Rush Limbaugh Program - May 10, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 10, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:45

May 10, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
	So the guy that they granted immunity to can't find any emails.
	Not a single email.
	Pagliani, whatever his name is, the guy they granted immunity.
	Hillary's I.T. guy, no doubt, sent emails back and forth to her for four years.
	Yeah, they can't find any.
	And anybody that's still surprised over this, you need to be committed.
	Anybody that thought this was ever going to amount to anything, the evidence every day is nothing's going to happen to Mrs. Clinton on this email stuff.
	What about the rule of law?
	There is no rule of law when the left is running things, folks.
	All it is is their agenda.
	Greetings.
	Great to have you here.
	Rushland Boy, 800-282-2882.
	If you want to be on the program email address, lrushbo at eibnet.com.
	It's like this thing, the stuff that we're learning about FakeBook.
	You know, FakeBook out there is this, no, no, no, none of these allegations are true.
	But of course they are.
	FakeBook has been deceiving every FakeBook user all of these years.
	The newsfeed on FakeBook is called the newsfeed.
	I was asking yesterday, what's the newsfeed on FakeBook called?
	It turns out it's called the newsfeed.
	And it also turns out that your average fake book user has been convinced, has been persuaded, that whatever shows up on the fake book page as trending in the newsfeed is the result of popularity.
	An algorithm is determining which of the stories are the most read, the most passed around, the most forwarded, whatever you do with things on FakeBook.
	And therefore, the only stories that mattered were those stories that advanced the Democrat Party or the leftist agenda.
	Well, of all people, of all places, Gizmodo exposes the fact that there weren't any algorithms being used, that in fact it was a bunch of Ivy League 20-something millennials who were nothing but a bunch of young average liberals who were actually choosing the news.
	They were making it all up.
	Not the news.
	They were making the list up.
	There was no algorithm being used.
	They simply decided amongst themselves what they wanted to appear as the most read news story.
	And a classic illustration is Black Lives Matter.
	It turns out that Black Lives Matter is exactly, it's a replica of Occupy Wall Street.
	It's not real.
	Black Lives Matter is made to look as massive and big as it is because of fake news construction on places like FakeBook and the Drive-By Media.
	You know, Occupy Wall Street was not organic.
	Occupy Wall Street was not happening until the Tea Party came along.
	The Tea Party was organic.
	The Tea Party was genuine.
	It was actual Americans fed up and ticked off, and they began to organize, and many of them had never been involved politically at all beyond voting.
	They found a way to organize.
	It was leaderless.
	There wasn't one person you could focus on to destroy or impugn and thus destroy the whole movement.
	And so the left didn't know what to do with it.
	They couldn't censor it.
	They couldn't stop it because they couldn't control it.
	And there wasn't one person that was in charge that they could destroy and thus destroy the movement.
	So they did what they always do.
	They created their own response to it called Occupy Wall Street.
	And they made, it was like Wag the Dog.
	Wag the Dog happened on TV, but it never really happened.
	The movie about a fake war that some political consultant arranged to make it look like it was actually happening on TV to help his candidate when there was no war.
	Well, there was no Occupy Wall Street.
	You had some people, you had some ragamuffins, you had some protesters, and they pitched tents in various places.
	It was all bought and paid for.
	And it looks like Black Lives Matter is the same thing.
	Just it never did have the massive popular support that FakeBook and other leftist organizations wanted people to think that it was or had.
	And that is the case with so much of popular culture liberalism.
	Now, while all that's going on, conservatism is being censored.
	Actively censored.
	Not by virtue of algorithms, not because fake book users are not reading conservative things, but because these 20-something Ivy Leaguers hired as news curators at FakeBook were simply eliminating anything that had anything to do with conservatism except things that portrayed it in a negative light.
	Your average FakeBook user has no idea, thinks that all of this is the result of popularity.
	All of this is the result of trending by actual FakeBook users creating these trends when in fact it wasn't.
	Here's a grab soundbite number two.
	This is Michael Nunez.
	This is Jake Tapper last night, CNN.
