Ep. 85 dissects Super Tuesday’s fallout, where Trump’s wins exposed GOP fractures and media narratives like the Times’ misleading unemployment claims (ignoring workforce dropout rates) and Clinton’s "unity" facade. Andrew Clavin highlights Cruz’s conservative resistance and Rubio’s brokered-convention gambit while mocking WSJ’s blame-the-voter economic spin. Trump’s KKK flirtation and Clinton’s corruption contrast sharply, with Clavin arguing voter anger—not policy—drives the race. He rejects despair over conservatism’s future, framing it as an eternal struggle, and hints at a third-party split if Trump hijacks the GOP, ending with Shakespeare’s Henry V rallying cry for principle over defeatism. [Automatically generated summary]
Donald Trump took immense strides through seven states, crushing buildings and citizens alike beneath his gargantuan clawed feet.
Scientists now believe the Trump phenomenon is the result of an illegal nuclear blast that released radiation into the ocean, resulting in a mutation of rage into stupidity and unleashing the gigantic creature from his murky bed on the ocean floor.
The Trump rampage left several cities in smoking ruins and thousands either dead or just so depressed it's hard to tell the difference.
Soldiers with tanks and bazookas were unable to stop the rampaging Trump, whose scaly, lizard-like skin seemed to repel the ordinance without allowing any damage to his scaly, lizard-like brain.
In the Democratic primaries, voters reported an enormous shadow passing over the sun that soon revealed itself to be a woman in a pantsuit with blonde hair and the tremendous leathery wings of a pterodactyl.
Breathing fire on the terrified civilians below, the flying reptile emitted this hideous cry caught on tape.
I know, right?
That'll give you nightmares.
Several religious leaders have speculated that the appearance of these beasts on the American political landscape may be punishment for the sins of the world and even an omen of the end of days.
But MSNBC host Chris Matthews says he's looking forward to the sequel when the two beasts will clash in a titanic battle that will leave the entire country a heap of steaming rubble.
When told this wasn't a movie but actual reality, Matthews responded, oh, crap.
Trigger warning.
I'm Andrew Clavin and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
So the American presidential, President's War Race has turned into a cheap Japanese B-movie.
You know, if you walk next door into the Daily Wire's writer room, you'll find people running around going, Gunsera!
Gotcha!
Hi-roo-re!
Hurrah!
All right, so we're going to take a look, obviously.
We have to take a look at the results, and we're going to answer the musical question, is conservatism dead?
Is it dead now?
And is it dead if Trump goes on, as it looks like he's going to, if he goes on to take the nomination?
And one of the reasons I want to answer this is because yesterday on Twitter and a couple of other places online, people were saying about me that I was unrealistic because I hadn't despaired.
Because they listened to my show, and I don't sound like gloomy and despairing.
I'm not a realist.
And I have to admit, this gets up my nose a little bit.
Actually, that's the British expression, right?
That's what we say.
It gets under my skin.
It gets under my skin a little bit.
Because in the arts, which is my day job, I'm a novelist still.
That is what I do most of the day.
There's kind of the same idea that if you write something tragic and sad, it's deep.
And if you write something that's uplifting or has a happy ending or anything like that, or it's funny, it's not as deep.
Somebody famously said of Shakespeare, you know, his tragedies are better than his comedies because tragedy is better than comedy.
And I've always argued, even though I kind of write dark stuff, I've always felt that was wrong.
I felt that was shallow.
And I feel it's shallow when you're talking about politics too.
So I'm going to make the argument that this is the most realistic podcast in the, in this, whatever it is, the atmosphere, wherever we are with our podcast.
All right, so let's look at, we're going to look at the results, but let's look at the, we're going to look at the results through the eyes of the New York Times.
I read it, so you don't have to.
And we're going to look at what they are saying.
Chaos and Cackling00:07:20
Obviously, Donald Trump cleaned up.
He won seven states.
Cruz won three, I guess, if we count Alaska, where there's six people and a bear, I guess, come out.
But the New York Times is just in ecstasy, or at least pretending to be in ecstasy.
One of the reasons I like reading the New York Times is you either find out what the left is thinking, because they're the official newspaper of the elite left, or you find out what they want you to think they're thinking.
So you have to determine which it is.
You know, you have to determine whether they're just sending out a kind of idea that they want right-wingers to believe, or they're actually telling you what they think.
So, their headline is, this is the analysis, not the results.
The headline is, as Donald Trump rolls up victories, the GOP split widens to a chasm.
