All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 24, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:14
February 24, 2016, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, the point was, how could I not have been clear yesterday?
How in the world could you have not understood what I was talking about?
This blows my mind.
I'm feeling like Trump here.
What do you mean you don't get what I was saying?
It was very, very clear.
We had a lady call who said we need to go back to the days of Reagan when everybody was unified.
I said, we weren't unified.
She said we have 49 state landslides.
I said, yes, but if we were so unified, I mean, we came together on elections, but he was so unified.
We had record prosperity.
We had record creation of wealth.
We had low unemployment.
We had low deficits.
We had the biggest economic boom post-World War II in those, well, actually, the last six years of Reagan.
What happened to it?
Why didn't it last?
My only question, you know, why didn't it last?
Why are we here today?
Why didn't the people alive experiencing all of that understand what was going on?
How were they talked out of it and elected Bill Clinton a few short four years later after Reagan left?
And of course, the discussion of that is eye-opening and instructive, and that's all I was getting at yesterday.
We can have eight years.
In fact, the Reagan boom went through the mid-90s for crying out loud.
All of that prosperity and all those good economic times that people were living through and they were still able to be talked out of it.
All right, I'll expand on it even further today because I think the reason it's important to me, the reason the lady's call lit me up, and it was nothing to do with her.
I mean, there's nothing personal to her, but she said we need somebody, and she was for Rubio, I think, which we need somebody that can unify us.
That's not the answer here.
We're never going to be unified.
We're not going to be unified with Bernie Sanders supporters.
They don't want to be unified.
We're not going to be unified with Hillary Clinton.
We have to beat them.
And once we beat them, they have to stay beaten.
That's the way they look at us.
Hi, folks.
How are you doing?
Great to have you here.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network.
I'll develop this more as the program unfolds.
There's more pressing stuff here.
Although, I don't know what could be more pressing than that.
And I'll be happy to go through it again.
More than happy.
As many times as it takes.
800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, the email address, lrushbaugh at EIBnet.com.
All right, I'm getting tired of something.
I'm getting a little tired of everybody in the establishment, everybody in the media talking about how anger is the driving force of this as though it is a disqualifier.
As though the anger that is propelling this election makes the results illegitimate.
That's what the establishment's trying to tell us.
That's what the drive-by media is trying to tell us.
That's what Axelrod's trying to tell us and a bunch of Democrat adolescents.
All this anger out here, it's irrational.
It's kooky.
Well, let me throw something at you here on this.
See, I think the anger is totally understandable.
I think it's called for.
I think the anger, there ought to be a little bit more of it, if you ask me.
But how come when some downtrodden group in America, when the gay lobby is mad, we're supposed to take time out and understand the rage and learn from it?
When Saudi Islamists hijack three airplanes and crashed the World Trade Center in the Pentagon and another Washington target, why do we take time out to say, gee, why do they hate us?
What have we done to make them so mad?
And then we're told that we must not react irrationally here.
We must try to understand their rage.
Why?
Because it's our fault, we're told.
Something that we did as a nation.
State Department had seminars after 9-11.
What did we do to make them hate us?
But you notice in this anger, it's directed where?
It's directed to the Washington establishment.
Is the Washington establishment ever saying, we need to pause.
We need to have a timeout.
We need to find out why they're so mad at us.
We need to just go, what have we done wrong?
Wouldn't that be the consistent thing?
Except that's not the case.
In the case of the anger on the Republican side propelling this primary season, everybody is saying it's irrational.
It's kooky.
It's irresponsible.
It's insane.
Nobody is saying, hey, why are they mad?
What did we do to make them so mad?
Maybe we need a seminar or two over here at some lobbyist's office to figure out why they're so mad at us.
Why is it not the case?
Why is the anger propelling the Republican primary vote automatically disqualified as unhinged, Irrational, and yet the anger of terrorists blowing us to smithereens, the anger of illegal immigrants breaking our laws to get in the country, the anger of every minority group ticked off and basically being unhappy in life.
