The “No Kings II” protests, held on October 18, 2024, presented a significant moment of political dissent across the country. Organizers claimed over 2,700 rallies nationwide, but turnout in key urban centers, particularly New York City, fell short of expectations. By early afternoon, the vibrancy of the morning march gave way to noticeable gaps in the crowd, prompting observers to share reports of diminishing numbers.
In New York City, areas like Times Square, traditionally associated with mass demonstrations, lacked the expected throngs. One social media post captured the atmosphere: “It’s only 2PM and the No Kings rally in densely populated New York City is SPARSE and CLEARING OUT.” This stark visual contrast raised questions about the efficacy of sustained public engagement in lengthy demonstrations.
While participation was robust in the morning, certain demographic factors appeared to influence overall turnout. The presence of many older Americans and retirees may have contributed to the drop-off in numbers, as fatigue set in after hours of standing under the sun. An elder protester, known as “Eric from the Village,” succinctly highlighted this: “I came out to make my voice heard, but I can’t keep standing in the sun another few hours.”
The protests aimed to spotlight opposition to what participants saw as authoritarian actions by the Trump administration. Issues ranged from immigration policies to the right to protest, demonstrating the diverse concerns of those involved. In smaller cities, local ties lent strength to protest efforts, yet larger urban events like New York City struggled to maintain momentum as the day lingered.
Contrasting with New York, Portland’s protest escalated into a more confrontation-driven atmosphere, culminating in the deployment of tear gas by police. After reports of non-compliance with orders, the police sought to maintain control. This resulted in at least three detentions, emphasizing the complicated dynamics often present in large-scale protests.
Meanwhile, cities like Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington D.C. showcased a more peaceful flow of events. In D.C., multitudes assembled on the National Mall, carrying trusted signs and slogans from various advocacy groups, creating a colorful tapestry of unity. Some even donned historical costumes, nodding to early American resistance to monarchical rule.
However, not all voices supported the movement. Prominent Republicans criticized the demonstrations, framing them as divisive and questioning their grassroots authenticity. House Speaker Mike Johnson labeled the protests “un-American political theater,” while others highlighted images from New York to challenge participants’ patriotism. A campaign staffer remarked on Truth Social, suggesting irony in the presence of “retired Canadians” at a U.S. protest.
On the organizing side, leaders pointed to the event’s visibility and mobilization as successes. “We brought out young people, families, and yes, even grandparents,” noted activist Elizabeth Szabat, emphasizing inclusivity. Renowned civil rights leader Dolores Huerta, at 95, declared the ongoing dedication to resistance, saying, “We are going to resist and keep on protesting.”
The participation of veterans added weight to the protests, as individuals like Iraq War veteran Brian Wofford framed their presence as a matter of civic duty, stating, “I was willing to die and lost a leg for this country.” These sentiments echoed throughout various protests, reinforcing a commitment to defending constitutional rights.
Despite the organizers’ claims of around 7 million participants—potentially marking “No Kings II” as one of the largest coordinated protests in U.S. history—verification remains a challenge. Experts stress the need for independent assessments through comparisons to past rallies, calling attention to the need for caution in such claims.
The decline in visible protesters as the afternoon advanced may bolster critiques, as it vividly illustrates the logistical hurdles of sustaining day-long events for diverse audiences. Across multiple cities, security assessments revealed most gatherings proceeded without major incidents, with Portland being an exception due to a tense standoff. This points to the importance of local police cooperation and effective pre-event training in de-escalation as critical elements for public demonstrations.
Overall, “No Kings II” emerged as a broad yet uneven expression of political sentiments. While it energized a multitude of communities, it faced challenges in sustaining visible engagement in major urban areas, particularly New York. For observers, the protests signal a commitment to civic engagement, yet they also invite skepticism regarding the grassroots nature of such movements. The differing images of bustling marches in some locations against quieter streets in others will undoubtedly influence ongoing discussions in the national political landscape.
"*" indicates required fields