You kind of have to read this with like gleeful cackling, evil cackling.
Democrats are falling in line, is the lead.
Democrats are falling in line.
Republicans are falling apart.
There's a picture also of Trump, which you can't see just looking like the most smug creep on earth, which fair enough, but I mean, it's just a really nasty picture.
I remember in the old days, they used to do this to Nixon.
They just catch him in the worst possible expression on his face to make him look bad.
All right, the steady and seemingly inexorable unification of the Democratic Party behind Hillary Clinton stands in striking contrast with the rancorous and widening schisms within the Republican Party over the dominance of Donald J. Trump, who swept contests from the Northeast to the deep south on Tuesday.
More cackling.
Now, as the parties gaze ahead to the fall, they are awakening to the advantages of consensus and the perils of chaos.
So I hope you're following that, right?
The advantages of consensus is Hillary Clinton, because everybody's falling in line behind her, and the perils of chaos, that's the Republicans.
Here's the quote from Tim Polenti.
If the Republican Party were an airplane and you were looking out a passenger window, you would see surface pieces peeling off and wonder if one of the wings or engines was next, said Tim Polenti.
Not since the rupture of 1964, when conservatives seized power from their moderate rivals and nominated Barry Goldwater of Arizona, has a major party faced such a crisis of identity.
And the underlying theme there, of course, is that Goldwater was destroyed in the general election.
Democrats are now poised to exploit a fortuitous intersection of forces.
All right, listen to this.
An improving economy with low unemployment, a Democratic president with a nearly 50% approval rating, a Supreme Court battle in which Republicans are energizing liberal voters with vows of obstruction, and now what is likely to be a relatively smooth nomination process that will give Mrs. Clinton a chance to bring together the party's disparate strands.
Heather Cox Richardson, the story ends, is a Boston college professor and the author of New History of the Republican Party, which I can bet is a real friendly history.
She predicts a violent rupture that cleaves the party in two.
A hardline conservatism, as embodied by Pat Buchanan, Newt Gingrich, and Mr. Trump, and an old-fashioned strain of moderate Republicanism that recalls Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Nelson Rockefeller.
It's going to be really ugly, she said.
Classic New York Times.
It's a little house of facts populated with a family of lies.
It's like, really, well, they're so good.
You've got to give them credit.
They're so good at what they do.
I mean, it's a fact that there is chaos in the Republican Party.
It's a fact that the party may split.
It's kind of a fact that Hillary Clinton is now unifying the party in the sense that she creamed Bernie Sanders where she creamed him.
I'm just like, you know, percentage points so great that he'll never be able to catch up, especially with her super delegates.
He's got the thing virtually sewn up.
But Sanders isn't going anywhere.
You know, he's building a socialist party within the Democratic Party.
This is his legacy.
This is what he's leaving behind.
So he's not leaving.
He's got plenty of money.
He's raised much more money than she has.
So, you know, it's still going to be a fight.
It's still going to make her look bad.
She's still going to suffer some losses.
And he's still going to have a voice at the convention.
But the other thing is, of course, the description of the country is completely false.
The economy is not good.
The economy is trembling on a knife's edge.
Unemployment.
The unemployment numbers are ridiculous because all they do is they stop counting you if you drop out of the workforce, which is just about everybody.
There are more people out of the workforce than since the 70s when Jimmy Carter was president.
So, and you can say Obama has a 50% approval rating, but he has torn this country apart.
Blacks and whites, rich and poor, the elites and the rank and file.
Everybody hates each other under the Obama administration, and he has stoked that.
And maybe, you know, he can think to himself that it's paying dividends in this chaos in the Republican Party, which is the part of the story that's true.
They ran a story yesterday, The Times, about how Clinton is preparing for Trump and taking him seriously and, you know, how she's getting ready for the big fight.
And, you know, they didn't, they made it sound like she was serious, that she really had to, that she wasn't blowing him off or thinking, oh, I can beat them, because there is this kind of thing going around that Trump can't win in a general election.
I don't believe that.
I think Trump can win.
The country is so divided.
People are so angry.
And Trump is not afraid to play to those voters as Republicans have been in the past.
When he turned down, when he didn't take the chance to disavow David Duke's endorsement in the KKK, now he has disavowed them, and he's disavowed them before, but then he hesitated.
He was asked thrice if he was going to disavow.
He said, no.
Listen, I don't think Donald Trump's a bigot.
I don't think he's an anti-Semite.
I don't think he's any of those things.
