By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Bulwark’s JVL, Sarah Longwell, Will Sommer, and Andrew Egger discussed the stark contrast between Donald Trump’s poorly attended military/birthday parade and the massive, nationwide “No Kings” protests. These protests drew unprecedented crowds, highlighting a significant division in public opinion. The discussion was part of a Bulwark+ Takes video, available to subscribers. Audio-only options were also provided.
Read the original article here
Trump’s much-anticipated parade turned out to be a significant flop, overshadowed by massive nationwide protests that dwarfed the turnout for the event itself. The stark contrast between the sparsely attended parade and the widespread demonstrations paints a clear picture of the deep divisions within the country.
The sheer scale of the protests, described by many as reaching “millions,” significantly contradicts earlier media reports that downplayed their size. This discrepancy suggests a growing nervousness among some media outlets about accurately reflecting public sentiment, possibly reflecting a shift in the narrative surrounding Trump’s influence and popularity.
The military’s participation in the parade also drew considerable criticism. The idea of the armed forces participating in a spectacle that resembles a display for a dictator sits uncomfortably with many, who view it as a misuse of the military and a betrayal of its core mission to uphold the Constitution, not any individual president. This sentiment is clearly illustrated by the considerable number of people who actively chose to avoid the event.
The contrast between the supposed celebration and the widespread protests further highlights the lack of public support for the parade. The images circulating online, showing mostly empty stands and a relatively small number of participants, speak volumes about the event’s failure to attract a significant audience. Conservatives online attempted to downplay the size of the protests and inflate the parade attendance, but the disparity between their claims and the visual evidence is undeniable. This blatant attempt at misrepresentation only served to further emphasize the disconnect between Trump’s perception of his own support and the reality of the situation.
The parade’s perceived lack of success is further underscored by the online reaction. Conservative forums, known for their fervent support of Trump, showcased a significant amount of cope and denial, desperately trying to spin the event as a resounding success. This desperate attempt at narrative control only served to highlight the parade’s true failure, further amplified by the abundance of protest images and videos circulating on the internet. The almost complete absence of positive visuals and reporting from the conservative side underscores this failure.
Beyond the immediate visual evidence, the parade’s failure carries broader political implications. The outpouring of protest suggests a growing resistance to Trump’s style of leadership and his perceived authoritarian tendencies. The fact that a significant portion of the population actively participated in demonstrations against him speaks to a profound and widespread dissatisfaction with his political trajectory and policies.
The massive protests, considered by some to meet the necessary threshold to influence the trajectory of a non-violent movement, raise questions about the ongoing political landscape. The level of engagement suggests a significant portion of the population is actively seeking to resist what they perceive as a threat to democratic institutions. The widespread participation highlights the desire for a fundamental change in direction.
Ironically, the failure of the parade may have unintentionally strengthened the opposition’s resolve. The sheer scale of the protests serves as a powerful visual representation of the dissent against Trump and his actions. This visible opposition might further galvanize those who oppose him and encourage them to continue their efforts to counter his influence.
The events surrounding the parade and its subsequent failure serve as a potent symbol of the deep divisions that exist within the country. While the parade intended to showcase Trump’s alleged popularity, it inadvertently showcased the magnitude of opposition to his leadership and political agenda. The contrast between the two reveals a striking division in American political sentiment, suggesting a future characterized by ongoing contestation and resistance. The low turnout of the parade, contrasting with the considerable number participating in the protests across the nation, leaves no doubt as to the true sentiment of the population. The massive turnout in the protests effectively countered any message the parade intended to convey.