during the pregame show instead of at kickoff.  Furthermore, The New York Times, a leftist newspaper that describes Still as someone it “hired” to perform the study, brazenly distorts his analysis to 160,000 attendees.  Regardless, if the reader accepts Still’s conclusion, 600,000 attendees is hundreds of thousands more than Bush, and the most for a Republican since at least Dwight Eisenhower and possibly ever.

While the 2009 inauguration was unquestionably larger than 2017, the media should have added substantive context to their reporting.  Anything less does a disservice to the reader, and runs the risk of feeding a “fake news” narrative.

Evan Boudreau is a freelance writer, musician, consultant, stay-at-home Dad, and independent thinker who craves data-driven analysis and unbiased political commentary.  Evan detests social media, but can be reached at evanboudreaufeedback@gmail.com

PREMIUM ARTICLE: Subscribe To Keep Reading

Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!

Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!

Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!

Sign Up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
BENEFITS READERS PASS PATRIOTS FOUNDERS
Daily and Breaking Newsletters
Daily Caller Shows
Ad Free Experience
Exclusive Articles
Custom Newsletters
Editor Daily Rundown
Behind The Scenes Coverage
Award Winning Documentaries
Patriot War Room
Patriot Live Chat
Exclusive Events
Gold Membership Card
Tucker Mug

What does Founders Club include?

Tucker Mug and Membership Card
Founders

Readers,

Instead of sucking up to the political and corporate powers that dominate America, The Daily Caller is fighting for you — our readers. We humbly ask you to consider joining us in this fight.

Now that millions of readers are rejecting the increasingly biased and even corrupt corporate media and joining us daily, there are powerful forces lined up to stop us: the old guard of the news media hopes to marginalize us; the big corporate ad agencies want to deprive us of revenue and put us out of business; senators threaten to have our reporters arrested for asking simple questions; the big tech platforms want to limit our ability to communicate with you; and the political party establishments feel threatened by our independence.

We don't complain -- we can't stand complainers -- but we do call it how we see it. We have a fight on our hands, and it's intense. We need your help to smash through the big tech, big media and big government blockade.

We're the insurgent outsiders for a reason: our deep-dive investigations hold the powerful to account. Our original videos undermine their narratives on a daily basis. Even our insistence on having fun infuriates them -- because we won’t bend the knee to political correctness.

One reason we stand apart is because we are not afraid to say we love America. We love her with every fiber of our being, and we think she's worth saving from today’s craziness.

Help us save her.

A second reason we stand out is the sheer number of honest responsible reporters we have helped train. We have trained so many solid reporters that they now hold prominent positions at publications across the political spectrum. Hear a rare reasonable voice at a place like CNN? There’s a good chance they were trained at Daily Caller. Same goes for the numerous Daily Caller alumni dominating the news coverage at outlets such as Fox News, Newsmax, Daily Wire and many others.

Simply put, America needs solid reporters fighting to tell the truth or we will never have honest elections or a fair system. We are working tirelessly to make that happen and we are making a difference.

Since 2010, The Daily Caller has grown immensely. We're in the halls of Congress. We're in the Oval Office. And we're in up to 20 million homes every single month. That's 20 million Americans like you who are impossible to ignore.

We can overcome the forces lined up against all of us. This is an important mission but we can’t do it unless you — the everyday Americans forgotten by the establishment — have our back.

Please consider becoming a Daily Caller Patriot today, and help us keep doing work that holds politicians, corporations and other leaders accountable. Help us thumb our noses at political correctness. Help us train a new generation of news reporters who will actually tell the truth. And help us remind Americans everywhere that there are millions of us who remain clear-eyed about our country's greatness.

In return for membership, Daily Caller Patriots will be able to read The Daily Caller without any of the ads that we have long used to support our mission. We know the ads drive you crazy. They drive us crazy too. But we need revenue to keep the fight going. If you join us, we will cut out the ads for you and put every Lincoln-headed cent we earn into amplifying our voice, training even more solid reporters, and giving you the ad-free experience and lightning fast website you deserve.

Patriots will also be eligible for Patriots Only content, newsletters, chats and live events with our reporters and editors. It's simple: welcome us into your lives, and we'll welcome you into ours.

We can save America together.

Become a Daily Caller Patriot today.

Signature

Neil Patel