We're supposed to stop.
We're supposed to understand a rage.
We're supposed to learn from it.
And what we're supposed to learn from it is that it's our fault.
Okay?
Well, I'd like to turn that right around on the Republican and the entire Washington establishment.
Why don't you people take a little time out instead of mischaracterizing the anger?
Why don't you follow your own guidelines and try to learn from it?
Why don't you try to ask yourself, what have you done that made everybody so mad?
You know, don't, folks, don't let them do this to you.
They're trying to make you think that you are a wacko.
Some of you may be, but I mean, not because of your anger.
Do not let them convince you that there's something wrong with you because your emotions are at a feverish pitch in this campaign.
They ought to be.
What are you laughing at in there?
Well, I mean, in a large group of people, you're going to have a certain percentage of them going to be kooks.
And most kooks actually don't know who they are.
If they did, they wouldn't be doing what they're doing, right?
But the ugly, for example, know who they are.
Now, that's that's, I mean, you can't, it's a way of rationalizing it, but it's important in policy and dealing with these burials things.
Okay, let's go to Nevada here.
Trump wins third time in a row by margins that actually outstrip most of the optimistic polls.
And this is kind of interesting because I have here my formerly nicotine-stained fingers story here from the uh what is this?
The thehill.com.
Rubio Trump underperformed in Nevada caucuses.
It's an amazing, amazing analysis from number two.
Oh, we got to get to John Kasich too.
Everybody started saying, What is he hanging around for?
I can tell you exactly what he's hanging around for.
Do you know what he's hanging around for?
You don't?
I'll give you a hint.
It's not to win Ohio.
That's not why John, even if he won Ohio, big whoop, that's all he's going to win.
And oh, damn right, he does.
He's and everybody's got it wrong.
Everybody's thinking that what ought to happen is that Rubio ought to go to Kasich and sign him up as his VP, and that'd get Kasich out of the race and takes Kasich six or seven or whatever points he's got added to Rubio, makes it a real race.
Why would Kasich go to Rubio's not going to win?
Ruby hadn't won anything yet.
That's another thing.
Rubio, another second place, second place, second place.
We're talking about Ruby.
Rubio hasn't won diddly squat.
Trump's running away with this.
The only guy that's beat Trump so far is Cruz.
Cruz needs to make some adjustments, I think.
But no, Kasich, I know, I well, I don't know, but I mean, common sense that he's hanging around waiting for Trump to ask him to be VP.
Why sign up with somebody who's not going to win this thing?
Why wouldn't you want to be the VP of the frontrunner, which would be Donaldus Mactimus, the Trumpster?
Why wouldn't you sign up with him if you're from Kasich's standpoint?
That's what I think he's doing.
This is it for Kasich.
I mean, he's not going to win this.
He's not going to be any more than governor unless he becomes somebody's VP.
He's 63, 64 years old, whatever.
And this is the biggest shot that he's going to get.
So I'm sure that's why he's hanging on.
And if he can do well in Ohio, that could send a signal.
You got Trump.
Trump could argue say some Florida.
He could arguably say some New York.
Trump can say he's wherever his plane happens to be that day.
And Kasich from Ohio.
That's what I think Kasich's doing.
And Kasich kind of telegraphed it when he told a crowd.
He said, I don't know what I'm doing here.
Did you see that?
I don't know that I'm in this to win the presidency.
He said, I'm just in this, and we'll just see where it all falls out.
We'll just see where it goes.
Well, where it's going, I'm sure Kasich's told all of his people, stay off the phones, wait for the call to be VEP from somebody.
And if Rubio calls him to be Veep, he'd have to take the call.
He'd have to consider it.
But why would he do that?
Why would he do it?
The only reason to do that would be on the come on the theory of, okay, if I take my support here, my voluminous support of whatever it is, six points of seven points, and then I add that to Rubio's, I'm still 10 points beyond Trump.
