Best of the Program | Guest: Sen. Mike Lee | 1/23/24

Attention, all small biz owners.

At the UPS store, you can count on us to handle your packages with care.

With our certified packing experts, your packages are properly packed and protected.

And with our pack and ship guarantee, when we pack it and ship it, we guarantee it because your items arrive safe or you'll be reimbursed.

Visit the ups store.com/slash guarantee for full details.

Most locations are independently owned.

Product services, pricing, and hours of operation may vary.

See Center for Details.

The UPS store.

Be unstoppable.

Come into your local store today.

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

EGOD 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 tell you about My Patriot Supply.

It's hard to know when an 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 that 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, MyPatriot 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 Blandbeck program.

Stu,

is this going to be a fun day?

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.

It's an interesting journey going on.

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 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's 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.

JL 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.

Yeah, because in South Carolina,

I mean, it's pretty much of a career killer.

I mean, even Walter Mondale won his state against, 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 one of the nice features of being a billionaire.

You can kind of be from anywhere.

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 bright future.

It is

once they indicted Donald Trump, once that happened,

he became the

underdog.

He became Braveheart.

Okay.

Yeah.

And he became a symbol.

And you can't really beat a symbol.

You 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.

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 do, honestly, he didn't do, and 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.

I don't know.

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

is it's not going to work is she's out of step 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...

I don't want to sign up for that description of what we've become.

No, no, I mean,

if you were a Democrat, that's the way you would view us 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 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 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 of the United States in 2028.

It might be, though.

48 is waiting.

It could be.

It could be that.

But it's some obviously prominent role.

He has not done what Chris Christie has done.

And

no one would ever want to.

Nikki Haley, I think, falls closer to the Chris Christie vibe than the DeSantis vibe coming out of this, right?

Where 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 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 said, 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

you can run a bare bones.

I mean, Ryan Binkley's still in the race.

I doubt he has tons and tons, I mean, he has personal wealth, but he 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

beginning.

Falger is saying that you know there was a concerted effort to get Democrats to go out and vote for Nikki Haley yeah 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 gonna if they do go they're gonna write in Joe Biden yeah it's it's funny because the the Democrats once again are making Trump's road easier you can think of that what you will but they

the vast majority of 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 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

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 and 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.

This is so crazy.

It's aesthetic.

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 handily 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 these states.

I haven't heard really anyone talk about this.

This is the party that is 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 that the lead candidate lost

because,

oh, they're too white.

Yeah.

What's crazy is

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 win.

Therefore, they get rewarded with the first primary.

Does anybody really notice that every time they accuse somebody of doing something,

that's what they're doing?

Has anybody noticed that?

It does seem to happen over and over again.

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 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

for it.

And all of a sudden, they just claim he is an insurrectionist without any legal anything.

And 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 him tossed off.

They just keep coming back to who the real villain here is.

Us!

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 sample sample 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 glenbeck program

senator mike lee because

i will lead and not follow, I believe and 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 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 enjoining the Biden administration from taking down barriers put in place

by

the state of Texas.

See, the state of Texas,

wanting to make sure that

they restore some semblance of the rule of law in their state, decided to put up these barriers along the border, saying, we don't want to do this.

The Biden administration started taking actions indicating its plans to take down the Concertina 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 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.

The December 19, 2023 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, Justice 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, and 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...

Hang on just a sec.

Before you

was no analysis,

it's not unusual given the procedural posture 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 and urgency of this.

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,

either as Chief 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 ask you, if...

A military came over, let's say these 10 million people all had military uniforms,

but

only a few of them had guns.

And it was clear this was an invasion by an army.

And the federal government decided to say, nah,

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

call up your National Guard and

push these people back?

Is the Constitution a suicide pact?

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.

And 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 invading.

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, or we don't think of them.

They are 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 threaten to subvert the order of things 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, Polito, 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 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.

Well, it doesn't answer the the Article I, Section 10, or the Article IV, Section 4 question that we just discussed.

And as a practical matter, it leaves the state of Texas Texas in an untenable position.

