All Episodes
Previous Next
April 18, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:52
April 18, 2016, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, you know, this is actually starting to take off.
A bunch of Democrats here, a bunch of them now, starting to get mad that Bernie's supporters are throwing money at Hillary.
You know, like she's a call girl, like she's a pole dancer, like she's a stripper.
They're throwing money at her, and all kinds of Democrats start to get ticked off at it.
Charlie Wrangel's the latest.
You got some people on MSNBC.
I mean, who would know?
You know, just ignore it.
But man, they're all ramped up about this, calling attention to it.
Bernie Sanders supporters are throwing dollar bills.
Maybe even Hamilton's at Hillary.
Hey, folks, great to have you back here.
800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, the email address, if you want to send an email, I check them, is lrushbo at eibnet.com.
I am told by the webmaster that we set an email record all of last week for email to El Rushbo at EIBnet.com.
Never seen anything like it.
And that's after weeding out the spam.
We have a terrific spam filter.
Normally, folks, we get 10,000 emails.
So just during the course of the program, over the 24-hour period, it's a large number.
And we blew through those numbers.
So something happened last week that excited people one way or the other.
Just mentioning, and I'm not going to get into specifics of why or guessing what it was.
So much happens here.
So much is discussed here.
It's impossible to be able to nail it down.
I just wanted to pass it on to you.
The drive-by media, before we get to the latest on the two campaigns, the drive-by media this morning, just breathless over the wrap-up of oral arguments before the Supreme Court on whether to let Obama's executive orders on illegal aliens stand.
Speaking of which, there's a USA Today piece today all upset about this.
All of a sudden, all of a sudden now, USA Today editorial upset at Obama's executive orders.
But do you know why?
Well, what does this mean that Cruz or Trump might do if they're elected?
Yes, sir, Rebob.
Now they're starting to focus on what happens if the next president decides to run things the way Obama has been.
So now the drive-bys, take a look at this, are going to start going on record as opposing executive orders just to set that narrative up for the next president.
They have nothing to do with stopping Obama.
There'll just be expressions of concern and troubled thinking about this.
But back to the Supreme Court oral arguments today.
This is the real reason that Obama has gone so far as to offer a supposedly moderate liberal as his nominee to replace Justice Scalia.
Obama is that desperate to win this case.
You see, a tie at the Supreme Court lets the lower court ruling stand.
You know, the last court to hear the case before the Supreme Court took it.
It's always going to be an appellate court somewhere.
And the lower court ruling would stop Obama's executive order in its tracks.
So a tie 4-4, which is what this case will produce if there's not a new justice, means that Obama's executive order will be stopped dead in its tracks.
Now, just to refresh in everybody's memory, the case in question here is a lawsuit that the state of Texas and 25 other states brought which challenges Obama's executive order that gives legal status and work authorizations to more than 4 million illegal aliens.
And this case is even more than just a matter of Obama giving millions of illegal aliens amnesty.
Because if Obama's executive order is allowed to stand, we no longer have any immigration law.
In fact, we no longer have any law at all because any president can just bypass Congress and write his own laws if this stands.
This would be huge precedent and it wouldn't be limited just to immigration.
And the drive-bys know this, and I'm telling you, that's why you're going to start seeing it'll trickle at first.
But as we get into the year, you're going to see, I predict, it starts out with USA Today, it'll spread to other drive-by organizations starting to wring their hands Over Obama's executive orders.
And this case will be what prompts all of that.
But the real reason for it is to establish a narrative that these things are bad, that they're outside the Constitution, maybe even illegal, as a means of preventing the next president from even thinking of going in this direction.
Because what the media will be doing is sending a message to the next Republican, if there is one, Trump cruise, whoever, you better not expect to get away with this, like we let Obama get away with it.
That's going to be the message.
And the attempt there is going to be to dissuade them from even trying.
Now, Bernie Sanders, I wasn't going to lead with this, but folks, this is just, it's too good.
This is almost as good as Trump's name for her, Crooked Hillary.
So we get Lion Ted.
We got whatever lazy jab.
Now we've got Crooked Hillary.
And the Democrats don't believe that they're not concerned about this.
They are concerned about it because Crooked Hillary, you know, brevity is the soul of wit.
And the fewest number of words it takes to convey what you're thinking has the most impact or have the most impact.