And that's the way I'm going to get to the vice presidency.
I don't think he's going to see it that way.
Well, I could be wrong.
Look, that's not my business.
I'm just a commentator here on the radio, responsible for all of this mess.
Oh, yeah, it's still going on.
I mean, they brought Fred Barnes on a Fox to talk about it yesterday.
David Asmond did.
I don't even want to get into it.
It happens every election.
Every election, the people don't get they want what they want.
It's my fault.
It is.
Whoever's losing, it's my fault for not signing up.
It's my fault for not endorsing.
It's my fault for not doing this.
And the winners all think that I've been on their side.
And they all thanking me and praising me.
So, and I haven't done, I'm not doing anything differently.
But anyway, Rubio is saying, well, this is Wednesday, right?
Rubio said that Trump had underperformed in the Nevada caucus.
He said, last time Mitt Romney got over 50%.
So Trump actually underperformed what Romney did, not once, but twice in this state.
Rubio was in Fox and Friends today.
And he was talking about 2008, 2012.
I hate to break it to him, but this was a slam.
Look, let me find the turnout was a record.
The turnout was an all-time high.
In 2008, the turnout was 44,000, Republican side, Nevada caucus.
In 2012, it was 32,000.
Yesterday, 73,000.
Yesterday's turnout was almost exactly equal to the combined turnout of 2008 and 2012.
And Trump won 46%.
He's looking at this.
He says, Mitt Romney, whatever percentage Romney got in terms of real votes is in Trump's rearview mirror, no matter how you slice this.
But I understand what Rubio's doing.
I mean, Rubio wants to stay in this and considered to be a very close front runner and all kinds, you know, perception is reality.
So try to get it out there that Trump underperformed because that would be a first outside of Iowa.
But anyway, let's go through the rest of this.
Trump wins Nevada third primary/slash caucus in a row by margins that actually outstrip most of the polls that were optimistic.
He actually did better.
He outperformed the poll.
There might be a Trump effect out there going on.
There might be, meaning fewer people say they're going to vote for Trump than actually do.
I mean, more people vote for him than say so in polls because he's overperforming.
He's outperforming the polls.
And for a third time in a row, the Republican turnout broke all previous records.
And again, in Nevada, turnout yesterday was almost equal to the combined turnout of 08 and 12.
Trump even won by a percentage that exceeds the total.
Now, here's the thing about this.
I realize you had to stay up until, what, 11.30 or midnight last night to have any idea what was happening.
And there was a, I don't know, attitudinally, I think a lot of people, Nevada, it's way out there.
It's casinos.
Come on.
It doesn't matter what happens.
Nevada primary, no big deal.
And then you see that the Republicans that lived there showed up in a record number.
And you find out that there isn't any off-state here.
There isn't any state where people are ho-hum about this.
The news preliminarily to Nevada did not make Nevada look nearly as big as South Carolina, for example, or Iowa, New Hampshire.
It was just kind of the next spot, but it was sandwiched there.
What really was important is what's coming next.
Nevada is kind of a speed bump.
And then you see all this turnout.
It was huge in Nevada like it has been everywhere else.
Now, Trump won by a percentage that exceeds the totals of the next two candidates combined.
Trump got 45.9.
So we'll round that off.
People in Riolinda can more easily follow us here.
46% for Trump.
Rubio and Cruz's votes combined add up to 45.3.
Rubio at 24 and Cruise at 21.5%.
And once again, Trump won all groups.
He won very conservative voters, 38%.
He won somewhat conservative voters, 50%.
He won moderate voters, 55%.
Look, this is moderates.
Look at, why are you shocked?
I have been saying for, I don't know how long Trump's coalition is exactly what the Republican Party for all these years has been claiming they want.
He's got people from every ethnic group and sizable percentages of them.
He's got, he's out there.
