The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guest: Sen. Mike Lee | 1/23/24

Episode Date: January 23, 2024

The 2024 New Hampshire primary is under way, and it’s not looking good for Nikki Haley. Stu explains why a weird and vengeful Biden move could embarrass him when the votes are in. The Supreme Court, with the help of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, has allowed the Biden administration to cut razor wire at the border. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) joins Glenn to explain why Barrett might have done this and how Texas and Americans should respond. Is there a better presidential primary system than the one we currently have? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to aboard Via Raille. Embarked and profite. Embarked and relax. Cirotay. Bookine. Oh, that also. And profite.

Villaray, the voice that we love that we love. Stu. Glenn! What a program. What a broadcast. What a show. Would you say? People will be saying it for years.

For years and years. This is the one we win the Emmy or the Grammy or the the EGOT or something. We're going to win for this one because it's quite a show. We're talking about Election Day in New Hampshire. Is this the last day of a primary in America? Is this the way it should be? What do the poll numbers look like?

We heard from a lot of people that were voting up in New Hampshire. We also talked to Mike Lee about the border decision made by the Supreme Court. He brought in some real problems and some real hope, I think. There's too many people saying, you know, we should defy the Supreme Court. Well, on this one, there's nothing to defy on the right. And Texas isn't going to have to defy anything. We'll talk about that on today's podcast and so much more. Right now, let me tell you about my Patriot Supply.

It's hard to know when emergency is going to occur. I mean, is it going to be now or, you know, 10 minutes from now? We don't know. But it could be something happens directly to you, something in your region, or even something nationwide or global. That's all up in the air, but bad things do happen from time to time. It's how we deal with those bad things that is the choice that we make. Make the choice now to prepare so when they do happen, you're a blessing to others. You are, you're not a burden.

You're a blessing. Get started today by going to MyPatriotsupply.com. You'll save $200 on an essential three-month emergency food kit. Over the years, My Patriot Supply has helped millions of American families prepare for emergencies. and yours should be next. Eat right when things go wrong. MyPatriotsupply.com. Order by 3 p.m.

You get same day free shipping. It's MyPatriotsupply.com. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. It is. I mean, it's going to be new, exciting. We're going to see things that never have happened really before. I can't wait to see how all of them turn out. Yes.

It's going to be incredible to watch. You know, interesting journey. And I don't think we're going to have to wait long. No. You know? I think, you know, sometimes when we've been saying that, we're like, you know, five, 10 years. I think we're, you know, days, weeks, months before we can see how this all turns out, which is great. We know we're going to live through it so we can see it.

Well, we don't know that, of course. Wow. You may not be able to see it because you'll be in prison. Anyway, so let's start with what's happening in New Hampshire. There is a new Trafalgar poll out. Yep. And it doesn't look good for Nikki Haley. No.

In fact, I would say my impression of this race is one that is moving quickly away from Haley having any impact in it. You know, if we would have talked about this about a month ago, maybe three weeks ago, right after Chris Christie drops out, there's a real chance of Nikki Haley kind of keeping this close. There's some polling that shows it in single digits. You know, Christie dropping out, most of her, his voters likely go. to her. Like all six of them? Well, he had 12% in New Hampshire. It was the one state he was competitive. So there was an argument to be made that this was a, I mean, it was always a leaning Trump race, but it was close to a toss up there a few weeks ago. What has happened since the Iowa results have come in is it has consolidated, I would say, around Trump. And the polling

has moved as well. I mean, it was, even the polls that showed Trump with a lead were showing him with a, you know, 13, 15 point lead in that range. Slew of polls came out today. All of them had Trump up 20 points or more. So this one does seem like it is moving towards Trump. I would not be surprised at all to see this to be real blowout territory. 23 in the Trump in the Trafalgar poll, insider advantage has it at 27, with Trump at 62% of the vote. J.L. Partners Daily Mail has it at 20 points.

the Boston Globe Suffolk University, which they're doing a tracking poll, kind of updating it by the day. 22 points. The previous poll had him up 19. It seems to be moving in the direction of Donald Trump, showing a real blowout. And at that point, you'd look at this and say, well, probably this is completely over. Because in South Carolina, I mean, it's pretty much of a career killer. I mean, even Walter Mondale won his state. It was the only one. But he at least. won his state against Ronald Reagan. That was bad. If she loses her own state, that's not good. That's not good. Now, we saw this with Marco Rubio in 2016, right, lost Florida, and that was the end of his campaign. Now, in a weird way, DeSantis is Florida and Trump was Florida. So he kind of has multiple home states, which is, you know, one of the nice features of being a billionaire.