Crooked Hillary says it all, and they're worried and they're out there laughing and making fun of Trump.
And there's going to be Hillary won't pay any attention.
But this is the kind of thing that's going to really, really bother them.
But this Bernie Sanders business throwing, of course, it's other people's money.
You've got to keep that when Sanders supporters are throwing dollar bills at Hillary.
It's other people's money.
It's not their own.
Bernie's supporters don't have any money.
Well, except for Clooney and the Hollywood crowd.
I first saw this story referenced by Real Clear Politics.
It's a video of Joy Ann Reed on PMS NBC, who was horrified by Sanders supporters throwing dollar bills at Hillary as if she's in a strip club.
She said, Bernie Sanders supporters throwing dollar bills at the motorcade of Hillary Clinton as she was going to the George Clooney fundraiser.
It is funny.
We're going to roll that video in a second.
She said, but just the idea of that.
And people went on Twitter afterwards.
You can see the video there.
People throwing dollar bills as if in a strip club.
And then she said that visual there throwing dollar bills at a woman as she's going by in her motorcade has the Democrat race gone over the edge treating Hillary like she's a pole dancer.
Trust me, Democrats, nobody's going to think that.
They might come up with other connotations about throwing dollar bills at a woman at strip club, but not pole dancing.
We're looking at the madam here.
We're looking at the babe that might run the joint, but she wouldn't actually be on the poll.
We hope.
Who actually knows?
Here's Charlie Wrangell.
This is from just this morning, CNN's new day.
Brooke Baldwin, the fill-in infobabe, said, did you see, did you see the 28,000 people at Prospect Park in Brooklyn over the weekend?
Senator Sanders, I mean, he's out raising Hillary Clinton.
There are more people showing up to his events than showing up to hers.
I mean, it's not even close, Congressman.
And she's out fundraised him now.
He's out fundraising her for three months in a row.
Do we have audio soundbite number 20?
I guess we don't.
Here's what Wrangell said.
I see where he's throwing away money with Donna Bills, too.
I wish you'd invested in some of the Democrat candidates that are running.
Then he said, no, the fact of the matter is, I see this as an exciting change in American politics.
It's very little to do with Bernie.
Bernie has the aspirations that anybody, even an old Democrat like me, would want to achieve.
And then she said, what about this business of throwing dollar bills at her motorcade out there in Hollywood?
The imagery, I'm curious if you see any more to it than that.
I think it's stupid.
I think that they have money to throw away, literally, and that it's not changing anything, and that he should collect that money and to make certain that Democrats in the House and Senate will be able to support a Democratic president.
I think he ought to not have his people throwing money in the street.
It's a complete disregard of the value of dollars.
It's a complete disregard of the value of dollars.
Hey, these dollars are more valuable than what the hell you Democrats spend them on.
These dollars have a purpose.
They are characterizing Hillary Clinton.
So I think it's great.
It's funny as it can be.
And by the way, don't forget, 25% of the Bernie Sanders voters say they will never vote for Hillary.
25% say they would never, ever vote for her.
And my guess is that the Democrat hierarchy doesn't believe that.
But they don't like this imagery.
And they don't like Trump out there calling her crooked Hillary.
This is Saturday in Dexter, New York.
First, there was Low Energy Jeb, then Lion Cruise, and a little Marco.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Soundbite three first.
Never, never mind.
You know what?
Folks, I'm self-funding.
Don't stop the tape.
Stop the tape.
Let's everybody get their head in the game here, and we'll be back into second.
Don't go away.
Yeah, Charlie Rayleigh, it's a complete disregard for the value of dollars.
People throwing them at Hillary Clinton.
If they were throwing the dollars at him, he wouldn't think that it's a disregard of the value of dollars.
In fact, that's probably what ticks him off.
He's used to people throwing dollars at him, and here they're out there throwing them at Hillary.
Greetings, folks.
Great to have you back.
800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program.
Here's Hillary.
By the way, this crooked Hillary business, a lot of people are probably saying that it's not that effective and it's kind of easy or cheap or whatever.
I think one thing to keep in mind here is the degree to which you and I are informed about Hillary Clinton and thus what we think of her.
There are a lot of people out there who don't think anything of the sort.