	Nunez is the Gizmodo tech editor, and he ran the story about what was happening at FakeBook, suppressing conservative stories.
	And Jake Tapper said, why might FakeBook executives or officials want to keep stories about people like Mitt Romney or Ted Cruz or Chris Kyle, American sniper?
	Why would they want to keep those stories off the trending list and inject others into it?
	Well, why do you do it at CNN, Jake?
	Not Jake personally, but whoever arranges the news, whoever decides what's going to be the news at CNN, why do you do it?
	It's the same thing.
	It's no different.
	That's the point.
	FakeBook has editors.
	FakeBook has curators.
	FakeBook has people selecting the news and also selecting what isn't news.
	Remember, we've talked, I don't know how many times about something as important as deciding what is news is deciding what isn't news, what people never hear about.
	By the way, that explains the success of conservative media.
	Whenever conservative media is allowed to be heard, it triumphs.
	It wins big time.
	That's why the left has to suppress it.
	That's why the left has to censor it.
	They're scared to death of it.
	When they can't control it, look at of all the news organizations that the Drive-Buy Media controls, what are they focused on?
	Fox News and this program, the tooth, they've got to shut us down.
	They've got to shut this show down.
	They've got to shut down Fox News, even though they own 90% of mainstream news.
	And it's not news.
	It's another thing.
	It isn't news.
	It's a Democrat agenda.
	So anyway, Jake Tapper's asked this guy from Gizmodo, why would FakeBook want to purposely keep conservative stories up?
	Jake can answer the question himself.
	But, but it's FakeBook, and so it's Gizmodo reporting.
	So let's go to the source from Gizmodo.
	That's Michael Nunez.
	Here's his answer.
	They have basically just tried to wash the existence of these curators from the face of the planet.
	For the last two years, they've been saying an algorithm is doing this sorting.
	We have found that actually a small group of 20 journalists that are recent graduates from East Coast private schools and often Ivy League schools are the ones that are actually activating a trend so that it can show up in your feed or blacklisting it.
	So, you know, it's not that Facebook has any bias here.
	It's that these young journalists are the ones that are choosing what trends and what doesn't.
	And, you know, the question then becomes whether you trust recent graduates to determine what the most important news of the day is.
	So it's the same thing that happens in the drive-bys.
	It's not an actual conspiracy, meaning they don't get together and collaborate on what they're going to report, what they're going to leave out.
	It's just what they do.
	I mean, they're liberals.
	And they believe everything liberals believe.
	And at the top of the list is that conservatism is insignificant.
	It's corrupt.
	It's way the hell over there as an extreme right.
	It's abnormal.
	It's whatever.
	And so they're not even interested in it.
	They don't have to collaborate.
	That's the point about liberalism.
	Lois Lerner, and I make the point again, everybody says, well, where's the smoking gun from Obama?
	We need the smoking gun that shows that Lois Lerner was instructed to do what she did with the Tea Party.
	She didn't need a memo.
	Lois Lerner was hired because she already knew what to do.
	Lois Lerner was there for the express purpose of denying tax-exempt status to conservative Tea Party groups.
	Nobody had to tell her not to do it.
	That's why she was there.
	The left doesn't have to send reminder memos.
	That's just what they do.
	They censor, look at political correctness, they censor anything and anyone that says something that threatens them, something they disagree with.
	So, but this is this is it, folks, it's a bigger story than you're going to see reported on in the drive-bys.
	And that is the evidence of how big it is, that it's basically a one-time shot.
	They report it and then they move on.
	The reason it's so big is because, sadly, but it's the reality, FakeBook has quickly become the primary news source for a whole lot of Americans because they trust it.
	Actually, I think that the news feed is the result of an algorithm determining most read, most liked, most agreed with, most popular, or what have you.
	So they buy into the scam, and as such, the drive-bys are threatened by it.
	I mean, everybody that is in the quote-unquote news business is threatened by it because that's where most Americans now get their first taste of the news every day: is that the fake book news feed.
	Now, FakeBook is denying that they did any of this.