You can kind of be from anywhere. Yeah. I live in all 50 states. Trump is not from South Carolina. quite clearly, and he already has a major lead there. Now, she has an impact. And there's an argument for her to say, why not stick around? She doesn't have, I would argue, the future of DeSantis and the party, or DeSantis has a real incentive to get out of the way, endorse Trump, fall in line. He's got a future. He's, you know, he has a bright future. And, you know, it is, once they indicted Donald Trump, once that happened he became the underdog he became Braveheart

and he became a symbol and you can't really beat a symbol can't beat a symbol right so I think that's true you know it was interesting to watch as Trump has kind of done this tour he's talked about DeSantis a little bit and you know of course as is the way with Trump you know he's very aggressive against you when you're

when you're running against him and the second you endorse him he's very, very nice to you. But when he made the statement in a couple places, you know, I'm retiring the DeSanctimonious name, the reaction from the crowd was cheering. Yeah. Like, the crowd does not hate DeSantis. No, they don't.

They actually really like him. He's still plus 40, 40 when it comes to favorability in the Republican Party. This is not a guy who destroyed himself in this race, despite what you're going to read online. No. But I don't know. He didn't do, honestly. He didn't do. this is not why I think she destroyed herself, but he didn't do what Nikki Haley did.

And that is come right after Donald Trump, be Chris Christie. I don't think she's done that. She's not been Chris Christie. No, she hasn't been Chris Christie, but she took some pages out of Chris Christie's notebook. The reason why she is out of, it's not going to work is she's out of step. Yeah, with the new Republican feeling, which is honestly, I mean, the left and the Democrats, I don't see any movement there except to the harder left. And that's not where Democrats live. I don't think the average Democrat in the middle of the country.

That's not what they are for and live for. We have actually become much more when it comes to wars and things, much more like the, Democratic Party used to be. We're suspicious of the machine. We're suspicious of the, you know, the industrial complex, military industrial complex, suspicious of the government, what we're doing overseas. We're becoming what the Democrats, we've moved. I think we're... You don't want to sign up for that description of what we've become. I'm going to... No, no. I mean, if you were a Democrat, that's the way you would view us. on the on war that's not where i am i'm still for look you come and poke us in the eye and give us a

bloody nose we're going to take you out but we're not going to get involved and i don't want to rebuild everything or anything i'm just going to say no and we do that a few times and then just leave we're we're going to teach people the lesson don't punch us in the face punch each other in the face. Well, I'm going to have an opinion maybe on that, but I'm not going to get involved. Right. And I think that is, you're right, out of this, out of step with the energy of the party. And that's why I'd ask you, Glenn, like, while I think DeSantis quite clearly has a future, might not be, I think, might not be the president in the United States in 2028. It might be though. Forty-eight is waiting. There could be. It could be that. But it's, it's some obviously prominent role. He is not, he is not done what, Chris Christie is done and like, you know, no one would ever want it. Nikki Haley, I think, falls closer to the Chris Christie vibe than the DeSantis vibe coming out of this, right?

Yeah. We're like, it feels like if she doesn't win here or do something here, her future in the party probably is there. Like, she probably will have some prominent position. There's a lot of money in one side of the Republican Party that is not the Donald Trump side. So it's not to say that she has no future, but like I don't think she's looking at herself as the 2028 candidate per se. And the reason I, so saying all that makes me think that her best piece of strategy is probably to stick around and pocket delegates over the long term and hope that Donald Trump runs

into some major legal problem that changes the dynamic of the race in some way. That's a dark way of looking at the future. But what's the upside for her to just drop out and go away? I don't know that there is one, especially with South Carolina next. But, yeah, you can run a bare-bones. I mean, Ryan Binkley's still in the race. I doubt he has tons and tons and he has personal wealth, but it does not have tons and tons of donors coming in.