You have to keep in mind there are a lot of people, low-information voters, Democrats, who never read anything but laudatory things about her.
They never hear anything except laudatory, puff-piece, positive type things about her.
These are genuinely sheltered people.
And as a result, their preconceived notions of Hillary Clinton, I mean, she's got a great reputation with a lot of people.
First lady, tried for health care, senator.
It's one of the things that frustrates me and always has, that a woman as corrupt and as challenged in any number of ways as she is is totally not seen that way by a huge number of people.
I mean, here's a woman that can go on the Today Show back in 1997 and claim that her husband's affair with an intern was because of a vast right-wing conspiracy.
And you had people on the Democrat side believe that, or at least think there was something to it.
So the point is, crooked Hillary as part of the Republican presidential campaign coming out of Trump's mouth.
And now with Bernie Sanders reacting to it by saying, no, no, no, the whole system is corrupt.
Hillary's not corrupt.
The whole system.
By the way, Bernie's reaction, rather than pick up on that, which he says anyway, when he ties her to banks, when he ties her to any number of issues that he thinks are corrupt, he ought to be picking up this crooked Hillary.
But the fact that he doesn't, it's not Democrat Party unity, I think, that's causing him to circle the wagons.
Maybe a little fear of the Clinton political machine.
But there's also maybe what it really means is that Bernie's not that serious about winning this.
Just as back in the early days of the campaign, when he refused to get anywhere near her email scandal, and in fact, in a debate, went out of his way to say he thought it was much ado about nothing.
And that's when we all concluded, okay, this guy's just there as a placeholder.
He has no desire to win this.
But this crooked Hillary business, I'm just telling you, there are a number of people all over the country who've never heard her spoken of that way.
You might find that hard to believe, but don't doubt me on this.
And they're going to be scratching their heads.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, what does that mean?
And because they think Trump may have some credibility when he's just lying Ted and whatever else he said about other Republican candidates, listen, what is this crooked Hillary?
Even if they dislike Trump, they're still going to hear it.
The point is, for the first time, people who are sheltered and have a total investment in the Clintons are going to hear something that they never otherwise hear.
There are people who only get their news in the drive-by media.
They don't hear the things about Hillary Clinton that you hear on this program.
What they hear is people who are accusing Hillary being mocked and ridiculed and laughed at.
So this is one of these little things that people may cast aside and think that is no big deal.
And it may end up having more impact in characterizing Herford people than you might be aware.
And I think the Democrats are giving an indication of how bad this is by their reaction to Bernie Sanders fans throwing dollar bills at her motorcade.
They're really having conniption over this.
I mean, they start out with no sense of humor.
But I think many of them know how precariously balanced the entire Clinton political machine is, that the Clinton political machine requires daily massaging and caring and positioning by the drive-by media and the Democrat Party.
I mean, that's the firewall, if you will, that protects and always has protected the Clintons.
And it's not just the drive-bys shielding people from hearing things about her.
It is the drive-bys actually attacking those who are critical of her.
But this crooked Hillary, simple, may cause you to scratch your heel.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, what's that?
And they may look into it.
Or it may taint them in ways that you just can't see.
So we'll find out.
It won't be long.
Her negatives are already in trouble.
They're already demonstrably high.
Here's how she reacted to it on this week, yesterday, on ABC.
It's audio soundbite number four.
I don't respond to Donald Trump and his string of insults about me.
I can take care of myself.
I look forward to running against him if he turns out to be the Republican nominee, if I am the Democratic nominee.
What I'm concerned about is how he goes after everybody else.
He goes after women.
He goes after Muslims.
He goes after immigrants.
He goes after people with disabilities.
He is hurting our unity at home.
He is undermining the values that we stand for in New York and across America.
And he's hurting us around the world.
He can say whatever he wants to say about me.
I really could care less.
Yeah.
Well, of course, that's what she's going to say.
And in her case, it may roll off.
I mean, the Clintons are very much aware of the criticism they get.
But I'm talking about people they depend on, voting for them, donating to them, the people they depend on thinking that they're the cat's meow.
This kind of thing, because it's going to be repeated.
It's so simple.
Crooked Hillary is going to become a moniker.
I mean, we're going to use it here from now on.
She crooked Hillary here.
And I think a lot of people are going to see to this.