But he is sending signals to those people saying, I'm your guy.
You think they can't hear that?
He says, well, now I disavowed them.
You think they didn't hear that he had to be asked three times?
And even then, didn't they know what he's saying to him?
He's saying, you know, you hate people.
I'm your guy.
Follow me.
And that's a problem for Hillary Clinton because the Republicans have not played to those people, thankfully.
I mean, because they had some class for a while, but you can forget about that now.
And also, there's the man-woman thing.
You know, Plouf, David Plouffe, the guy who organized Obama's campaign, he said to the Times, you know, this is going to be a mean campaign because Trump is a gutter fighter.
And Plouffe said, hope and change, not so much, more like kill and castrate.
Okay.
Now, what's that going to look?
Hate and castrate, he said.
Sorry, hate and castrate.
Well, what's that going to look like to men to have this screechy old biddy, you know, who we know is corrupt, who belongs behind bars, you know, screeching at Donald Trump because he's a big, tough guy, swaggering, tough guy, as he's, that's his role, the thing he plays.
How's that going to look to men?
You know, it's not going to, you know, they're saying that Trump has problems with educated single women and Latinos.
And the Republican Party is all in a dither because those are the people they're trying to win over.
But he's going to get a lot of men and a lot of women who like men and a lot of women who don't like seeing men pushed around by this screaming old woman who's, like I said, is corrupt and has nothing to, you know, nothing to support her.
So let's take a look at Clinton's speech after the Clinton has now moved on.
Hillary has now moved on to the main fight.
Now she's making speeches that are essentially addressed to the battle between her and Donald Trump.
So here's her part of her victory speech last night.
Rubio's Vision for Unity00:08:33
America prospers when we all prosper.
America is strong when we're all strong.
And we know we've got work to do.
But that work, that work is not to make America great again.
America never stopped being great.
We have to make America whole.
We have to fill in.
What's been hollowed out?
We have to make strong the broken places, restitch the bonds of trust and respect across our country.
Now, it might be unusual, as I've said before, for a presidential candidate to say this, but I'm going to keep saying it.
I believe what we need in America today is more love and kindness.
I'm for it.
I support that.
I'm for more love.
She really, at this point, she reminds me of Elaine Stritch, the woman who played this battle axe.
She played Alec Baldwin's mother on 30 Rock, you know, and she had this long career on stage as a battle axe.
Love and kindness.
We need love and kindness.
Who listens to these people?
How dumb are these people?
They look at this felon and they say, yeah, we need more love and kindness.
Yeah, that's right.
And Trump's doing the same thing.
So he does the same thing.
He is moving on to the main event.
Listen to Donald Trump.
Look, I'm a unifier.
I know people are going to find that a little bit hard to believe, but believe me, I am a unifier.
Once we get all of this finished, I'm going to go after one person.
That's Hillary Clinton on the assumption she's allowed to run, which is a big assumption.
I don't know that she's going to be allowed to run.
And I think that's frankly going to be an easy race.
You see the polls.
I beat Hillary in many polls.
I know one thing, I don't think Marco is going to be able to beat her.
I don't think, in all fairness, I think Ted's going to have a very hard time.
But Ted at least has a shot because at least he's won a little bit.
So I just tell you this.
We are going to be a much finer party.
We're going to be a unified party.
I mean, to be honest with you, and we are going to be a much bigger party.
And you can see that happening.
We're going to be a much bigger party.
Our party is expanding.
And all you have to do is take a look at the primary states where I've won and just look where we've gone from X number to a much larger number.
That hasn't happened to the Republican Party in many, many decades.
And there's Chris Christie standing behind him with a look on his face that basically says, what have I done?
What, oh Lord, forgive me.
What have I done?
You know, it's interesting that both Trump and Hillary Clinton use similar phrasing, like, this may be strange.
You may not believe.
This may be hard to believe.
And then lie, you know, like, yeah, I'm for love and kindness.
I'm a unifier.
I'm a unifier.
And you're a wimp and an ugly little man.
You know, like, you know, who could possibly believe that?
So they're both into the main battle now, but they're in completely different positions.
As the New York Times says in their little house of facts, populated by a family of lies, one of the facts is that Hillary now has the party behind her.
That party is solidly behind her.
The establishment is behind her.
The people are going to gather behind her.
Trump is tearing the place apart.
The establishment hates him.
There's talk now of the establishment just like throwing ads at him.
And his two main competitors, and Kasich as well, each has a totally plausible reason to stay in the race, dividing up the votes among them.