	FakeBook is, I think, I think FakeBook is denying that they've had anything to do with this, but it's silly to deny it because it's imminently and totally believable.
	But it's big because this is how it's the same thing with pop culture.
	It's how most people find out what's going on.
	It's what, you know, people are followers.
	If something's hot and popular, they want to be in on it and they want people to think they agree with it and see it the same way.
	So it's pretty hideous.
	And once again, all it does is confirm, amplify that the left really has to censor its opposition because it cannot compete.
	Gretch Gutfeld, grab soundbite number one, Gutfeld.
	He says this pretty well.
	This was on the five yesterday, the Fox News channel.
	And Kimberly Guilfoyle was asking the group there on the show, why wouldn't FakeBook want those messages there?
	Because they have an agenda?
	The reason why they don't want it there is because it always wins.
	Wherever restrictions are removed, conservative thought takes over.
	If you think about talk radio in 1987, when all of a sudden those restrictions were gone, Rush Limbaugh took over.
	When the internet became a thing, what was the biggest site?
	Drudge Report.
	Cable news, CNN for a little while, then all of a sudden, boom, Fox News comes in and becomes number one.
	Wherever restrictions are pulled, conservative thought takes over because it's thought.
	And it does win, and it triumphs, and the left can't deal with it, and the left can't legitimately debate or fight, so they choose not to.
	They just censor it.
	That's what political correctness is.
	Censor it or eliminate it or stigmatize it or attack and criticize leaders of movements that they perceive to exist and discredit them to discredit all the followers and discredit the thoughts and the beliefs.
	Anyway, nothing new here that you haven't heard before other than the left has found a way to corrupt yet another, turns out to be sizable element of major big-time media.
	Brief time out, my friends, as we roll right on the program just underway, back with more after this.
	Well, the politics is a little shaken up today, folks, in all sectors.
	And that's because of the polls in three swing states that Hillary Clinton was projected to win in a landslide.
	It's now a dead heat.
	Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are effectively tied in the swing states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, according to the results of a Quinnipeak University survey that was released today.
	No presidential candidate has won an election since 1960 without winning at least two of those three states.
	Now, in Florida, in the Quinnipiac call, Clinton Paul Clinton leads Trump 43-42.
	The conventional wisdom is that Trump isn't going to get above 20% in Florida because women hate him and Hispanics hate him and children hate him, but everybody else hates him.
	So he's not going to do better than 2025%.
	So they shocked today to see Hillary leading 43 to 42, which of course is margin of error.
	Now, Clinton does hold Hillary holds a 13-point advantage among Florida women, 48-35.
	But on the other side of the gender dividing line, Trump's lead among men is just as big, 49-36.
	In Florida, independents are split 39 to 39.
	So all the conventional wisdom out of the box is already turned upside down.
	Hillary is supposed to be cleaning Trump's clock in Florida because of the women divide, the gender gap per se, and the fact that the conventional wisdom says that Hispanics hate Trump.
	And so now the left, the liberals, the Democrats, they're trying to concoct excuses for this.
	Well, they're saying, this is just Trump's post-nomination bounce.
	Yeah, well, what's the problem with that?
	Trump hasn't been nominated yet.
	There hasn't been the convention.
	The post-nomination bounce is actually called a post-convention bounce.
	And there hasn't been the convention yet.
	Therefore, there hasn't been a bounce.
	And these people on the left, as you know, they live and die by polls.
	So now they're scratching their heads.
	And they're actually talking amongst themselves on these left-wing TV shows.
	They're asking themselves, my God, oh my God, do you think Trump can actually win?
	Well, I would have to say, looking at the polls, it looks like it's...
	No, no, no, the polls can't possibly be right in this.
	Yes, you say that, but we rely on these polls, and we believe them every time they come out.
	Well, yes, you have a good point.
	But this can't possibly be right.
	So they're having to reassure themselves.
	Something's not right with the polls.
	If it was just one state, it would be easier.
	But in Ohio, registered voters prefer Trump to Clinton 43 to 39.
	That's just at the fringe of the margin of error.
	That's not supposed to happen.