Nikki Haley could run a bare-bones campaign doing interviews on MSNBC for the next six months and probably not. Yeah. She's already on the balance. Trafalgar is saying that, you know, there was a concerted effort to get Democrats to go out and vote for Nikki Haley and to get the independents who usually vote Democrat to come out for Nikki Haley. And now it's, that seems to be falling apart.

And people are just going to, if they do go, they're going to write in Joe Biden. Yeah. It's funny because the Democrats once again are making Trump's road easier. You can think of that what you will. But they, the vast majority of voters in New Hampshire are independents. It's not like other states. Because the way that the registration goes for this primary is if you're a Democrat, you cannot come today and register as a Republican and vote in the in the in the primary if you're an independent you can do

that so most people just stay independent and pick the primary that they want to go into just you know figuring out whatever they feel like at the time the long story on why the democratic party did this mr. president democracy himself who just cares so much about democracy wound up losing iowa new hampshire last time and then just deleted them off the calendar this time that's the show of democracy from joe biden and the democratic party but they have a law there that they have to have the first primary, so they're holding it. It's a non-binding primary. They're not getting their delegates. However, it's become a big deal because other candidates filed there. And last minute, everyone's coming in on the Biden side and saying,

maybe this would look bad for us if we don't win. Joe's the president of the United States. If Dean Phillips wins this primary, this is going to look bad. So they've dumped money in through super PACs to try to get people to write in Joe Biden, which is now, taking those independent Democratic leading voters that may have crossed for Nikki Haley over to the Biden side to try to get Biden to have a showing there so he doesn't embarrass himself. It's so crazy. It's so crazy. But it does. I think this is something that is legitimately going to hurt Haley's chances tonight because the people who just want to come out and hurt Trump are being told by their people, no, go right in Joe Biden instead. So I don't know. I think

that's part of the dynamic that's happening here. But I do. expect Trump to win and win probably handling tonight. Yeah, I think so too. I think the Democratic part of this is sort of fascinating in that, you know, this idea that they had to just eliminate these states. I haven't heard really anyone talk about this. This is the party that is pitching to you that all they do is care about democracy, wherever the chips may fall, your vote matters.

And this is the party that eliminated the two states. The lead candidate lost because, oh, they're too white. Yeah. What's crazy is, unreal. They talk about disenfranchising voters and how Republicans are disenfranchised. They don't want to count every vote. They will disenfranchise two states. Two states.

Two entire states. Traditional leaders in this process. Again, I don't like this process. I can't stand it. I don't understand why we do it this way. But, okay, you want to change it up. So they've now changed it to the state. you know, the one that just happened to rescue Joe Biden's campaign.

You know, Joe, as soon as he wins, I mean, they talk about Trump doing this stuff, right? And they act as if he's Mr. Anti-Democracy. Look at what they're doing. These poor people in New Hampshire are doing a Democratic primary because they are required to buy state law. And then they're just not going to give them any delegates for it. Because Joe Biden didn't like that he lost last time. He was angry that he lost Iowa. He lost New Hampshire.

South Carolina let him wins, therefore they get rewarded with the first primary. Does anybody notice that every time they accuse somebody of doing something, that's what they're doing? Has anybody noticed that? Does seem to happen over and over and over. Oh my gosh. It's crazy. Every single time. You know, Donald Trump, if he gets elected, he's going to try to put his opponents

in jail. What? That's what you're doing. That is what you're doing now. Currently, everyone knows you're doing it. We all watch the news. We all know that you're trying to take your opponent off the ballot. And like, what form of democracy is that?