There's a question in the soundbites, the CNN.
They can't figure it out.
Somebody asked Gloria Borger.
Gloria, why is it that so many Hispanics are supporting Trump when he insults them every day?
She doesn't have an answer for it.
Well, you know, anger.
Man, they don't have an answer for it.
To this day, they can't explain this.
I understand that.
Moderates are supposed to be turned off by anger.
Look, you know as well as I do that's nothing more than a liberal Democrat trick to get the Republicans to shut up about what they believe is exactly right.
Republicans believe don't criticize Obama.
Don't be seen as shutting down the government.
Don't disagree.
Oh my God, you're going to be seen as an obstructionist and not wanting to make Washington work.
And the Independents are not going to like it.
I'm going to run right to the Democrats.
Well, you can't find somebody that's more angry, angry, obstinate in your face, insulting.
I mean, everything that the Republicans believe turns off moderates.
Trump is hoovering them up.
So here we go again.
Let me just start.
Don't interrupt me here.
Very conservative.
Trump gets 38%.
Somewhat conservative.
Trump gets 50%.
Moderate voters, 55%.
He won both men and women.
He won voters in every age group over 30.
He won evangelical voters as well as non-evangelicals.
And of course, the drive-bys are scratching their heads on.
They don't understand how in the world that can be happening.
And it's very simple how it can be happening.
All these people on the left think that every conservative is a monolith.
And if you're an evangelical, it's evangelical or bust, and that's all you care about, which is pro-life or whatever.
And if you're something, and it's not the mosaic that makes up support on the right wing is as intricately woven as anything they have on the left.
I got to take a break here, folks.
We will be back.
Ha, how are you?
Why, you know, I just got an email.
It amazes me.
Some things that people will think I would answer.
Dear Rush, who do you think is the most attractive female anchor on Fox?
Who in their right mind would think I would even answer that?
I don't have an answer.
See, here we go.
Snerdley is looking at me with his eyes getting he's now pondering it.
Anyway, a couple of more breakouts here.
No, don't run down.
You realize there's no, there's no chance here.
Even if I had an answer, there's no chance at announcing it.
What I would probably be on safer ground endorsing a candidate than answer that question.
Anyway, I always say I'm fascinated by the way people think.
And only Fox, by the way, I was not asked, you know, the other networks, they were not part of the request.
Trump won evangelicals by 40 to 23 over Ted Cruz.
That has everybody stunned.
And I'm sure it has people in the Cruz campaign scratching their head as well.
Despite all the predictions to the contrary, except for South Carolina, Trump's numbers with evangelicals have been getting better with each vote.
In Iowa, it was Cruz 34, Trump 22.
Evangelicals.
New Hampshire, Cruz 23, Trump 38.
South Carolina, Cruz 27, Trump 33.
Non-Nevada, Cruz 23, Trump 40.
The figure that's really blowing the minds of the drive-bys, Trump even won Hispanics in Nevada.
His numbers match the combined numbers of Rubio and Cruz who are Hispanic.
Whoa, back in a second.
Welcome back, folks.
800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, your phone calls are coming up.
Here's the Kasich story.
I'm not exactly sure what the goal is.
In fact, we may have.
Let me check the audio soundbite roster.
We may have.
I think I saw this.
Pardon me, folks.
For as tech advanced as I am, this is a paper project.
And I don't have a master list of, so I just got to go through here.
Kasich, Kasich, Kasich.
I thought I saw it.
Maybe I don't have it.
Yeah, okay.
We don't have it.
Doesn't matter.
Doesn't matter, cookie.
Don't sweat it.
It'll be too late by the time I read this.
It's no big deal.
No big deal.
Kasich.
I'm not exactly sure what the goal is.
Here's the story.
This is from, it's a YouTube video, but the where did I see this?
Last night, and I've been watching it, and I read a story, but here's the way it's written.