Okay, on the Republican side, there's all kinds of stuff happening on the Republican side.
I mean, it is effervescing and percolating out there.
And it's no way in any way known where this is all going to end up.
There's a story at thehill.com on an NBC Wall Street Journal poll.
Almost two-thirds of Republicans say that the candidate with the most votes should be the nominee.
The number is 62%.
That means that 62% of Republicans are saying, nah, scrub this 1237.
Just whoever ends up getting closest to it.
You know, with the most votes, that should be what determines who gets the nomination.
So, I mean, the RNC is not going to like hearing that.
And a number of people, strict adherence to the rules, are not going to like hearing that.
It's just going to add up to more pressure.
But let's get started with all the rest of this when we get back.
You hang in there.
That's right.
As a stickler for language, I always have wondered when people say, I could care less.
That means you care a lot.
It's I couldn't care less.
And Hillary didn't say I couldn't care less.
I could care less.
We know what she means.
But when she says, I could care less, if you really want to diagram that, it means she cares a lot.
Now, back to this NBC Wall Street Journal poll.
Here number 62% Republican voters' new polls say that the Republican presidential candidate with the most votes should be the party's nominee if no candidate wins a majority.
So even if nobody gets to 1237, 62% of Republicans go ahead and give it to the guy who gets closest.
55% said that it is acceptable if Ted Cruz wins the nomination at a contested convention.
And about 71% say that it is unacceptable for delegates to choose a nominee who has not run in the primaries.
But there were a lot of people that ran in the primaries, and some of them would be ideal choices of the Republican establishment.
Washington Post, GOP foreign policy elites do not know whether they will serve if Trump is president.
When the Republican foreign policy elite gets together these days, conversation quickly veers from challenges like the Islamic State or North Korea to focus on two questions.
How has Donald Trump come so close to becoming the party's standard-bearer?
And if Trump were elected president, would any of them serve in his administration?
Well, you got to understand, Trump, to these people, I'm telling you, these establishment types, Trump represents a bigger threat than ISIS.
Trump represents a bigger threat than North Korea or any other, and just like we represent the biggest threat to the Democrats because we are the direct challengers to their power.
Elliot Cohen, professor of strategic studies at Johns Hopkins and a former George W. Bush official said, in this Trump thing, it's the only thing we can talk about.
That's all we talk about.
Us foreign policy guys, that's all we talk about is Trump.
He's answered the question by spearheading an anti-Trump petition.
He's now got the signatures of 121 Republican national security experts who are pledging they will not work in a Trump administration.
Others are not so sure how they would respond if Trump called them.
One of them, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, look, leaving any particular president completely alone and bereft from the best advice people could give him, it just doesn't sound responsible.
There's one guy here saying, essentially, look, Trump's not going to know diddly squat.
It'd be irresponsible of thus, the gurus who have all the answers, not to help him out.
I love the assumption that these guys are the gurus.
They have all the answers.
And it would be silly not to help Trump out because he doesn't know.
Anyhow, I don't know how any of these quotes justify the Washington Post headline, but what do they care?
I mean, the headlines what they want people to see.
GOP foreign policy elites don't know whether they'll serve.
Meanwhile, from the politico, could Trump be impeached after he takes office?
It's highly improbable, but law scholars and political junkies are speculating about it.
I'm telling you, this from the Politico, the USA Today story today questioning Obama's executive orders.
They're all about establishing new narratives for the upcoming new president should he end up being a Republican.
Donald Trump isn't even the Republican nominee yet, but his incendiary rhetoric, most notably about killing the families of terrorists and bringing back torture, has critics on the right and the left discussing the most extreme countermeasures at an unusually early point in the race.
Impeachment is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress.
Even the mainstream Republican head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently tossed out the impeachment word when discussing a civilian backlash if Trump's trade war with the Chikons led to a higher price on every item sold at Walmart.
And then I'm quoted here in this politico story on his radio show last month, Rush Limbaugh even put a very brisk timeline on it.
They'll be talking impeachment on day two after the first Trump executive order, I predicted.
Well, lo and behold, yet another El Rushboat prediction comes true.
I just blew it by about six months.
They're not waiting for the first Trump executive order.
They're not waiting for Trump to even been inaugurated.
They're already talking about impeachment before Trump's even got the nomination.