Okay, so now,

Mike,

we have to have a serious adult conversation, so we have to start modeling these conversations and having these conversations and

have them as rational, reasonable citizens of a republic.

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.

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,

remove all the concertino wire,

and do all that?

Glenn, remember something.

We have seen in the last month

more people pouring across our border unlawfully than has ever been observed in our nearly two 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 McCowan area as a missionary for two years.

I know this area well.

Are they really going to say this is where we want

our efforts focused?

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.

Are they really going to say that's where we want them?

Bring up the wire cutters, stop processing everything else.

Everything else you're doing.

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?

They were cutting them.

They had to stop for three weeks, but in the meantime, Texas put down a whole lot more wire.

And they've got more wire wire now I mean it this really would be a massive undertaking and if after

after the month of December 2023 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 a 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 clear.

You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.

So

it's one of those shows where

I've kind of given up, you know, and it's like, eh, whatever.

And 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 if if the united states was an apartment building

uh

about 80 of its citizens would be on the ledge looking down at the traffic right now yeah right and they're longingly right longingly at the hyundai sonata right riding below them right and there's not really anybody down there with a bullhorn

that's saying anything but, I don't know, give it a whirl.

Might be better.

Just don't block traffic if you can.

Man on the sidewalk.

Yeah.

So.

No, it does seem that way.

And I think it's interesting.

I mean, I think this is a, 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 for New Hampshire.

Oh, actually, everyone's showing up and it's going to, you know, 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.

And 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 and 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 can be like Joe Biden, I can do that.

Well, okay, yes.

But

the other thing 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?

I'm going to.

Every hotel is sold out.

I'm going to solve it.

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.

Just like.

But again, I'd like to remind this is one of those shows where

we're offending everybody.

We've given up.

Yeah.

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 getting us

the bootstrapped candidate, like, I don't know, Mitt Romney,

the bootstrapped candidate, like Donald Trump, a multi-billionaire?

So you're making good points.

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.

I'm not saying I've actually physically met them, but like, you know, they were talking, I was still listening to some interview today, and they're like, yeah, you know, Joe Biden didn't come here for the primary, but, you know, he's been running since 1972.

So we, 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 like, 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.

That'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, uh, certain sports where baseball is my, my ultimate example of this is where you have to go through.

I just hate the America's past.

I'm just going to hit this real quick thing.

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.

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 problem fishing 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.

And 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 an 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 and actually sees for 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?

Oh,

and,

you know, I think it would, I will say this, if you had this possibility, possibility, you'd have different, interesting, different things pop up.

For example, what 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, they're just going to walk around the streets of LA just with a pooper scooper in a plastic bag and just picking up human human feces and putting it in.

I would like that.

That would be

a lot of 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 up.

I think there'd be a higher 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 north, east, 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 to, don't do a totally different thing and show I can in a couple of small states.

Do you 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 Muckinfuch, 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.

And Jimmy was running for office?

He was running for office.

He wanted to run for office.

He wanted to run for office because he was 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, how 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 at some point.

Yeah, well, no, they would, you know, maybe I could give them some of my eyelids because I apparently have too much.

Too much eyelid.

Yeah.

That's a big goal.

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 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.

And I think rolling the dice would be a good way of doing it.

I think you'd 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 different.

Because I wouldn't want California, Oregon, and Washington.

I wouldn't want any of them separately deciding who the president was going to be.

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

they cast their votes for their candidates.

You get

the war veterans that lost their legs and can't make it.

You want to just take the

42 ballots each.

They get to fill them out for a while.

Don't worry.

We got that.

Of course, I was just wanting to make sure.

At Girls Jr., Latebirds, get the bag.

Build your own bag.

After 8 p.m.

for $5.99.

Get a Cali Classic single, fries plus chicken stars.

Or get a spicy chicken sandwich, onion rings plus chicken stars.

This deal is stacked.

Don't hit the sack.

Hit the drive-thru.

Build your own bag.

Just $5.99.

Only at Girls Jr., you build it, you eat it.

Order your bag on the app and unlock even more Burgers Insides.

Available for a limited time at participating restaurants.

Tax not included, price may vary, not valid in the offer, discount or combo.

See ya for details.