John Kasich's relentlessly positive stump speeches can often feel like motivational seminars.
But on a rainy Tuesday night in Georgia, it sounded like Kasich was trying to motivate himself.
Here's what I know.
I know I'm doing my best.
He told a crowd of 100 supporters who had spilled outside of the Sandy Springs City Hall.
It was too small to accommodate those who would share.
Are you kidding me?
They're trying to make it sound like a huge crowd there with 100 people, and it was so big it had to spill out, and it was held in a city hall.
Anyway, Kasich said, I'm following the purpose that I think has been laid out for me, and to achieve that goal, and then he paused.
Well, I'm not exactly sure what the goal is.
Some might say it's being elected president.
Maybe it's a different goal.
And he went on to say that he's just letting things play out.
He doesn't really know what the goal is.
Now, how does that start?
Let's say you're a Kasich supporter.
Let's say you've even given him money.
Let's say that you've been raising money for Kasich.
And he's speaking at a large crowd, 100 people, so big the overflow was spilling out the doors of a small town city hall.
And then Kasich says, I'm not exactly sure what the goal is.
I'm following the purpose that I think has been laid out for me to achieve that goal.
Somebody, what's the goal?
Well, I'm not exactly sure what the goal is.
Politico had a story yesterday morning, headline, G.O.P. to Kasich, get out, arguing that Kasich is hurting Cruz and that Kasich is hurting Rubio and their chances to consolidate the not Trump vote.
This is going to be a close call because I'm not sure the numbers here, but I think even if you add right now Trump or Cruz and Rubio, you still don't equal Trump, do you?
No, you do, depending on the poll.
And there are a lot of people still running around talking about, okay, Trump's, let's give him 40%.
We've got Nevada.
It still means 60% of Republican primary voters want somebody other than Trump.
That is one way of looking at it.
But then ask yourself this.
Let's say that Marco Rubio, after assessing the fact that he hasn't yet won a primary, decides to exit the race.
It's just an exercise here.
And let's give Rubio, what, 18%?
If Cruz, 18%, 36%.
So using our numbers, they're combined still are a little bit shorter, Trump.
But let's give Rubio, just for the sake of this hypothetically, 18%.
Are all 18% going to go to Cruz?
You know, in the Cruz versus Rubio scenario, there's some people on both sides that detest the other guy.
You've got some Rubio supporters that don't like Cruz at all, and vice versa.
You've got some Cruz supporters that really don't trust Rubio, don't like him whatsoever.
Trump's going to get some of those.
It's not enough to say, and the establishment's relying on this, they still are in this denial.
They're still relying on the fact that the majority of Republican voters want something, somebody other than Trump.
And so if they get these guys out of the race, they get Kasich out, get Carson out, and say get Rubio out, then that sets it up with Cruz and Cruz going to pick up all these votes and be dwarfing Trump.
But Trump's going to get some of those.
And I don't know what the breakout would be, but it's not realistic to think that every anti-Trump vote is going to stay anti-Trump as candidates get out.
But it's all academic anyway because nobody's getting out.
And Kasich is staying in to be asked by anybody to be VP.
That's, and I'm sure he doesn't want to say that.
I'm sure he knows this.
I'm sure this is what he wants.
He can't say that would not be politic.
Hey, John Kasich, what's your goal staying in the race?
I want to be asked to be vice president by one of these guys.
Just wouldn't go over well.
But that's what it is.
And Kasich thinks that he's got a huge keratinangle, being the state of Ohio, that he's a governor, he's a popular governor, and that the Republicans cannot win unless they win Ohio.
But then you might have to throw that out because what if, again, hypothetical, what if Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan all of a sudden become in play for the Republicans because of Trump?
So then Ohio's not singularly important.
Not that it would never be a factor.
But anyway, that's a bunch of offshoots.
I think that's what Kasich is hanging on for.
And I think he's hanging on for Trump.
