By John Q. Hosedrinker 
On Saturday, October 18, 2025, approximately 100,000 protesters gathered in Midtown Manhattan for a “No Kings” march, expressing their disapproval of the Trump administration’s policies. The protest, which was part of a nationwide “day of defiance,” drew demonstrators from all five boroughs of New York City. The protesters carried signs and banners criticizing the administration’s actions, including its stance on immigration, the transit system, and law enforcement funding. Despite the large turnout, the NYPD reported no protest-related arrests, marking a significant difference from the first No Kings event.
Read the original article here
100,000 protest Trump policies in huge NYC ‘No Kings’ march – now that’s a headline that grabs your attention. It’s impossible not to be impressed by the sheer scale of such an event, and the fact that it unfolded in New York City, a global hub, amplifies the impact. It’s a clear statement, a collective voice rising against the backdrop of policies and actions that have stirred significant opposition. The “No Kings” theme is particularly powerful, hinting at a rejection of autocratic tendencies and a reaffirmation of democratic principles.
Estimates of the crowd size are always a fascinating aspect of these events, and it’s interesting to consider the variations in reported numbers. The initial figure of 100,000 provided by the NYPD itself is a concrete starting point. However, as often happens, other assessments are emerging, with some sources suggesting substantially larger numbers, perhaps even reaching the 300,000 mark. The discrepancies underscore the challenges of accurately quantifying a moving, dynamic gathering, especially when considering the flow of people in and out, and the areas encompassed. This is where the accounts from participants on the ground become particularly valuable.
The firsthand experiences of those who marched add another dimension to the story. The description of arriving early, waiting for the march to begin, the slow pace, and the extended duration of the protest paints a vivid picture. It sounds like a deeply engaging and meaningful experience for those involved. The fact that the march continued past the anticipated end time, with thousands still participating, further reinforces the notion of a powerful outpouring of sentiment. The observation about side streets filled with people waiting to join the main avenue, and the impact of those who joined late or left early, highlight the complexity of the event’s logistics and its true scope.
It’s also worth acknowledging the role of media coverage in shaping public perception. The observation that there were only a handful of articles on the protest, despite its considerable size, brings up the issue of media attention. The fact that major news outlets like the New York Times and the Daily News covered the event is crucial. The speed at which stories are published is always a consideration. The march likely concluded not long before, so it might take time for more articles to come out. This is where it is important for the marchers and supporters to share their own experiences and information.
There’s also a clear feeling that the movement wasn’t limited to a single location. Reports of similar displays of resistance in other cities, like Portland, Oregon, highlight the wide geographic spread of discontent. The news is clearly reaching people beyond New York. This suggests a nationwide – perhaps even international – resonance, indicating a broader trend of opposition to certain policies. The fact that such a diverse group of people, including the elderly and those with disabilities, were moved to participate further demonstrates the breadth and depth of the concerns at play. The positive and joyful atmosphere described, despite the serious subject matter, is really encouraging and adds a layer of solidarity to the day.
And as is so often the case in these kinds of protests, there’s even the expectation that some people might try to paint an alternative narrative. It’s a standard play in political discourse, to twist the narrative to support a conflicting point of view. It’s always good to be mindful of that. It’s also interesting to see the quick rebuttals, the insistence on the event being covered, and the quick spread of information across platforms like Fox News and MSNBC.
Overall, the “No Kings” march in NYC seems to have been a significant event, a powerful statement of dissent, and a testament to the ability of people to come together and express their views. The sheer numbers, the active participation, and the geographical reach of the movement give it a degree of prominence and impact that’s hard to ignore.