What form of democracy has one name on the ballot? What form of democracy? It's the Saddam Hussein-style democracy. What what what democracy Claims someone is an Insurrectionist When he's not ever not just been tried and found guilty Not been tried

Not even charged with that Not even charged in the impeachment Right for it And all of a sudden they just claim He is an insurrectionist Without any legal anything They did it from day one too which is pathetic.

They knew they could have charged him with insurrection. They didn't because they knew they would never win it. And then they just started saying it on television over and over again, hoping that they could use that later as the evidence to get them tossed off the ballot. You know, I just keep coming back to, you know, who the real villain here is, is us, us, us, us, us, us. The people who are just dead asleep and are like, ah, nothing's going on. It's just, you know, it's a same-o, same-o. No, it's not.

No, it's not. No, it's not. No joke. No joke. I'm not joking, folks. The best of the Glenn Beck program. Senator Mike Lee, because I will lead and not follow, I believe, not doubt, I will create, not destroy. Because I'm a force for good, I'm a force for God, I'm a leader, and we can define, defy the odds.

I need your help today in understanding the news and where we go from here because if it's if it's not this, it will be something because we're facing constitutional crisis after constitutional crisis. And I'm not sure how to react, but I know there's a lot of people saying this is out of line. We should ignore the Supreme Court. but that makes us them. But what else are you going to do? First, let's go over what the Supreme Court decided yesterday, Mike. Okay, so yesterday the Supreme Court issued an order. Not an opinion, just a very brief order, undoing an order that was released by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on December 19th.

Now, remember, the courts of appeals are numbered throughout the country, the Fifth Circuit, includes the state of Texas. And the Fifth Circuit on December 19th had issued an order in joining the Biden administration from taking down barriers put in place by the state of Texas. The state of Texas wanted to make sure that they restore some semblance of the rule of law in their state. They decided to put up these barriers along the border, say, we don't want to do this. The Biden administration started taking actions indicating its plans to take down the

concertino wire and the other barriers. So Texas brought suit against the Department of Homeland Security and others in the Biden administration and said, we want an injunction telling them, telling the Biden administration that may not take down these barriers. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on December 19th issued such an injunction, and immediately the Biden administration went to the Supreme Court and filed an emergency application to vacate that injunction, in other words, to undo it. And the operative portion of the order from yesterday is just found in a sentence.

It's inclusive of a total of four sentences, but this one is the operative language. which the December 19th, 2003 order of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is vacated. That's it. Then there's a separate line that says Justice Thomas, just Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh would deny the application to vacate conjunction. So with that, the Supreme Court of the United States just undid this. And what this tells us then is that it was Chief Justice Roberts, along with Justice Kagan, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Jackson,

who were in the majority on this. And that is all we know about their rationale, all we know about what happened. So all of a sudden, Texas, having won this round of litigation, the previous round of litigation in the Court of Appeals, is now sort of back to square one, being told you lose. And yet we don't have the analysis as to why or what this means in everything is in a state of disorder. So, first of all, can you explain Barrett's joining the other side? I mean, any guess to what she was thinking? Yeah. Okay, so all I can do is guess.

All I can do is offer conjecture because there's no analysis. If I were to guess, I... Hey, God, just a second, before you go on, is that unusual that there was no analysis? It's not unusual given the procedural possible. through in which they find themselves. In other words, this side of the court's docket, the emergency applications docket, is itself something that the justices have to do as they're doing their other ordinary business writing opinions in other cases.

And because of the nature of it, it's a yes or no up or down thing most of the time. So that part's not surprising. But it is surprising, given the nature of this dispute and the complexity of an urgency of this, that we would have this, it's at least difficult to figure out what to do. So if I had to guess as to what her analysis might have been and that of Chief Justice Roberts, it would be that they reached some kind of conclusion that, you know, we don't want the courts to be weaponized. We don't want to be perceived, certainly as justices,

as playing only on the team of the political party of the presidents who appointed us. And therefore, I, we speaking, you know, either as Justice Roberts or Justice Barrett or both of them, we're going to decide to side with the Democrats on this one so that we don't over politicize this. But I really find that difficult to grasp that they would do it in that circumstance. And yet I don't see a good reason. I don't see an explanation that makes a lot of sense. It goes much beyond that because I don't understand why it's a bad thing to have the state of Texas trying to protect the people of Texas from these swarms of people who are pouring across their borders without documentation and destroying property along the way, converting property as if it were their own and destroying it as they cross in illegally. I don't understand what the compelling need is or what principle of law would be violated by the state of Texas trying to protect the people of Texas.