So Cruz won Texas, his home state, Oklahoma, the neighboring state, Alaska, which I think is a state somewhere that's like off on another continent or another part of the continent.
So Cruz, he's making a speech.
He wants everyone to unify around him.
America shouldn't have a president whose words would make you embarrassed if your children repeated them.
Our president should make us all proud, should inspire hope in all of us.
We can nominate a Washington deal maker, profane and vulgar, who has a lifelong pattern of using government power for personal gain.
Or we can nominate a proven conservative who has fought consistently for working men and women and to defend the Constitution.
So Cruz's argument, totally plausible, he won states.
I guess Rubio ended up winning Minnesota, I think it was.
So he won a state too.
But Cruz's argument basically is he has beaten Trump more often than anybody else.
So they should all unify behind him.
Rubio has a much subtler argument.
Let's listen to his, he was talking to, he was talking on CNN, and he was asked the question, was he just, shouldn't he just get out?
Basically, wasn't he just being wishful thinking to stay in?
Senator, you keep saying that, and he keeps winning states, and you're talking about Virginia, and that's another state that Donald Trump won.
And I'm just wondering if there's a certain amount of denial that you're in about this race.
No, Jake.
No, because if you look, again, we're in the winner-take-off phase of this.
You know, this is about delegate count.
This is not a traditional race.
Usually in a race like this, you'd have a frontrunner, and at this point, people would be saying, you need to drop out and rally around the frontrunner for the sake of the party.
They're saying the opposite now.
There will never come a time in this race where our supporters are asking us to get out and rally around Donald Trump.
What people are saying is fight as hard as you can to save the party of Lincoln and Reagan from a con artist who refuses to criticize the KKK.
If we nominate Donald Trump as our nominee for the Republican Party, it will be the end of the modern Republican Party.
Hillary Clinton will smoke him in a general election, and the next four years are going to be no different than the last state for our country.
I will fight as long and as hard as it takes to save this conservative movement from someone like Donald Trump.
Now, Rubio's argument is much more plausible than Cruz's, because Cruz kind of shot his wallet last night.
You know, Cruz, those are the southern states.
That's where Cruz is supposed to be, the strongman.
And he didn't do it.
He didn't do it.
Trump got all those states, all the evangelicals.
Cruz won his home state, but he did not make the kind of showing he has to make because now they're moving into the north where there aren't that many evangelicals.
There's a little less kind of social conservatism.
Rubio's argument is different.
Rubio's argument is that all he has to do is stop Trump and get to the convention, get to a brokered convention, an open convention, and the establishment will push him over the top.
Now, I don't think that's going to happen, but at least it's a plausible argument.
You know, if they get to a brokered convention, the establishment isn't going to fall in line behind Cruz.
They'll fall in line behind Rubio.
So Rubio's not calling for anybody to resign because he doesn't care who takes the delegates away from Trump as long as somebody takes the delegates away from Trump and they get to a brokered convention.
If on the other hand, on the 15th, Rubio loses Florida, even the establishment can't support him, and that's it.
Personally, it's very, very, very difficult now to stop Donald Trump.
He looks like he is sailing.
There's still some stuff that could happen, and the establishment may unleash such a barrage of ads and attacks that they really do make him stumble.
They really do get to a brokered convention.
Then democracy goes by the boards.
Then everybody's going to start screaming, the election, we've been robbed.
We was robbed, and the party's going to fall apart anyway.
So before I answer the question that I asked at the beginning, is conservatism dead and is it dead if Trump wins?
I just want to look at one last piece that was in the Wall Street Journal today, because we've talked about Trump support coming from the valid anger of the working class who've been basically destroyed by the Democrats and ignored by the Republicans.
We've talked about how conservatives like Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich have gone over to Trump feeling like even if he's not a conservative, at least he'll blow up the establishment that they hate.
Trump's Working Class Support00:05:29
Today, Holman Jenkins Jr., a very talented younger columnist at the Wall Street Journal, just unleashed anger against the Trump voters, saying, you know what?
Your anger is your own fault.
It's not the elites.
You've got to stop blaming the elites.
It's you.
He said, to be honest and impolitic, the Trump voter smacks of a child who unleashes recriminations against mommy and daddy because the world is imperfect.
The blaming of elites has gone too far.
The American voter has a big hand in his own disappointments.
His retirement system has been a conspicuous demographic Ponzi scheme for at least two generations, yet he keeps voting for unfunded benefits.
