Sunday's march by the Garden was the big one. The New York Times is saying 500,000, which is even more than the organizers originally claimed after the march (their own number was 400,000). But the AP says they were told by a law enforcement official that it was 120,000, which is about right, I think.
As for the protestors, the Times played up the families, and the really old people. But I would say, from what I saw on CSPAN, that the crowd was extremely white, with a combination of the usual suspects of young radicals and 60s retreads. And there were Kerry signs in the crowd, as well as some pretty obscene anti-Bush ones. Very few people in the crowd looked like typical Americans, that's for sure.
Oh I see NYCVirago. Didn't know there were more than one marches. But anyway, it seems to confirm our hypothesis that these are the looney left (ageing boomers). From what I read from various articles it seems to me NYC has plenty of looney left. Do they really constitute the vast majority of New Yorkers? And are they also the who caused all the graffitis on NYC's subways in the 1970s?
Thanks again for the answers.
X_CDN_EH, I'm not surprised by your sister's remarks. I think the non-US West really tolerated rather than liked Clinton, and the thought "Yeah, this guy [Clinton] is far right, to be sure, but who from America isn't far right? Besides, if a Republican happens to be the USA President it would have been infinitely worse." is extremely widespread here as well. I would say that puts her on the centre-left by Canada (and New Zealand, but NOT Australia) standards.