The Last Two No Kings Protests Are Considered 'The Most Successful in American History' That Explains Exactly Why The Left Is Fighting The Wrong Battles

 

Over the last year or so I've come to understand why Bill Maher has become the target of such vehemence from the left in general and even Hollywood, no matter how many times he makes it clear that he is a Democrat and even though he spends much of his act mocking Trump and Republicans. It's not because Maher has changed but the rules of late night have.

Maher is the only person working in late night who is still following the pre-Trump mindset that was championed by Jay Leno (and he was similarly excoriated when he pointed it out). He is the only comedian and one of the few people in Hollywood is following the old model of making fun of the hypocrisies of both parties and the extremes of the political spectrum. This includes being the only person in late night who will regularly invite Republican congressman and representatives to his show and having conversations with them (whereas everyone else excoriates them from a distance) appearing on conservative media when Hollywood and the left refuse to go anywhere near them (he has appeared on other more liberal networks as well) and perhaps most damningly pushing back against members of the left coalition when he thinks they are ridiculous or hurting their cause. Since members of that group has officially made it gospel in the past year that the last is someone no one should ever do, it is understandable why so many people in that group consider him the enemy.

I don't watch Bill Maher for multiple reasons; the main one is I've never really thought he's particularly funny. But as a fellow moderate who has received backlash on this site and others for taking viewpoints that aren't much different from Maher's on this last point in particular I can at least understand his reasoning. It doesn't mean I like agreeing with him when he makes a joke in that nature as he did last Friday.

In the midst of his routine he went out of his way to mock the upcoming No Kings Protest and said that the opposition hated Donald Trump and "was not going to this lying down. No, we're going to take it milling around."  As someone who has basically been making this argument about 'the movement' against Trump in this way I respect the truth even if I loathed the teller.

And sure enough I received yet another triumphant 'missive' from MoveOn this afternoon claiming how significant Saturday's protests were. "More than 7 million people gathered in over 2700 protests in all fifty states to express our outrage against Trump." Like so many things about these kinds of missives from these sites it sounds impressive when you read it and when you start to think about it, you realize just how meaningless it was even before you get to the idea of what it accomplished. I'll get to that in a minute but for now, let's just stick to the pure arithmetic of it all.

Let's say 7 million people showed up and that there were at least 2700 protests.  If we divide the number of protesters by the number of protests that means a little more than 2500 people showed up at each one.  2700 protests divided by 50 states means that in each state there were 54 protests.  So by that math in every state in the union if the numbers were spread out evenly (they weren't but I'll get to that) about 126,000 people showed up at every state.

Now if there were 126 thousand people protesting in a state such as Rhode Island or Vermont, or indeed Idaho or Wyoming it would be a bigger deal then if that same number were protesting in California or New York.  That said in Idaho 274 thousand people voted for Harris so the fact that they couldn't get have  half that many to show at a single protest one year later is less impressive then you'd think. And its impossible to believe 126 thousand people would show up in Wyoming because only 192,000 voted for Trump.

In a state like Rhode Island which Harris carried, she received 285,156 votes. So that would mean one year later not even half that many would show up in a protest against him. In Maine Harris got 435, 662 which would mean less than a third of them chose to show up and protest a year later. And even in Vermont, Bernie's home state, she got 235, 791. Bernie could probably get that many at a DNC event.

I suspect I will receive lots of outraged messages from people on this site saying I'm not taking this seriously. Actually I am. Need I remind you that these No Kings protests were scheduled to all take place in 50 states on a single day? That is the exact same way elections work out in our country. You know the kind of things that is the point of your protest in the first place. Trump was elected President and you think he's acting like a king.

Now we are approaching the one year anniversary of Trump's coronation, er, reelection. That led to a similar mass gathering which we do every four years. Now I realize everybody did not vote in person but nevertheless on that day: 75 million people came out to vote for Kamala Harris across all fifty states. With all your planning you managed to get 7 million people to show up in protests for all 50 states. Harris got 2 million more than that in California alone.

And to be clear this was on a Saturday, not a Tuesday. By much of the progressive argument you should have been able to get more people than that. But I get it. Most people might not want to give up their weekend to stand in a crowd, hold banners and chant for several hours, even to be part of a movement.

There's the larger question of course as to why the left cares so much about attendance: it's yet another sign that they are just as fixated with crowd size as the President has been. And considering how much of their time in the last decade has been fixated on trying to prove that the crowds who show up at Trump rallies are not representative of 'real Americans', they might have a point. The difference is they have clearly shown up at the ballot box when he needs to them and I'm not convinced even now you and your colleagues think that's as important.

But even if I were willing to acknowledge that this was the success under the standards you meet the bigger question is: so what?  Trump was President on October 17^th and he is on October 19^th. There's not going to be an election of consequence for another year and any number of things can happen between then and now. And need I remind you spent the entire first four years of Trump protesting against him and it didn't change anyone's mind of getting rid of him: the ballot did and only temporarily.

I almost wonder if these kinds of gatherings are a combination of group therapy and what this generation does for socializing these days instead of going to the Rotary Club or the Women's Auxiliary. (Ask your parents.) I have no doubt, given the way these things operate, that the same group of people show up at the event over and over again. Do you guys leave by saying: "All right, see you at the next mass demonstration!"

Because honestly I don't see what all of these protests are supposed to really accomplish aside from making you feel you're not taking what Trump is doing lying down. The fact that the President has never really cared what you guys do and in fact uses these protests to help him with his base is a fact that either seems to escape you or that you ignore.  If the force of the left's moral outrage alone was enough to cause his followers to desert him, don't you think it would happened years ago? Do you really think there's anyone left in the entire nation that doesn't know about your hatred of all things MAGA by now – and despite that keep sending the message in election after election, they could care less what you think? I know you don't care what they think, that you think they are subhuman and unredeemable. The trouble is, regardless of your opinions, they still have the power of the ballot and they have will use it just as much, if not more, then you will you.

I agree that this is not a monarchy and it is a democracy. Where we differ is that one side seems to have realized how to use its powers to subvert and gets its agenda passed and your side seems determined to fight back – by milling around and making it clear where you stand.  Democracy is about winning hearts and minds and your form of protest is talking only to people who agree with you completely and pushing away any allies who might help you – and the right is more than willing to welcome them into their camp.

Last Saturday was an impressive display of organization and gathering among the anti-Trump figures. It changed nothing in America one way or the other and I think at some level the left must understand that. I have no doubt that is why they plan another series of demonstrations like this a few months down the line and highlight it on every left-wing website. I guess if you want to spend your weekends that way, it's your choice. I might find it more useful to spend that time on a voting registration drive but where's the fun in trying to help democracy succeed as opposed to making it clear we live in one on camera?