Let me ask you something. The Constitution says that it is the federal government's job to protect the borders, but they're not doing their job, obviously. In fact, they're enabling those people trying to come in and they are enabling drug cartels, drugs coming over, killing our citizens, criminals, coming over. We know terrorists have come over now. They're enabling those who rape and sell into sex slavery. I mean, it's bad stuff. It's not even close. And what the justices are saying is, Texas, you don't have the right to protect your own borders. That's our job. Let me, let me ask you, if a military came over, let's say these 10 million people all had military uniforms, but only a of them had guns. And it was clear this was an invasion by an army. And the federal government

decided to say, nah, well, they can keep crossing in. Would they have the right to say to Texas or anybody else, you don't have the right to have a militia or, you know, call up your National Guard and push these people back? Is the Constitution a... A suicide pack? Certainly not. And specifically in that kind of circumstance, it wouldn't be. There are two separate provisions of the Constitution that tell us this. One is found in Article 4, Section 4, which says that the United States shall guarantee to every state a Republican form of government.

And on application of a state, typically the legislature, shall protect each of them from invasion. So that's an affirmative obligation by the United States to protect each state from invasion. Now, there's also something that defends in the Constitution, a separate right of the state to stand up for itself upon being invaded. That's found in Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3, which is a provision that tells the states a bunch of stuff that they can't do on their own without the consent of Congress. but then contains a carve-out for circumstances in which a state is actually invaded. Yeah, but the only difference in one scenario... The only difference is in these two scenarios is 10 million people are coming over, not in uniform. But that's it. I mean, it's an invasion.

That's right. And it's no less of an invasion, simply because they're not organized formally as a military. military, or we don't think of them. They were not a military, but it's an invasion nonetheless. Throughout history, there have been instances of invasions of many countries around the world. Some are armed, organized invasions. Others are not. But it's an invasion nonetheless. They are being invaded by people who don't belong there. And people who have threatened to subvert the order of and the rule of law as they enter. So the fact that there is an invasion and the fact that the state of Texas feels the need to protect its own citizens from this puts Texas, in my view, in a very solid position.

Now, I assume that for the four justices who dissented, that is for justices Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch, that that was their rationale. we're all still grasping to understand what the rationale of the majority was other than, as you say, probably reasoned, well, immigration is the thing that is done by the federal government, and it's not done by the state of Texas, therefore case closed. But that doesn't answer the question. It doesn't answer the Article 1, Section 10 or the Article 4, Section 4 question that we just discussed. And as a practical matter, it leaves the State of Taxis.

is in an untenable position. Okay, so now, Mike, I'm, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, I, and, and, and, and, if you, and, you as a and as adults. And if you as a listener can't handle that, then you should go away. Because I think some questions need to be asked. And if not now, very soon on whatever the next topic might be. You know, Mike, there was a guy named Martin Luther King, I know you know, and he taught people how to resist peacefully.

And nobody's teaching that. Nobody's pushing for that. Our pastors are all out to lunch. But there are people now who are saying we need to go. In fact, could you read Tucker Carlson's tweet from yesterday? I don't have that handy, but I can look for it. Basically, he says, where are the men of Texas standing up? Well, the men of Texas standing up, I don't know exactly what that means, Tucker, because

many of us are standing up and we're speaking out. At what point do people, are people justified at all to say, yeah, it makes me kind of like them, but we got to stop this. So in other words, defying the Supreme Court and just doing it anyway, I don't like that. Now, look, the rule of law is important to us. That's the whole reason why Texas is trying to take this action to begin with is to preserve the rule of law. And for that reason, everything possible needs to be done to comply with the rule of law, even if it means going along with a court order that one doesn't like and finding other ways to be persuasive to get it done.