	Because just like in Florida, Hispanics, however many of them there are in Ohio, are supposed to hate Trump.
	And women everywhere are supposed to hate Trump.
	And there aren't enough men who might like Trump and dislike Hillary to make up for all the women that hate Trump, except none of that's showing up in the polling data.
	Trump leads among men 51-36 in Ohio.
	Women prefer Hillary 43 to 36.
	And among independents, it's Trump over Hillary 40 to 37.
	Okay, so it's a second state, and it's an important state.
	It's Pennsylvania.
	And then we go to Ohio.
	I'm sorry, Pennsylvania.
	Pennsylvania is 43-42 Clinton, just like it is in Florida.
	Among women, Clinton leads 51 to 32.
	Trump leads with men 54-33.
	Now, at roughly this same point in the campaign back in 2012, Barack Hussein-O.
	led Romney by single digits in Ohio and Pennsylvania, while Romney led by one point in Florida.
	Obama ended up winning all three, all by single digits.
	And that's what people are going to be falling back on here in Britain.
	But this isn't supposed to happen.
	You have to remember that in pretty much within every circle of the establishment, be it Republican or Democrat, I'm talking specifically establishment types, Trump is going to get blown out.
	I mean, this is what they're all telling themselves.
	Republican establishment, especially.
	But the Democrats believe it too.
	Trump is going to get blown out.
	It isn't going to be close.
	In fact, this is going to be such a blowout.
	It's going to be so bad that it is going to forever change the political landscape in America.
	And it's going to forever change.
	It might actually serve to eliminate the Republican Party.
	That's how bad it's going to be.
	That's how badly Hillary is going to beat Trump.
	And then these three polls hit.
	And there are people scratching their heads in curiosity.
	Others are in near panic over this.
	Grab soundbite number three, Robert.
	Nope, wrong one.
	Number four, we can squeeze this in.
	Nah, because I need to run four and five back together.
	But I've got some examples here of drive-bys talking about this.
	And they're having to chat themselves off the ledge.
	They're talking to each other.
	No, no, no, no, don't worry.
	But does this mean that Trump can win?
	Yeah, I think we have to admit now that, yeah, Trump can win.
	no, no, Trump can't win.
	There's no scenario that, well, I think the polls indicate that we might have to consider it as a possibility.
	So they're trying to talk themselves off the ledge here in several drive-by networks.
	Anyway, brief timeout, my friends.
	We'll get back here as soon as we can and roll right on right after this.
	So I just saw that Ted Cruz was on the radio today, and he was asked whether or not he would get back into this presidential race if there's any conceivable way that he would re-enter the race and restart his campaign.
	And Ted Cruz said, well, if I see a pathway to victory, yes, I can see getting back into the race.
	I just saw that that happened.
	I don't know how many of you have heard it previously or what I just saw that it happened.
	And it's all about keeping your voters loyal to you, I think, for what comes next in 2020.
	So many people using what happens now as a springboard for the future.
	Totally understandable.
	You know, we've talked about this guy, Curly Hoglund, on this program before numerous times.
	I don't know if that's how he pronounces his name for sure.
	Spells it H-A-U-G-L-A-N-D, 69 years old.
	He's a pool supply magnet.
	Become independently wealthy, selling pool supplies.
	He lives in North Dakota.
	He is a very, very powerful Republican when it comes to the convention.
	And it is Curly Hogland who's been running around the entire primary season, trying to tell people: look, you think that you're choosing the nominee when you vote in these primaries.
	You think you're choosing a nominee when you go to these state conventions, but you're not.
	The voters do not choose the nominee.
	We do, meaning delegates to the convention.
	The party, and he's been abundantly clear.
	He's made this statement.
	I can't tell you how many times.
	He's treated as kind of a gad fly.
	He's just out there, a little bit of a rack and tour, maybe even in some places considered to be a kook.
	But the thing about the guy, and there's another story about this, is where does this run at Politico today?
	Curly Hoglund loves the rules, 69 years old, is a rule-mongering crank.
