MLK day and Obama Inauguration on same day!!!


Last Updated:

  1. dan330

    dan330 Well-Known Member


    Advertisement
  2. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    "The inauguration of the president of the United States takes place during the commencement of a new term of a president of the United States, which is every four years on January 20."

    The president was officially sworn in yesterday.

    Not much to wonder about, I should think.
  3. dan330

    dan330 Well-Known Member

    yesterday was sunday.. so what is today's big todo? just a party?
  4. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    Here in the US, the President is the People's President. Today is the People's day, in keeping with the Constitutional role of the President as the chosen leader for all Americans. It's a ceremony, not a party.

    President Obama is the only US President to take the Oath of Office four times. During his first swearing-in the Chief Justice botched the lines, so they did it again in private "just to be certain". This time the first swearing-in had to be done when the President's first term expired at Noon to ensure continuity of government. Because ceremonies aren't usually done on Sundays, the ceremonial part was done today.

    Al Roker just got Vice President Biden to break security and run over to shake his hand! :D Only in America...
    dan330 likes this.
  5. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    I think calling it the People's day is going a little bit too far. For the most part, no one really cares. Half the voters voted against him and I think half the people who voted for him couldn't care less about his inauguration either.
  6. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    That's their major malfunction then.

    I've been watching very large crowds of people out there, taking it all in, being witnesses to history.

    Having lots of witnesses is still important. When we have groups like the "birthers" trying to get us all to believe a lie, we need people who can stand up and say "I was there; what you say is false (or true, depending on the circumstance)."
  7. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Sure. It draws large crowds in person. I'm not convinced very many people who aren't there really care though.
  8. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    Maybe if you include infants you'd have a point. I doubt that people wait in long lines, go through heavy security checkpoints and stand around for hours by accident.

    EDIT: Oh, people who aren''t there. (I'm using a tiny old monitor.)

    Well, I'm not there and I care. I know quite a few people who planned on spending the whole day watching this on TV. They sure seem to care! I wasn't planning on watching the whole thing, but here I am.

    Yes, it's a big deal. Those who say it's not just because it's not their candidate out there...are free to leave. Don't need more sour grapes.
  9. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    I'll bet you any amount of money you want to bet that the Super Bowl gets far better ratings than the inauguration. I'd almost go as far as to say the NFC/AFC championships probably got better ratings. Why? Because people care about those things not the inauguration. People have never cared about the inauguration.
  10. saptech

    saptech Well-Known Member

    And I'll bet you any amount of money the majority of those football players make far more money then the President!
  11. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    Plus, a lot of people were at work while it was going on. you can't compare weekday daytime ratings. But yeah, even if it was in prime time, it wouldn't beat out the Super Bowl. And that's sad.
  12. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    Hey everybody! Let's argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin! :rolleyes:

    I don't see anything productive in letting the conversation be lead down the path of ridiculousness, and will not dignify attempts to do so. I think it's fair to say that lots of Americans do like to see and celebrate things like the orderly transfer of power and other major government functions like the State of the Union speech. If the number is waning, then shame on those Americans who take their freedoms for granted, and don't do anything to make it better. In that respect, we need more "makers" and fewer "takers"! "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."
  13. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Truly and honestly I don't think it's fair to say that. At work Monday I did not overhear one single conversation about Obama or the inauguration. There was discussion about MLK day because half of the office was gone and there was lots of discussion about the Super Bowl. Today, there was more Super Bowl talk and not a single mention did I hear about the inauguration. I think less people care about the State of the Union. While I have no doubt there are political junkies who care deeply about such things I don't feel the average American does. I haven't seen the ratings yet but I suspect they will be significantly lower than 4 years ago.
  14. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Numbers are in. They are less than half of what they were last year. About 6.6 mil watched it total (no clue how many of those were dupes of people watching both networks) which was about a third of last year and not all that impressive honestly. Meanwhile, some soap operas pull over 4 million views just on their own. So the inauguration totaled from all the networks only got 2 mil more than the Young and the Restless (also airs mid days) by itself.
  15. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Well-Known Member

    Same in every country with a directly elected head of state.
    You could put all the royal families in Europe together and not see such pomp. The deification is a bit dodgy imo.
  16. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Meh. He won. He has every right to celebrate. No one does ostentatious better than Americans.
  17. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    Ask any Royal Watcher who spent more and who cares more and the Royal Families and their doings are the ones that command attention. Obama is not even a minor fool in a royal court.