But keep in mind something, Glenn. The Supreme Court's order from yesterday does not order the state of Texas to do anything. As I read it, all it says is that they vacate the Fifth Circuit's order from the 19th of December, which had itself enjoined the Biden administration from taking down the barricades. So there's nothing affirmatively that the state of Texas has to do in order to comply with this order from the Supreme Court. It just lifts the legal impediment from the Biden administration that had previously told them don't take down the barricades.

Right. So one interesting question is what exactly is the Biden administration going to do now? Is the Biden administration really, seriously, with a straight face? Are they going to say, yes, cut the wires? Yes. Remove all the concertino wire. Yes. And do all that.

Glenn, remember something. I think we have seen in the last month more people pouring across our border unlawfully than has ever been observed in our nearly two and a half centuries of existence as a nation. And our border patrol agents and everybody else who works with them on this, they're all overwhelmed. I've been down to the border just in the last few weeks alone. I lived down on the border in the McCown area as a missionary for two years and know this area well. Are they really going to say this is where we want our efforts' focus to be going in there, removing barricades whose sole purpose is to protect the people of the state of Texas, and frankly, even the people who are being human trafficked along the border?

Aren't they really going to say that's where we want them? Bring up the wire cutters, stop processing everything else. They've already done that, Mike. They've already done that. They were cutting the wires in Texas. I mean, what makes you think they won't do that? What? They were cutting them.

They had a stop for three weeks. But in the meantime, Texas put down a whole lot more wire. And they've got more wire now. I mean, this really would be a massive undertaking. And if after the month of December, 2003, just last month, are they really going to go back in and undertake that huge effort again? if so this raises all kinds of other questions and if so I think this could end up being the very best thing the single greatest momentum producing exercise for the Donald Trump campaign because this is the president of the United States who loves lawlessness if this is truly what he

wants to do and we've got to make that point loud and free you're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program so it's it's one of those shows where I I've kind of given up, you know. And it's like, eh, whatever. And those, those are always fun. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I know I'm having fun, Glenn. Yeah, I know you are. I know you are. Well, it started as a

very difficult day today, you know. Yeah. I would say, would you say, Glenn, the country's a bit on edge? I think it is. I think that's safe to say. Yeah. That's what I detect. I detect the country as a whole, just a tad on the edge. Maybe just, you know, they're, okay, I mean, let's just say, you know, if the United States was an apartment building, about 80% of its citizens would be on the ledge looking down at the traffic right now. Yeah, right.

Longingly, at the Hyundai Sonata writing below them. Right. And there's not really anybody down there with a bull. horn that's saying anything, but I don't know, give it a whirl. Might be better. Just don't block traffic if you can. Land on the sidewalk. No, it does seem that way.

And I think it's interesting. I mean, I think this is for the conservative audience, probably a good day generally, right, right? Like, I think it's a good day. The overwhelming favorability for Donald Trump and the Republican voting populace. is I think well reflected here and probably will be reflected tonight. You never know. I mean, there are some reports on the ground from New Hampshire. Oh, actually, everyone's showing up.

And it's going to mean, we hear this every single election. I don't expect anything out of the ordinary today. And I am, it is interesting to think about this process as a whole, though, which is weird. Right. Like the fact that we go to Iowa and then New Hampshire and then like it's just over. Like, no one in Texas certainly is voting in this primary in a way that it will likely matter. You know, everyone, you know, and that's just the state I'm in. Every 48 other states are saying, yeah, like, we didn't really get a voice here.

It's a weird thing. I actually believe this. I don't think we should do it like this anymore. I'm with you on that. Are you? Yeah. Because I don't know if I'm in the majority or not on this one. But, like, I honestly think the contest we're talking about, okay, is a national.

contest. The fact that you can't figure out how to win a national contest for the primary is a problem. Like, we can all act like winning Iowa by itself is really important or New Hampshire is really important, impressive, and it is. But it's a different ball game, right? The rules are different. The things you do are different. But here's the problem with that. First of all, you are not a dictator and you can't make all the states do it the way you want to do. If I could be like Joe Biden, I can do that. Well, okay. Yes. But the other thing is, is it will keep people out that don't have massive war chests. You know, I don't know about that, though.