	On the National GOP Standing Rules Committee, he's been the pedantic curmudgeon, the stubborn speed bump who for years has raised points of order only to watch establishment Republicans stampede all over him.
	One problem that he might have is that he either sees or imagines rules that nobody else seems to see, such as his claim that none of the delegates are actually bound by their state rules.
	He said that earlier within the last 30 days.
	He said, Hey, I've read the rules, and I'm here to tell you that no delegate is bound to vote the way the primary voters voted in a majority in their states.
	It's a little-known secret, but I know it.
	And he's out there telling everybody delegates can vote for whoever they want, whenever they want.
	There's none of this first ballot stuff.
	Well, nobody else has seen that rule, but he's out there.
	And of course, since Curly is saying things that cause confusion, discord on the Republican side, the drive-bys love to focus on him.
	He's described here as a self-taught maverick and an expert on Republican convention rules.
	They say here he spent 10 years pushing schemes to take power away from Republican primary voters and give it back to the party insiders.
	And I do believe that.
	I think that's he's made it plain that that's what he thinks already happens and what should continue to happen.
	And anyway, the story is all about how this is the guy who could stop Trump.
	That it isn't over.
	So I mentioned this story in conjunction with Ted Cruz saying on the radio today that if he sees a path to victory, he might restart his campaign.
	And then here you've got this guy, Curly Haugland, profiled again at Politico Today as the establishment's last best hope to stop Trump.
	And make no mistake, there are establishment people who still, you disagree with me on this.
	There are establishment people who still harbor some great unknown event that'll come along and change the fortunes.
	And somehow what we all think is going to happen won't happen.
	There are still people trying to make sure that Trump does not get the nomination, no matter what happens delegate-wise.
	Don't kid yourselves on that.
	Now, the audio soundbites, here is CBS this morning, soundbites four and five.
	Mark McKinnon, these are the no-labels guys that have this show on Showtime called The Circus.
	And it's about the selection of nominees during the primary process.
	And you've got Mark Halperin, who's part of the group, and McKinnon, and they proudly call themselves no labels, which means they're Just they're conservatives, but well, no, they're not.
	They used to be maybe, but they don't like to be called conservatives because they're embarrassed and they're ashamed of it.
	But yet they're still Republicans.
	So they think no labels is the way they can inoculate themselves from public humiliation, being mocked and being laughed at.
	So Nora O'Donnell is talking to him.
	They're talking about the presidential race.
	She says, now, McKinnon, you work for George W. Bush.
	George W. Bush's father.
	Other Republicans say they're not going to go to the convention.
	Can Trump win this?
	You've worked for George W. Bush, George W. Bush, his father.
	Other Republicans say they're not going to the convention.
	Can he win?
	Well, that's what these polls out today say.
	Yeah, he can.
	I mean, look, these are swing states, and he's winning in Ohio.
	That's quite a surprise.
	Mark Halperin has to come along and assure them that these polls are real.
	They're real polls in real states.
	A lot of the tensions are Republicans thinking.
	We don't really like him.
	We don't trust him.
	And he can't win.
	If it looks like he can win and Republicans can have the House, Senate, and the White House, a lot of Republicans will fall on the real polls.
	I mean, these are real numbers.
	These are real polls in real states.
	Yeah, Charlie Rose, you hear that.
	These are real polls.
	I mean, these are real numbers.
	Oh, yeah, Charlie.
	That's right.
	These are real polls.
	These are real numbers.
	Oh, wow.
	Well, what do we know about these polls?
	Do we know what these polls have read?
	Do we know what books these polls have read?
	Well, they're real polls, Charlie.
	They're real states.
	Wow.
	Really?
	Trump's doing this well.
	Now, over to ABC.
	Good morning, America.
	George Stephanopoulos speaking with Matthew Down.
	This guy used to work for the Bushes.
	He's a Bush spokesman and has moved over to the drive-bys.
	He's now a supposed strategist or analyst, the gad fly here running around.
	I guess he's more considered, he wants to be considered a moderate more than anything else.
	And anyway, he's talking with Stephanopoulos about these battleground polls that have the Democrats freaking out right now.
