this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
689 points (99.9% liked)

politics

24567 readers
2826 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The “No Kings” protests in every state may have been the biggest day of demonstrations in American history, a data analyst has suggested.

“Based on hundreds of crowd-sourced records of No Kings Day event turnout, and extrapolating for the cities where we don’t have data yet, it looks like roughly 4-6m people protested Trump across the U.S. yesterday,” independent data journalist G Elliott posted to X Sunday.

For reference, that’d mean Saturday’s demonstrations featured 1-2% of the total population of 340 million taking to the streets in more than 2,000 cities to voice their opposition to the increasingly authoritarian, far-right policies the president has pursued since assuming office for the second time.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 141 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

Biggest protest in US history so far.

[–] wanderwisley@lemm.ee 15 points 2 weeks ago
[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

The next one will probably be No Kings 2 combined with anti Iran war protests.

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

I was gonna say. Now we get to add anti-war protesting to an already lengthy list of complaints. This is going to get huge.

You want to protest the war? We have a whole anti-trump protest movement already warmed up and ready to go. C'mon in.

[–] burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

personally I'm excited for Gulf War V https://youtu.be/P0FYB2QkakU

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] the_abecedarian@piefed.social 66 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The protests show you have support. Find ways to resist ice

[–] distantsounds@lemmy.world 65 points 2 weeks ago

You just need to get in the way. Slow them down. It works

collapsed inline media

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

You see masked people with guns don't engage with them or ask for ID. That's dangerous for you, and it's not your job.

Instead, immediately call 911 and report a group of masked individuals with guns at your location.

[–] TipRing@lemmy.world 44 points 2 weeks ago

It was the first protest I've ever attended.

It won't be the last.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 34 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Historically, a regime falls when around 3.5 percent of the general population protest. You can do it, US, I believe in you!

[–] Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de 24 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Protest by itself achieves exactly jack shit. It's a tool, effective in conjunction with all the others, but you can't expect any change if you just put 3.5% of people on the streets. They will fuck around aimlessly, and then go home.

[–] Natanael@infosec.pub 11 points 2 weeks ago

Yes - it's a signal that a large fraction of the population is mad, it's not the protest that does it but rather the fact that there's so many people involved in opposing the regime that it becomes difficult for the regime to act and easier for the population to find like-minded to fight back.

It's the willingness to act that makes a difference.

[–] Anomalocaris@lemm.ee 9 points 2 weeks ago

it's at best a warning sign and a way to organise and prepare actual riots

once movement starts hurting the economy, regimes will collapse.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago

I think the statistic of 3.5 is more of a symptom rather than the cause of a regime's fall. For 3.5% to protest means that:

  1. Anger has reached a high level in the general population (a lot lot higher than 3.5%),
  2. The state of affairs is dire enough and hopeless enough that the trust that the system can improve on its own is very very low.

Probably other reasons.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] frezik@midwest.social 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Correct stat, but it's not like you get to 3.5% and then the regime magically falls. There's context around that. It requires keeping up the pressure.

We can't fizzle out the way the George Floyd protests did.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The George Floyd protests didn't fizzle out, but the Dems took power for 4 years. The protests we see now are built on the George Floyd protests, and include many of the same people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago

This oversells it. 3.5% is the level at which experts say can cause a "Tipping Point" for a trend to take hold, such as a dad like hula-hoops or yo-yos, to revolutions.

It's not guaranteed, though.

[–] Mister_Feeny@fedia.io 23 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

The other day I was seeing 13.1 million people, now I'm seeing 4-6 million, these are some big gaps.

A ton of people either way, but anyone know why the discrepancies are so big?

I can't even imagine how people are counted for things like this. The one I went to was in a town of about 100k total people so I'm sure it was on the smaller side of things, but if asked how many people were there I'd guess around 2000, but that would still just be a completely wild guess essentially. Is that how they count attendance for these things, wild guesswork?

[–] barkingspiders@infosec.pub 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The 13M type numbers came out early and captured a lot of attention but didn't have much legitimacy, but they anchored people's expectations. The smaller numbers are coming out now and have much more legitimacy. They may be smaller but in the big picture this is all still impressive, the movement is big and growing

[–] cenzorrll@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I saw 13.1 million come out from the alt national parks Facebook several days after seeing 5-11 million estimate. From that post it seems like they had people at each protest doing the work, whereas the others are back of the napkin estimates. So I'll go ahead and accept the absolute minimum conservative estimate being 4 million, while probably actually 10+ million.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I dont know in the US, but in my country, in Europe, where we have a tradition of taking to the streets, the police have developed some pretty good methods for counting, based on helicopter photos, video, and physical references.

I imagine that with drones, lidar, machine learning, and other technologies, you can probably now tally attendance to ridiculous accuracy

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 3 points 2 weeks ago

After lawsuits from Trump and friends against government and media for "underestimating" his crowds, both tend to stay out of that game. Just another case of dysfunction in the US.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I'm also confused because even the high estimates pale in comparison to the George Floyd protests, do those not count for some reason?

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

It's tricky to estimate things. If you take footage from drones or helicopters, how many people will be hidden behind trees? There are ways to guess, but those come with assumptions that can give you very different numbers. Local organizers, police, and the media can all come to different numbers with perfectly reasonable differences in assumptions or techniques.

This should be kept in mind for any big outdoor event where there's no specific entry points to count people going by. Affects Trump's parade, too.

[–] limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 2 weeks ago

The numbers only count if it’s constantly repeated, otherwise it’s just a sort of a national holiday.

“Here in the USA, we are so progressive that we actually protest 4 times a year”

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

I keep seeing estimates of everything from that 4-6 million up to 11 million or even 13 million.

I also saw estimates of 5 million for the Hands Off protests and these were definitely a lot bigger than that (certainly at least twice as big at my location), so either the Hands Off one was over-estimated or the 4-5 million for No Kings is underestimated.

[–] insomniac@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago

Isn’t it still significantly smaller than Earth day 1970? I’d also like to see how it compares to percentage of population since the US has more people now than when other big protests took place. But still, good job America.

[–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 6 points 2 weeks ago

And yet a different auditing group says it was 13.14 million protesters.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Did someone say "tea party?"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

As in % of the population?

load more comments
view more: next ›