He's talking about Social Security, the fact that we can't possibly put in enough money into Social Security for people to retire.
Social Security was built when people died at 63 and it kicked in at 65.
It was easy to keep that system going.
But now people live into their 80s easily and there are fewer workers and everybody's getting older.
It's just not going to be supportable.
But we keep saying, but anytime Paul Ryan says we've got to fix it, he gets shouted down.
The Obama administration complains in its latest economic report about declining state and local investment because all the money is going to the unfunded pension promises negotiated by public sector employees.
And he adds, those are voters, obviously, without also negotiating the taxes to make good on them.
And that's exactly right.
That's exactly right.
I live in California where we vote on everything.
Nobody makes any decisions.
Everything becomes a referendum and we vote on it.
And what we do is we vote for more stuff and no more taxes.
More stuff, no more taxes.
Who wouldn't vote for that?
Who wouldn't vote for that?
I go down the referendum all the time and I just say, what's the price?
If the price is over a dollar, no, because we don't have any money.
We don't have any money.
So why should I vote for it?
If I'm not going to raise my taxes, I'm already paying taxes through the roof.
So why should I vote for it?
But other people vote for those things.
They say, oh, the children, oh, the roads, oh, the this, oh, the that.
You know, yeah, I'll vote for that.
Oh, but no taxes because, you know, maybe only taxes on the rich.
And the rich move to Texas because they're not going to pay for California's craziness.
So when you're angry, you know, these are workers who want union wages, but they don't want Mexicans to come in and get paid under those union wages.
You know, they want to bring Trump promised he was going to force Apple to build their phones in America, but they don't want to pay for what it would cost to have phones built in America because that's just like taking a pay cut.
I mean, every time we send that stuff over to be built more cheaply overseas, that's like getting, we get a pay raise because it's cheaper stuff.
All the stuff we need is cheaper.
So they want all the stuff.
He's going to force the Apple to build computers here.
He's going to build a wall and force people to stay out.
He's going to force the Muslims to go away.
He's going to even force the press to stop criticizing him by loosening the libel laws so he can sue them more often, which is the way he spent his life.
Is this the end of the conservative movement?
My answer is, of course it's not.
It's just a new enemy for the conservative movement to fight.
Now it's Donald Trump, and if Donald Trump takes over the Republican Party, it'll be the Republican Party.
We were never, never the same as the Republican Party.
We've always been at odds with them.
But before, at least, when we were at odds with Paul Ryan, when we were at odds with Mitch McConnell, we were at odds with people who basically had a fundamental sympathy with us.
You know, when people would say to me, oh, you know, Paul Ryan is worse than Obama because a traitor is worse than an enemy, I would say, no, he's not.
No, he's not.
And now it's apparent that we always needed this party to have power.
So we're going to lose power.
If Trump takes over the party, we are going to lose power.
But conservatism, American conservatism, is a battle for liberty.
It's a battle for human liberty.
That battle never ends and it never dies.
It's never over.
Conservatism is never dead if it's a battle for liberty.
Did somebody, you know, when I hear these people despairing, I always want to ask, did somebody give you a card when you were born that said liberty was going to come to you without a fight?
That you weren't going to have to estrange your wife's friends, that you weren't going to lose a couple of jobs, that people weren't going to scream that you were a racist if you stood up for liberty.
People die for liberty.
People go to prison for liberty.
And here in America, so far, so far, all we really have is we lose some elections, we lose some friends, we get attacked in the New York Times.
You know, I mean, what exactly are you despairing about?
And what is your despair good for?
You know, what is your despair good for?
I'm thinking, I don't have time to play it, but I was thinking of that speech that Sam Gangy makes in The Lord of the Rings, where he talks about the great stories of old and the great stories of heroes, and how the people in those stories didn't want to be in them because it's hard.
All those times the conservatives whine about the young generation and how they're snowflakes and they look back on the greatest generation and say, whatever happened to the greatest generation?
Was the greatest generation great because life was easy, because the Depression was a breeze, because World War II was just a walk in the park?
You know, this is what it's like fighting for freedom, folks.
This is what God made you to do, and why should you be depressed that you have to do it?
Why should you be depressed?
Because it's not easy anymore, because it was easy for about 50 years.
Now it's not, and you're depressed.
Too bad, folks.
Too bad.
You're a conservative.
You've got to be a tough guy.
You've got to be a tough girl because this is what makes people what they are, is the principles they stand for.