Well, have you no, I don't recall, have you heard Kasich in any of the debates go after Trump by name?
You have not.
Kasich has been pretty clever about this.
He's gone after everybody else as being childlike.
And all this bickering, it's got to stop.
He's kind of spoken about all of them collectively as he has attempted to elevate himself as the adult and the reasonable one and so forth and the responsible choice.
And we've got to stop beating each other up.
But he's not going after Trump personally.
He hasn't gone after Cruz personally.
He hasn't gone after Rubio.
And I think for a reason.
It's like somebody called here yesterday.
You think maybe Trump would pick Cruz to be no, I don't know how that would happen now.
I mean, Trump is getting close to defaming Cruz with some of these allegations about not being Christian, not being religious, waving the Bible while lying.
I mean, some of this stuff is really vicious.
And it doesn't matter in any campaign, the most conservative guy is always going to end up being the target, and that's Cruz right now.
The unquestionably conservative candidate is always going to be the target of the slings, the arrows, and all that.
I don't know how that could happen with Cruz becoming – and I don't think – well, I don't know.
Cruz and Rubio are relatively young.
I mean, their political futures are still ahead of them.
If this doesn't work out, they've got time to run it.
Kasich, that's not it.
Kasich really doesn't.
What is he, 63, 64?
Put him past 70 before the next chance, the legitimate chance to do this again would come up.
So that's why I think VP is what's on his mind.
Now, there's another chapter of this, too.
This is from the New York Times.
Rivals no more, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush talk and agree to meet.
Since Jeb's withdrawal from the presidential race on Saturday, endorsements from prominent Republicans have been piling up for Rubio.
Just in the last day, Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, Senator Oren Hatch of Utah, Governor Asa Hutchison of Arkansas have signed on to Rubio.
But there's one endorsement that remains elusive, and that's Jebs.
And Rubio made a point on Monday when word leaked that some of Jeb's money was going to Rubio and some of it.
Jeb might even be thinking, Rubio went public and said, no, no, no, no, Jeb's not endorsed me.
He knew it was not the time for that.
No, no, no, Jeb has not endorsed me.
He wanted everybody to know.
Speaking of Jeb's money going to Ruby, folks, do you realize how much?
$115 million was spent, was raised, donated to Jeb Bush.
What did the people who donated that money get?
If you look at it, I mean, these people don't give this money just because they like the family.
Well, take that back.
Some of them do.
But most of them give this money access to have some say in the leverage of power should the candidate they back win.
No great mystery here.
So isn't it interesting how fluidly and blithely people, oh yeah, well, the Jeb money is going to go to Ruby.
The Jeb money's gone.
There's only $15 million left of the Jeb money.
Now, some of that could go to other candidates, but they've got to start raising it all over again.
That's a lot of money we're talking about here to ask people to donate first to some guy who doesn't get there and now throw in again On Rubio, because he's got the establishment backing, but he hasn't won anything yet.
El Rushbo at the EIB network.
Back after this, folks.
Do not go away.
And here's Dylan in Chico, California, as we start on the phones today.
Dylan, it's great to have you here.
What can I do for you, sir?
Hi, Rush.
Thank you for taking my call.
Yes, sir.
I just know I know why there's such a diversity in votes when it comes to Trump.
It's because he said he won't let the people die in the streets.
He said that numerous times, and people see that he has a heart, opposed the popular Democratic opinion that the Republicans are racist and we only care about the rich.
Okay, you are you from what angle are you coming at this, Dylan?
Are you a Trump supporter?
Yes, I am.
Are you Republican or Democrat?
I'm Republican.
You're Republican.
Do you think people are dying in the streets, or do you think people believe people are dying in the streets because Republicans don't care?
Well, I think a lot of people will die in the streets no matter what.
But, I mean, his health care plan, he hasn't really been too specific about it.
But I think that he will set aside some money for people that can't afford health insurance, opposed to Obamacare, where a lot of people can't even afford it.
