Topic: Crowd Size

Mainstream media outlets like CNN are highlighting Elizabeth Warren's growing crowd sizes as a sign of her rising momentum in the 2020 Democratic primary. However, critics point out that Bernie Sanders consistently draws larger crowds that receive significantly less coverage. President Trump has also commented on Warren's crowds, claiming his own remain far superior.

Barbra Streisand tweeted that news of President Trump's actions causes her to eat pancakes and gain weight. In a separate media obsession, CNN filed a FOIA request for National Park Service photos to compare the inauguration crowd sizes of Obama and Trump. The hosts characterize these stories as evidence of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" in the media and celebrity circles.

An investigation into the viral photos comparing the 2009 and 2017 inauguration crowds reveals a lack of verifiable EXIF metadata in mainstream media publications. The Washington Post published comparisons without technical data to prove the exact timing of the shots, which is critical for an accurate comparison. The hosts note that satellite imagery from the National Reconnaissance Office could easily settle the dispute but remains unreleased.

The focus on inaugural crowd size is analyzed as a strategic "distraction" intended to shift media coverage away from the Women's March. CNN's Gloria Borger and other pundits noted that the administration's aggressive stance on attendance numbers successfully dominated the news cycle.

Donald Trump continues to fill large stadiums with 15,000 to 20,000 attendees, while Hillary Clinton reportedly struggles to fill smaller venues. Observations from a recent Trump rally in Arkansas suggest the crowds are composed of diverse families rather than the "hateful" caricatures described by political opponents. In contrast, Clinton's appearance at a Baptist Convention required closing off sections of the hall to hide empty seats.

The recurring media narrative of "empty seats" at Donald Trump's South Carolina events is characterized as a potential political dirty trick. The segment draws parallels to the Nixon era, where activists used public humiliation tactics to undermine candidates. The hosts argue that these "memes" are coordinated efforts by the media to signal a decline in a candidate's popularity.