First campaign rally: Obama's 14,000 vs. Bush's 10,000

[Marzupialis]

George W. Bush's kickoff event for his re-election campaign drew 10,000 attendees, as reported today by Eric Boehlert of Media Matters via Twitter, in reaction to the media's obsession with the fact that "only" 14,000 showed up for Obama's first campaign rally.

https://twitter.com/#!/EricBoehlert/status/198900651135217666

[bahrbearian]

1. Its harder to find 10,000 millionaires, then it is 14,000 common folk

[Summer Hathaway]

2. Two hours ago

I received an email from a RW acquaintance, who quoted Alexander Marlow (of Breitbart), who stated that 14,000 attendees equated to a 'poorly attended' event.

Obama drew 14,000-plus people, which is 70% of the stadium's seating capacity.

What was particularly amusing is that Marlo went on to say: "To hold a campaign event in a room that you can't fill is a mistake ..."

I pointed out that it must have slipped Marlow's less-than-agile mind that when Romney delivered a key speech in Michigan two months ago at the home of the Detroit Lions, 1,200 people showed up in a venue built for 65,000.

Fuzzy math. It continues to be a problem for the wingers.

[Vorwarts]

4. Hate to say it... big difference

This hopefully will be a wakeup call for the party, and trying to gloss over it by comparing it to a Romney event during a primary in a state he won does nothing to assuage the reality of what happened.

This was the launch of a presidential campaign where you can pick the venue to launch.

It was a mistake by the campaign, and unfortunately, this will get a lot of play next week.

I'm just spelling out harsh realities. They cannot afford such mistakes; if it was after the launch, no big deal, but when it happens at thee launch... someone goofed.

[monmouth]

6. Photos of those "empty seats" were taken before our President arrived. Photos show they were

filled later on. Try harder next time.

[Vorwarts]

3. This is going to be a tough uphill fight

It doesn't matter what Bush had or did, and yacking about Bush is only going to harm Obama. Obama is running against Romney, and has to defend his record.
Bush is 3 plus years out of office. He and we should not go down that path... his call is Forward! Not backwards. Blaming Bush is a dangerous road and a lot of the key swing voters will not buy it. That is the harsh reality.

The Ohio launch...
Obama had masses of supporters when it got going in 08, and filled sites easily. This being a kick off of his campaign does not bode well on two fronts. They should have kicked it off in an area where they knew they would get an arena packed.
I cannot look at this with rose colored glasses... The campaign staff blew it big time, and it if this were 08, thousands would have been outside hoping to get in.

You may not like the above, but tell me how any of this was a good thing?

[OKNancy]

5. your concern is noted

[Evergreen Emerald]

7. hahahahaha

You are so funny.

I cannot believe this exaggerated /made up issue is getting any traction.

Whether or not the crowd estimation (within margin of error, by the way) was

10,000 v. 14,000? Come on. You can do better than that for an issue.

Hey, I have a couple: how about women's rights or middle class unemployment?

If I were a republican, I would not want Bush mentioned either. But, the reality is that Bush's policies got us into this mess--and Romney wants to continue those policies. Bush is relevant and fair game.

[SidDithers]

8. Byeeeee....

Sid

[Scurrilous]

9. K & R