You're talking about, but Trump here.
Yeah.
Trump's going to set aside money for people who are dying in the streets that'll have health care so they won't die in the street.
Well, that's what he, yeah, that's what he's saying.
Well, you think the fact that he's saying that is why he's getting a wide variety of support, diversified.
Well, not just that.
People also see that he has a heart.
There are like a lot of Democrats that think that Republicans are so heartless, you know, because thanks to Hillary and everybody else acting that way.
People, they actually see him saying that in interviews and stuff.
They actually see that he has a heart, and he's very honest because he, you know, people come at him at all angles, and he doesn't deny, you know, that he used to be somewhat, you know, so basically what you're saying is that Trump is using Democrat language as a Republican to reach out to potential Democrat voters.
And essentially, the Democrats think the Republicans are heartless.
The Democrats think the Republicans are mean-spirited and all that and are letting people die in the streets.
So Trump saying he's not going to let people die in the streets is a direct appeal to Democrats to show that he's not your typical Republican.
Absolutely.
But I also think that they know that he's being genuine about it because he's been honest the whole time he's been running for president.
Oh, I don't know.
It's not just saying that.
They also genuinely believe that he will try to do that.
And so he's getting a lot of votes.
And a lot of people that don't want Hillary because they just think she's a liar.
And they don't want Bernie Sanders because they don't want to go socialist.
A lot of people are going towards him because of that reason, because they do believe that he's not just a hardware.
Right, but you're speaking, he'll be.
You're speaking primarily, though, of Democrat voters that don't like Hillary and don't like Bernie for whatever reason.
And so Trump has found a way to appeal to them.
But you think he's being honest about it.
He's not just saying it.
He actually is honest, and they're buying it.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
And also the independent voters, too.
The independent voter, yeah.
Well, look, I was the first to suggest that Trump is doing this.
I was the first to suggest after witnessing that debate in South Carolina, I was the first to say that Trump's making a play for Democrat voters by going after Bush, going after Iraq, by going after 9-11, by going after weapons of mass destruction, going after Republicans in ways only Democrats do was an open primary.
So I can see you're thinking on this.
By the way, the Democrat side, I was talking earlier.
I meant to throw something in.
You know, Bernie Sanders is not, folks, it's looking really bad all of a sudden for Bernie, but the problem is a Democrat turnout.
There is no Democrat turnout that's commensurate with any kind of a gigantic movement that would be led by Bernie Sanders.
I mean, the media is portraying Bernie as leading this revolutionary army of people.
There isn't any revolution because look at the Democrat turnout.
It's microscopic.
The Democrat turnout so far in every caucus and primary is way below what it was in 08 and way below what it was in 2012.
And that's not related here to what Dylan said.
It's just I meant to mention this earlier when talking about the Republican turnout.
Okay, so to comment on what you said, I will grant that you may have a point, that Trump is doing this and that he means it.
But my problem with it, Dylan, I'm the mayor of Rioville.
That means I'm a literalist.
And that also means I am really unique.
I'm in a small group of people.
Most people are not literal.
Most people speak in generalities and expect people to understand them.
I take people at what they say.
If they don't say it, then I don't think they have said it.
And if they say something, I believe that they mean it.
And when Trump talks about people dying in the street, I'm sorry, I separate myself because we don't have people dying in the street.
Not because of healthcare.
Now, you might be able to make the case that there are people passing away, homeless people pass away here and there, but we do not have a systemic problem of people dying on the street in the United States of America.
So I agree with you why Trump is saying so.
It's a crossover comment.
But what he needs to add, in my view, is that if there are people dying in the street because of healthcare, it's the fault of the Democrat parts, Obamacare that's obviously bombing out and failing here.
Well, another sterling example of broadcast excellence.
First hour in the can on the way over to Limbaugh Broadcast Museum, the virtual museum at rushlimbaugh.com.
▲
Export Selection