	Those polls, even though this is quite early, have to be bracing for the Democrats.
	I think they're very bracing for the Democrats.
	We're going to have a jump ball today in the course of this race.
	I think what the voters are going to be faced with is you have two candidates that are very disliked in the course of this.
	It's a little bit like being hungry, walking up to the refrigerator, looking in the refrigerator, thinking, I don't want anything in that refrigerator, but I'm hungry.
	And I think that's going to create tremendous volatility in this race from now until election day.
	That's an interesting analogy.
	You're hungry, you walk up to the fridge, you open it, and there's nothing in there you want.
	That's depressing, isn't it?
	Depending on how hungry you are.
	And it can make you really mad at whoever stocks the fridge.
	Who the hell is responsible for nothing being in here that I like?
	So it can make you mad.
	But it wasn't, that's not it.
	Larry Sabateau, this is Fox and Friends this morning, Steve Docey, speaking with Sabateau.
	He runs the University of Virginia Center for Politics.
	And he's talking about these polls.
	And Doocy says, look, there are three brand new Quinnipiac polls.
	Florida, Trump and Clinton are tied.
	Pennsylvania, pretty much tied.
	Ohio, Trump actually leads Hillary by four points.
	Larry, what is going on here, bud?
	You have to go into the poll to see what's significant.
	The number one thing that I think is significant from these polls is that average Republicans, rank and file Republicans, have more or less coalesced around Donald Trump.
	That is, the rank and file is ahead of the leadership, which is still disputing whether Donald Trump should be the nominee or whether they should support Donald Trump as the nominee.
	And that obviously is important.
	You need a unified party, at least at the base, in order to win an election.
	Well, you realize the importance.
	That Sabateau is saying the party has already unified behind Trump.
	That's what these polls have to mean.
	Look, you can't just commission a poll and then when you don't like it, say, it can't be, and throw it out.
	And Quinnipiac has its reputation.
	People respect it.
	So it's got Trump up by four in one of these three states and within the margin of error tied with Hillary and the other two.
	And nobody can believe it.
	And Sabato says, because what's happened here is the Republican Party, the people that are going to vote in the presidential race, have unified behind Trump.
	They've accepted Trump.
	The only people that haven't are the establishment and their buds and others that are related to them.
	And it's making it appear like there isn't any unity.
	But there is when it comes to voters.
	That's Sabato's point.
	We'll be back.
	And here's Ted Cruz from the, this was with Glenn Beck this morning on the Glenn Beck show.
	And this is Cruz talking about the possibility of re-entering the presidential race.
	There is a path to victory.
	We launched this campaign intending to win.
	The reason we suspended the race last week, Indiana's lost, I didn't see a viable path to victory.
	If that changes, we will certainly respond accordingly.
	So he's not going to release delegates yet either, just in case something happens.
	And then Rubio's not there.
	You know, Rubio got tainted by a rumor that he might be Trump's VP.
	Rubio cannot do that.
	After what Rubio has said about the Trumpster, he can't.
	There's just literally no way.
	In fact, what Rubio said about Trump's con man, all that sort of stuff, both on the debate stage and elsewhere, those things are going to be in Democrat anti-Trump ads during the presidential campaign.
	So when I saw these stories that Rubio was in the VP, there's no way.
	I mean, I don't even think Rubio would want to do it.
	I think Rubio could be talked into it.
	There's no way that was going to happen.
	And he hasn't released the delegates either.
	And Trump or Rhetta Cruz hasn't and is now openly saying, do you realize the gaskets that are blowing all over the left with Cruz deciding to get back if he does?
	Just the idea that he might.
	It's going to drive a bunch of people babby.
	Okay, to the phones we go.
	Michael in Roxbury, Maine.
	Great to have you.
	You're up first today.
	Hi.
	How are you today, sir?
	I actually am fit to be tied.
	I'm trying not to tell anybody about it, but since you asked, I have to be honest.
	Well, that's good.
	Never mind that.
	What's up with you?
	Mike, my question is, everybody seems to be talking about Trump and Hillary, Trump and Hillary, like it's already sewn up, and nobody's really speaking about Bernie Sanders anymore.