What does that tell you?
They are scared to death.
I guess they think he's going to win, but to they're at their wit's end.
If they're talking about impeachment as a way of getting rid of Trump, you have to think that they've shot their wad getting rid of him during the primaries here.
Here's that USA Today piece.
Obama's immigration order overreaches our view.
This is what the Supreme Court oral arguments today were all about.
If this president is allowed to reinterpret the law, what about the next one, they write?
Sometimes it seems the Supreme Court's main purpose these days is to resolve disputes between Republicans and President Obama.
Toward the end of Obama's first term, the Supreme Court ruled on a challenge to Obamacare.
On Monday, as Obama approaches the end of his historic second term, the justices are set to consider his executive order that would allow millions of undocumented workers to avoid deportation.
Now, let me give you a couple pull quotes.
I'm going to read the whole thing.
Pull quote number one, imagine what executive orders Ted Cruz or Donald Trump would issue if elected president.
Trump has advocated mass deportations, temporarily banning entry of foreign Muslims, and building a border wall financed by confiscating the remittances that undocumented workers attempt to send to their families back home.
And pull quote number two, the court would be wise to limit the president's authority in this area and leave Congress and the White House to work out through the legislative process how to handle undocumented immigrants, as maddening as that might be.
That second pull quote is fascinating.
The court would be wise to what this is, the court would be wise to uphold the Constitution in this case.
The court would be wise to uphold the Constitution in this case and let Congress and the White House work through the legislative process, however maddening that might be.
So what these clowns at USA Today are saying, you know, this making of sausage, the legislative process, Congress and the White House, it's ugly.
It's so distasteful.
We don't like watching it.
All the arguments, normally we would be in favor of the Supreme Court deciding.
But this, they don't care about this.
This is all about their fear of precedent being set that would then be followed by the next Republican president.
So don't doubt me what this is.
It's a shame they have to do it.
In their minds, it's a shame they have to do it over this issue because I'm sure they would love the court to find for Obama on this one.
I am sure USA Today would love for the court to rule that Obama has all the power in the world to simply ignore immigration law.
But the truth is, we're on the last months of the regime, and they are more concerned.
They haven't opposed conceptually presidents using executive orders to violate the Constitution.
They have advocated for it.
USA Today and the whole drive-by media have advocated.
They have supported it.
They have defended it.
But now when we face the possibility of a Republican president, now it's time to editorialize against the whole thing.
It's just no matter how messy the legislative process is, we must always resort to it.
We must never allow wild presidents to usurp.
But where have they been the last seven and a half years?
Nowhere.
Everybody is getting scared.
On the left, they're all getting scared.
I kind of like seeing it.
Back after this.
Meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day.
Program in its 28th year now.
Is that right?
Still growing by leaps and bounds.
Mike in Pompado Beach, Florida.
We start on the phones with you.
Great to have you.
Hello.
Thanks, Rush.
It's a pleasure to be on with you.
My question is, with Trump, hypothetically speaking, at the end of this, if he has millions and millions more votes, hundreds and hundreds more delegates, and has won the vast majority of states, like 35 or some odd states, how does Ted Cruz get that nomination, whether it be by a second vote or a third vote, and still have all Trump's voters not feel like they got robbed and support him?
I don't see how it happened.
I mean, logistically, how could it be done?
You see, there's a way that all of that can happen.
And what Trump is doing here by going down the road that everything's rigged and that he's being cheated, Trump's philosophy is blowing up that potential strategy that the establishment has of somehow awarding this to somebody else on the second or third ballot.
That's why Trump is like, there was no canceled election in Colorado.
Yet, Trump writes an op-ed on Friday talking about the election camp.
Today on Drudge, there's a story about the four Cruz guys that could cancel the election.
There wasn't a canceled election.
There was no election planned in Colorado.
So the theme is being established by Trump that he's being cheated, that he's being rigged.
The whole thing's rigged in favor of everybody but him.
So that if something happens and he doesn't win it on the first ballot, somebody else does, then this is made order for the Trump voters to skedaddle and get the hell out of there and just be fit to be tied.
But my question, again, I know that that's what he's trying to do, but I'm just saying, let's say we get to the end and he does have millions more votes.
I mean, it's rarely happened that somebody gets all the votes, all the states and all the delegates, but they don't get the nomination.