Let me push back against that a little bit. Number one, it's really, really hard to buy a national primary, or let's call it a regional primary. Maybe you do, you break it into four regions and do four different days. But like, it would be hard to buy that because it's too expensive for everyone. It's no longer difficult to buy one of these early states because there's so much money flowing into them. So now you kind of do, in a way, push out smaller candidates. I know there's, you know, you get to go to all the counties and all that stuff and there's something to that. But like, you're not going to do that in the general election.

It's a different skill set that's important and can be important in certain states. But I would argue, Glenn, you know, with social media, the way it is now, with access to media the way it is now, it's not the same as 1954. Yeah, I agree with you. But I mean, you know, let me play the devil's advocate here. I mean, I'd feel bad for Iowa. I mean, who would go to Iowa then? Every four years, people show up and they're like, hey, you know what? Every hotel is sold out. Every corn dog is sold. Yes. No, I know. That's true. And it would not be as, I mean, some people would go. but you're right.

Again, I'd like to remind this is one of those shows where we're off, we've given up. We've given up. We've given up. But like, I think with the access to social media more than ever you have an opportunity to spread your message at low cost.

And honestly, like this process is this process getting us the bootstrapped candidate like, I don't know, Mitt Romney? The bootstrap candidate like Donald Trump, a multi-billionaire? Okay. So you're making good points here. The guy who got hundreds of millions of dollars from China is now the president of the United States.

You at least have a chance to see the candidates and meet the candidates and they have a chance to meet and see and hear you. But I'm not in Iowa. I'm not in New Hampshire. I've met them all. I've heard tons about them. Okay. Yeah. I'm not saying I've actually physically met them. But like, you know, they were talking. I was listening to some interview today and they're like, yeah, you know, I, you know, Joe Biden didn't come here for the primary. but, you know, he's been running since 1972. So, you know, all of my relatives have met him six and seven times. All right. Like, I guess that's one way to win. But it's not reality.

You're not talking. These candidates aren't going to meet the everyday voters six or seven times in New Mexico or North Carolina, which are also important states. I'm just saying that show you can put together the same type of organization that can win a general election to win a primary. And using the Internet. is a great idea, especially now that we have no misinformation and the government is just going to make sure that all

voices are heard that, you know, need to be heard. It's true. I mean, like, I understand that, but I don't think that that is just as applicable during a general election campaign. This is the thing I hate about some certain sports where baseball is my ultimate example of this, where you have to go through...

You just hate America's pastime. I'm just going to hit this real quick, and I know Glenn's not going to understand it, but for you the audience, you go through the entire year needing five starters. right to get through 162 games. Then you get into a playoff series and it's a three game series and you only need three starters. It's like a totally different build of your team to get through this.

Now, this might sound a little bit like someone whose team has lost multiple short series in a row. So I would just throw that out the window for a second. No, I don't. But my point is like the person who can perform well in a national or at least regional primary is likely the candidate that will perform well in a general election where they're doing the same thing,

not a totally different thing that they're doing in one small state where they don't need any money and they don't need to raise the money. They can go door to door and meet Bob and Karen and everyone else who's going to be at the voting booth. I just don't know the most efficient thing. And I'd like to have a voice in it too. Right. But the voice of California, which nobody's ever going to California, I mean, they'd be stabbed to death.

Not enough secret service for people to go campaign in California. But that's a different story. But let's just use California as example. There's nobody weirder than the people in California right on the coast, right? Okay. I mean, you have to, I mean, a candidate should be exposed to them so they can go, holy crap, we've got to do something about those people out in California, okay? And the only ones that are probably more weird are the ones in Hawaii.