	And I'm just wondering why that is, because it seems to me like he's got an awful lot more support than he's getting credit for, I guess.
	And I just want to know what you have to say about that.
	What I have to say about that is that the deck is stacked against Bernie.
	It has been from day one.
	He was never going to win the nomination.
	He was in this to provide a foil for Mrs. Clinton, to make it look like she had some opposition, to present the illusion that she's a tough fighter, that she can overcome opposite, that she's not being coronated.
	The whole thing's an illusion.
	And the proof of it is that Bernie is winning state after state after state and accruing hardly any delegates.
	If this were happening on the Republican side, I mean, Trump's winning and he's getting a vast majority of delegates and they still think the game is rigged on the Trump side.
	Can you imagine if Trump had decided to run as a Democrat and was doing the same thing to Hillary that Crazy Bernie is and she was getting a delegate?
	Whoa, that'd be worth the price of admission.
	Are you a, Michael, are you Bernie Sanders fan or are you just interested in politics and trying to figure out what's happening on the Democrat side?
	Well, kind of both.
	I like what he has to say.
	He comes across to me as very honest, cares about, you know, the people, wants to see some changes made, and I agree with the changes.
	What does he see?
	Give me a couple of examples of things he says that you like or you agree with.
	People paying their fair share in taxes.
	You know, not bailing out the big banks, holding people accountable for the mistakes they know they made even before they made their mistakes.
	You know, they knew it was bad.
	You see, that's the Democrat Party that did all that.
	And Bernie's right.
	But it's not just Hillary.
	It's the whole Democrat Party.
	It's Hillary's husband.
	It's the Democrat bankers.
	It's the consultants.
	It's all the donors.
	They all conspired in that subprime mortgage thing to bail out the banks.
	Absolutely agree with you.
	I don't disagree with you on that at all.
	But I'm just a little bummed out with how the situation is going, and a change needs to be made.
	Why do you think why are you animated or info?
	Why are you inspired by hearing Bernie say he wants to raise tax on the rich?
	How would that change your life for the better?
	I don't think it would change my life for the better.
	I'm hoping it improves life for the people who really need it.
	How would that work?
	I'm not sure.
	I'm not sure how that would work.
	What do you think the fair share is for the rich?
	Well, I know my father was a machinist, and he worked his whole life in the machine shop turning handles.
	And for every $1,000 he made, he had to pay $300 out in taxes.
	You know, that's 30%.
	And you've got big corporations, I guess, you know, from what I'm hearing, who are paying less than 5%.
	Well, but corporations don't end up paying taxes.
	That's been true since the beginning of corporations.
	They're able to pass whatever tax bills are, for the most part, along to consumers at the wholesale and retail level.
	Corporations don't pay taxes.
	But I don't want to get into that with you because you'll disagree with me on it.
	Well, no, I won't.
	I'm not very politically savvy.
	I just like to hear people say, I don't know why, but I know why.
	Would you believe me?
	I'm going to give you some statistics, a statistic here from something called the Tax Foundation, which is an independent group that studies who pays taxes.
	The top 1% of wage earners, and that's over $1 million a year, the top 1% pay 44% of all income taxes.
	Did not know that.
	Well, that sounds like they're paying more than their fair share to me.
	If the top 1% is paying almost half of all income taxes collected, see, there's a great - I have a very fascinating story today that I may get to.
	It's about people that get ticked off on airplanes after having to go through TSA.
	They have to troop through and load up and sit down on the plane.
	And they pass through first class on their way to coach, and it just ticks them off.
	And they get mad at the rich, the people up in first class, they see those big seats, lots of legroom, they get mad at the rich.
	They don't understand who they really ought to be mad at in that circumstance.
	I'll try to explain it.
	Look, I know that crazy Bernie, he's only 290, 300 delegates behind Hillary, but that's 290 or 300 delegates.
	And I don't know that the superdelegates are even being counted yet.
	So he doesn't have a prayer, folks, if things stay as they are.
	He doesn't have a prayer.

▲