Why We Left Easy00:06:50
If Trump takes over the Republican Party, frankly, I would vote for a third party.
I would be happy if conservatives formed a third party.
Would we lose?
This time, yeah.
But then we'd have a stance to come back, you know, because the fight never ends.
Which brings me to stuff I like.
I've been talking about poetry all week.
And if we're going to talk about poetry, we might as well talk about the best poetry.
So today I'm going to talk about Shakespeare.
And this is a speech from Shakespeare's Henry V. Now, Henry V was to the British what John Wayne and Ronald Reagan are to us.
He was the guy who represented the best of British values.
And he fought, you know, he was constantly fighting the French in the Hundred Years' War.
And at the Battle of Agincourt, he scored an immense victory against a far, far superior force.
And this happened in 1415 on October 25th, which is St. Crispin's Day.
And so Shakespeare has Henry V. His play almost entirely takes place on the evening before this battle.
And in the evening before the battle, Henry goes out and he goes out and listened in disguise and he listens to the ordinary people.
And remember, the king was like a god to these people.
I mean, he was like an appointed, appointed by God.
And he goes out and listens to the ordinary people to give them what he says is a little touch of Harry in the night, a little inspiration, and to find out what they're thinking.
And Henry V begins to realize that his kingship is purely symbolic, that it's the creation of what he calls ceremony, that he's just an ordinary man, but ceremony makes him a king.
And by extension, he realizes that that means that the people are the same as he is, are equal in some sense to him, even though he represents to them the values that they're fighting for.
So now the French come over the hill, and there's thousands, tens of thousands of them.
They totally outnumber the British.
And the British start to say, I wish we had more people.
And Henry V gets up and he makes a famous speech where he says, don't wish for more people.
There's enough of us here so that if we die, our country will feel our loss.
And if we win, we don't have to share the glory.
The fact that we're this few against so many makes it more glorious if we win.
And so don't wish for that to happen.
And then he said, and he talks about it being St. Crispin's Day.
And St. Crispin, there were twins.
It was St. Crispin and St. Crispian or something like that.
They were nobly born, but they became, they were persecuted for being Christians and they became cobblers.
So they were the patron saints of basically workmen, leather workers, cobblers, and things like that.
And the reason he talks about that is, see, what he's saying is that the cobbler and the king are one if they stand for principle.
And he uses a phrase that has now become famous.
He says, He says, We few, we happy few, and they're happy because they don't have to share the glory.
We band of brothers.
And this is a king talking to the people.
This is an amazing thing for Shakespeare to have written and for Henry V to have said.
He says, We are a band of brothers because he who fights with me today becomes my brother.
No matter how low he is, he says the fight will gentle his condition.
It will make him a gentleman, okay?
Because we are what we stand for, and we are the fights that we take on.
So I'm not going to read this poem.
I'm going to let Kenneth Brannig read it.
He made Henry V in 1989.
I think it is the single best Shakespeare movie ever made.
And this is the scene where he inspires the British, the English, I should say, before the Battle of Azeriko.
Of fighting men, they have full threescore thousand.
That's five to one.
Besides, they are all fresh.
It is a fearful odds.
Oh, that we now had here but one ten thousand of those men in England that do no work today.
What's he that wishes so, my cousin Westmoreland?
Oh, my fair cousin, if we are marked to die, we are enough to do our country loss.
And if to live, the fewer men a greater share of honor.
God's will, I pray thee, wish not one man more brother.
Proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host, that he which hath no stomach to this fight, let him depart.
His passport shall be made, and crowns for convoy put into his purse.
We would not die in that man's company that fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is called the Feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day and comes safe home will stand at tiptoe when this day is named and arouse him at the name of Crispin.
He that shall see this day and live old age will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbors and say, Tomorrow is St. Crispin's.
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars and say, These wounds I had on Crispin's Day.
Old men, forget.
Yet all shall be forgot, but he'll remember with advantages what feats he did that day.
Then shall our names, familiar in their mouths, as household words.
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter, Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester be in their flowing cups, freshly remembered.
This story shall the good man teach his son.
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by from this day to the ending of the world.
But we in it shall be remembered.
We few.
We happy few.
We band of brothers.
For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.
Be he ne'er so vile, this day shall gentle his condition.
And gentlemen in England now are bed shall think themselves accursed they were not here and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks and fought with us upon St. Crispin's Day.
If we lose the Republican Party, we few, we happy few, we band of brothers and sisters will go on fighting for liberty, a principle that never dies and a fight that never ends.