    Seriously, am I missing something or did Diane's wedding or the burial of a queen get more ink and bandwidth? Not to mention, the cost to the state.
  18. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    23 million Americans watched the Royal Wedding even though it happened at 6 am EST on a Friday American time. Obama's inauguration happened in the middle of the day on a day that many Americans have off 6 mil watched it. So, from a purely numerical perspective, way, way, way more Americans care about the Royal Wedding than they do about Obama's inauguration.
  19. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    Yes, that IS the bottom line. President Obama was re-elected. Those who try to use statistics to "prove" otherwise are full of sssssour grapes.
  20. copestag

    copestag Well-Known Member

    from my standpoint its not about Obama specifically..... Ive said the same thing every election since Ive been voting

    there should be no inaugural festivities....... no parades at taxpayer expense...... no big fancy balls at taxpayer expense..... etc

    the president is 1/3 of goverment........ all of which has equal power

    if we insist on inaugural festivities then congress is deserving of a parade and ball every election......... or in fact technically they deserve a parade and ball annually....... since its technically a new congress every year..... and they have a swearing in every year......... I believe the ussc only swears in once when a new judge is appointed..... but at the very least they should have all the fanfare then

    we treat the office of president like it is higher than the rest of govt...... we elevate that position to that of king........ hes simply 1 cog in the machine...... no bigger or smaller than the other 542 people

    do the math on this.... the money spent in 1 innauguration could feed about 40,000 starving african babies until their 18th birthday... and we do this every 4 years.... what about the children?
  21. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    I never said he didn't win. I just said no one cares about the inauguration. The stats hold that up. More Americans got up at the butt crack of dawn on a Friday to watch the Royal Wedding that tuned into the inauguration in the middle of the day on a day that a lot of them had off. That tells you something about how popular it is. No one cares. If Romney had won it would've been the same. No one would've cared.
  22. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    No, not in as many words. But you are clearly getting your marching orders from the GOP, and are parroting what GOP politicians are saying at this very moment. And that's the problem.

    This constant hammering of non sequitur comparisons between TV viewership of a once-in-a-lifetime royal wedding and President Obama's second swearing-in ceremony is in fact an underhanded way to try to re-litigate the 2012 Presidential election. But it will not change the fact that President Obama will continue to be the POTUS for the next 4 years! All the shenanigans in the world will not undo the will of The People. Live with it.
  23. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    You stated that lots of Americans cared about the Inauguration. I pointed out the cold hard fact that they don't. I backed that up with cold, hard facts. Should they care? Yes. The should. The fact is they don't. When the Royal Wedding and the Young and the Restless both get more viewers then you can't say that people care about the Inauguration. That is a fact. Yes Obama won. No, he didn't get any sort of mandate. No, he doesn't necessarily need one.

    If you're going to disagree with me, please disagree with what I actually said, not what I didn't say.
  24. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    I'm not going to be led around in another circle about this. One is my limit. It's a fact that many Americans do still care about pomp and circumstance. The President did in fact win re-election with a clear majority. Period.

    I love my country and respect its Constitution. That includes the traditions that we, the People have to celebrate our system of government. I'm rapidly running out of tolerance for those who piss on the parade just because they're unhappy about who's the guest of honor. It's only bad form to be a sore loser, but it's unacceptable to be a wet blanket.
  25. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    This "fact" does not seem born out by the numbers. When more people tune in to a soap opera than the inauguration I don't see how you can make that argument unless you are going to argue that many Americans care about soap operas. I really don't think they do. Soap opera lovers are niche just as those who care about the inauguration are a niche as well. You can make all the claims you want, but the numbers just are not there to back you up. Obama won 51.1% of the vote. A majority yes, but hardly a resounding one. It was actually down from what he won in 2008. The fact is he has half the country behind him and only half. That's all I'm saying.

    Once again, no one cares about the parade regardless of who the guest of honor is. Nothing personal. It would've been the same no matter who won. People in the US care more about soap operas than the do about inaugurations. The numbers back up that statement. And furthermore, they care way more about weddings of royalty in other countries than they do about either.

Share This Page