Don't you think his voters, regardless of what he's trying to do, look, you have I've been explaining this over and over, and I'm catching hell from every direction in explaining this.
No matter how I explain it, either Trump or Cruz supporters think I'm endorsing what they're doing.
It's amazing to see this.
Let me just give you Pennsylvania as an example.
The short answer to your question is the millions and millions of voters do not choose the nominee.
In many states, they do, but in some states they don't.
Let me give an example, Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania coming up soon has 71 delegates available.
And by the way, you know the nominee has to get 1,237 delegates.
There's no mention of votes.
It's the votes of 1,237 delegates.
You with me so far out there, Mike?
I am.
Hang in there.
Hang in.
Look, Mike, I'm just explaining.
I don't want you to assume I'm arguing or any.
I'm just explaining.
So in the case of Pennsylvania, 71 delegates, but the winner of the popular vote is only going to get 17 of them.
The other 54 are up for grabs based on other criteria, but they are not bound to vote for on the first ballot.
They are not bound to vote for the popular vote winner at the convention.
And there have been some states with similar but Trump is also, he has been able, he's actually benefited from this system.
For example, in Florida, get this.
In Florida, he got all the delegates despite not winning every vote.
He got all the delegates.
In Florida, do you know that on the first three ballots, the delegates have to vote for the popular vote winner?
In this case, Trump.
So on the first three ballots, Florida delegates must vote for Trump.
There is no second.
Cruz cannot hope to get Florida no matter what he does.
Kasich cannot hope unless it goes to a fourth ballot.
I'm not a rush.
I'm not trying to figure out what's right and wrong.
I mean, parties by the tradition of our Constitution were able to pick their own candidate over the years.
It's only recently that it's become voter-based and primary-based.
But just in Rielville, if we get to that spot and Trump has more votes, more states, and more delegates, and then Cruz, who came in second, gets the nomination, I just think we're going to lose all those Trump voters because the scenarios never happen.
You could talk about rules and delegates and Florida giving all the delegates to, but people are just going to be like, man, this party, it screwed me.
I'm not voting.
And they think we're giving it to Hillary if that happens.
I don't mean to be changing the subject on you.
Mary Madeline was on one of the Sunday shows yesterday.
And she said the party's going to blow up no matter what happens here because it's been blowing up for who knows how many years because the GOP has been purposely trying to subordinate and suborn conservatives.
They've been ignoring, they've not been paying attention, they've been sabotaging conservatives, and it's going to blow up on them.
Look, I know what you're asking.
And we've got the poll here from NBC.
The answer to your question is: 62% of Republicans, not delegates, not attendees at the convention, 62% of Republicans, Coast Coast, think exactly what you think.
Whoever shows up there with the most votes in these primaries should get the nomination to hell with 1,237.
By the same token, 55% of the same sample think it'd be perfectly fine if Cruz got the nomination on the second ballot.
So you could say almost two-thirds agree with you.
And you're concerned that if Trump is denied the nomination, and he look, that's another wordplay game.
I'm sure that got me in deep doo-doo too.
Did it?
Well, do you keep track of all this stuff out there with people saying?
Because I don't.
I just, my instincts are just telling me here.
But I made the point, you can't be denied something until you've won it.
But the Trumpsters think that that process has begun.
Look, there's a headline here.
This is from Politico.
This is not going to please you, Trumpists.
Ready for this?
Trump massacred Trump massacred in delegate fights once more.
More than 90 delegates were up for grabs Saturday, and Ted Cruz grabbed most of them again.
And your question still stands, Mike.
I know, well, how can that be?
And I've tried to explain it.
You know what?
You're on your own.
I've explained it.
I've been explaining it since September.
I can't be any more crystal clear than I have been.
Now I got to take a break.
I just saw the clock.
Back here in just a second.
Because I can read the stitches on a curveball, because I see the pitch before it's coming.
I'm able to tell people what Trump's strategy is going to be.
Problem is, when I do that, people think I'm advocating for it.
Same token I can tell people what Cruz's strategy is.
When I do that, people think I'm advocating for it or not advocating for it enough or whatever.
But I'm going to persevere out there, folks, because that's the only way I know to be.
Or some such dribble.
▲
Export Selection