"No Kings Day" protests turn out millions, rebuking Trump | Our unofficial estimate is that around 4-6 million people attended a protest event yesterday. Anti-Trump resistance is outpacing 2017.

a year ago by silence7 to c/politics

Our unofficial estimate is that around 4-6 million people attended a protest event yesterday. Anti-Trump resistance is outpacing 2017.
load all comments
nuxi 35 points a year ago

We gotta keep the momentum up. History suggests the threshold for achieving change is a turnout of 3.5% (roughly 12 million active participants)

https://www.bbc.com/...

path: 0 17685958, hotness: undefined, score: 35, children: 26
aceshigh 30 points a year ago

That number keeps getting thrown around but this admin dgaf. That number only works when the admin believes in human rights and when the admin cares about it’s popularity.

path: 0 17685958 17686533, hotness: undefined, score: 30, children: 18
FordBeeblebrox 10 points a year ago

Turns out someone who looks like Luigi but is definitely not Luigi proved it takes only one death certificate to initiate change for scores of people

path: 0 17685958 17686533 17692334, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 10
Denjin 8 points a year ago

British India didn't care about human rights

path: 0 17685958 17686533 17686813, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 3
frezik 3 points a year ago

Would you say that Ferdinand Marcos believed in human rights and did not care for his popularity?

path: 0 17685958 17686533 17698530, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
seejur 3 points a year ago

It only works when you are near an election, and the election are coming. This administration is working on a different path: at least one year before the next election and is actively working to make sure (fair) elections might not happen anymore

path: 0 17685958 17686533 17687379, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 1
markovs_gun 10 points a year ago

What do you suppose happens at this magic threshold? I'll give you a hint- it's nothing. We still have to do the work to actually make a difference. Protesting and building momentum is good, but we can't just wait until we hit this magic threshold and pretend that will fix everything and rest on our laurels.

path: 0 17685958 17688335, hotness: undefined, score: 10, children: 4
QueenHawlSera 4 points a year ago

This

Anyone else remember how the Women's March saved reproductive rights? Of course not, and now women are dying in Texas because doctors are afraid they'll be arrested for murder if they treat them for life threatening conditions.

path: 0 17685958 17688335 17692393, hotness: undefined, score: 4, children: 2
frezik 3 points a year ago

This is the right take. There's more that goes into than just achieving that number. It is necessary, but not sufficient.

path: 0 17685958 17688335 17698547, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
jj4211 5 points a year ago

Way way too much stock is placed in that study.

For one, their total sample size was only 323 events, only 3 of which met the "3.5%" level. So the statement that change is inevitable based on only 3 instances is really crazy.

Further, none of those three instances had participants thinking that 3.5% was some sort of goal, it was a correlation. So now you have a lot of protestors treating 3.5% as a goal rather than some organic emergent property of the broader movement. Even if there was something inevitable about having a 3.5% participation rate when no one is aware of that metric, simply knowing of the metric can change a lot.

path: 0 17685958 17698983, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 1
ramenbelly 2 points a year ago

Yea I think you can have 35% of the country at the steps of the White House , Trump ain’t stepping down

path: 0 17685958 17698983 17704272, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0
politics
politics

@lemmy.world

login for more options
31377
33947
9297

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

go to feed...