So there's a good reason to take a star off a flag, maybe even two. A president won't know that unless he goes out in action. sees from himself because he'd be like, you know, the Golden State. It's nice. I've seen it on TV. Baywatch was great. You know. I was. I think it would in, I will say this. If you had this possibility, you'd have different, interesting different things pop up. For example, when we have in Iowa, people go there, they talk about ethanol and farm policy. And we get all these updates. Like, what about like pooper scooper policy in California?

Yeah. How do you get the poop off the streets? You got to have the president. That's a job only the president can do. Right. That's true. It's got to be a nationalized issue. But wouldn't it be fun instead of seeing people go to the Iowa State Fair?

just going, we're walking around the streets of L.A. just with a pooper scooper in a plastic bag and just picking up human feces and putting it in. Oh, I would like that. That would be, that's the type of door-to-door retail campaigning I want. If we turn this whole thing around and we look at candidates that have already won and we go back into the booth and say, which candidate should have to now spend his whole time just picking up the poop on the streets in California? I mean, I'd show up at the polls. I think a lot of people would show, you know, I think there'd be a high. turnout for that one. I'd watch where I stepped when I walked toward the polls.

But yes, I'd show up. I'd show up to see that happen. See, I feel like this would be an interesting change to consider. Like, if you had a northeast, west, south, four days, over four weeks in a month, where it's not, you know, like, it's nice to have a little bit of the winnowing process, I think. But like, prove that you can do something before you have to do it in a bigger venue, right? Do the thing you're supposed, don't do a totally different thing and show I can win in a couple of small states. Do, like, Super Tuesday is a good example of that. If you can win,

if you can do really well on Super Tuesday, you're showing something that's similar to what you're going to need to accomplish in November. Winning in Iowa is not similar to what you're going to do in November. I'm sorry. It's a totally different thing. Well, little Jimmy Muck and Futch, who was just running to be president because he was trying to raise enough. money for children without eyelids doesn't get a chance because Jimmy doesn't have enough money for even a regional campaign. Oh my gosh. Okay. And Jimmy was running for office? He was running for office. He wanted to run for office. But I've just taken it out of the process. You took him out. And now all those people that were born without eyelids, they're not going to have any eyelids.

I mean, now dry their eyes are going to be. They're going to be very dry. Very dry. And they may have to have your eye surgery. It's something else. Yeah. Well, no, they would, you know, maybe I would, you know, maybe I could give him some of my eyelids because I apparently have too much. Too much eyelid. Yeah. That's a big glit. Or lazy eyelid. I don't know what it is.

Whatever it is. I would like if you happen to be someone in America who doesn't happen to live in Iowa or New Hampshire would like to have some opinion as to what happens in this race. How about we rotate? So like every time there's three new states, you never know. I mean, I think that's better than what we do now. I think there's a thing where like the structures are so well built in these states. You know, everyone knows how to do it. And then like there's a game plan that that's why I think it keeps happening.

So you want, let's say, we just say, hey, let's just roll the dice. And the first three primaries are Oregon, Washington State and California. I don't think rolling the dice would be a good way of doing it. And I think you try to capture some element of what the party would look like or what the electorate would look like. Yeah, okay. So rolling the dice might be a little bit difficult. I wouldn't want California, Oregon and Washington. I wouldn't want any of them separately deciding who the president was going to be.

But why? Just have a primary day. We all just know when it's coming. It's, I don't know, March 1st, and everyone goes and March 1st, and you just go and you vote wherever you are, just like the actual election. And people cast their votes for their candidates. You get a couple months of lead up. What about those poor veterans that lost their legs and can't make it? You want to just take the...

Oh, we're going to mail them like 42 ballots each. They can just fill them out for... Okay, good. All right. We got that. Yeah, good. I was just wanted to make sure. When you were little,

you were trying to make sure. Always in trying to negotiate, to exchange these cards of hockey, these bonhom, these bracelets, even des collation. You know that each thing has a value, well,

before to have to have gotten. And, and the things have not really changed. Negoti to sitre t-D you can't do renuwee with your instinct of negotiation. With without operation gratuit,

no amount minimum, and no free month, and you are made for negotiate for negotiate for

you know, and the app negotiates to right right