All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 4, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:50
August 4, 2016, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Yes, sir, here we are, my friends.
Great to have you here.
I know you've been eagerly anticipating today's excursion into broadcast excellence.
You will not regret it.
You never will regret being here.
Happy to be here.
Happy to have you here.
Telephone number is 800-282-2882 and the email address, lrushbow at EIBnet.com.
Well, it is obvious.
The Washington establishment is in full destroy mode.
The entire Washington establishment, consisting of the Republican establishment, the Democrat establishment, the media establishment, the think tank establishment, the entire political class has arrayed every gun that it has at the Trump campaign, and they are firing both barrels 24-7.
It is a breathtaking sight to behold, ladies and gentlemen.
Why all of this panic?
No, no, now hear me out on this.
I understand on the surface of it, it would make sense.
You've got Republicans over here, and their nominee is now 10 points down and is losing some of the battleground states.
And as a result of that, yeah, if the nominee were Romney or if the Romney nominee were Ryan and this were happening, you can understand the panic.
But these establishment types have been in panic since Trump announced.
They've been in panic since Trump didn't implode.
And they have been openly expressing their opposition to Trump since the day Trump got in the race.
And they've openly said that they want Hillary to win.
Many of them have come out, some quoted, some not quoted, some publicly, some anonymously.
The list keeps growing of established Republican types who say that they can't just handle this anymore.
They can't deal with this anymore.
It's unacceptable.
It's just too embarrassing.
And they've got to go with Hillary.
They always are going to go with Hillary.
Why all the sudden panic?
Some of this doesn't make sense to me because, look, if the people in panic had started out supporting Trump, then I would understand this panic.
But the people I'm talking about have been predicting what's happening now from the get-go.
They have predicted that there would be a Trump implosion.
They predict that Hillary would run roughshod.
This is part of their attempt to defeat Trump during the primary.
So they want to get rid of Trump.
Why aren't they out there dancing?
Why aren't they celebrating?
Why aren't they going on and on about this is exactly what we wanted?
We can't have our party taken over by this guy.
This guy can't possibly win.
I mean, this is exactly what they wanted to happen.
So why the panic?
And by the way, who's telling us there's panic?
The drive-bys, the drive-by media.
And I don't doubt there's panic, but there's a part of it that doesn't quite connect logically because the very people said to be in panic and some of the people saying they are panicked are getting, at least as reflected by polling and media coverage, exactly what they wanted.
I can't remember the names right off the bat, but I mean, you know what I'm talking about during the primary process.
Seems like every week there was a Republican elected or official, some prominence, who would come out and make it clear very publicly that he or she just couldn't support Trump.
I can't do it.
I can't do it.
And they would either explore the possibility of finding a third party candidate or finding ways to deny Trump the nomination at the convention or maybe voting Hillary.
But they never have supported Trump.
And they always have made it clear that this is kind of what they wanted to happen in a way.
I mean, the people that have been opposed to Trump do not want Trump being the agent that redefines the Republican Party.
So a Trump shellacking and Trump taking constant never-ending hits in the media should be cause for celebration.
So why are they panicking?
Any theories, Mr. Snerdley?
Or am I off track on this?
I mean, no opinion here.
I'm literally asking a question.
Some of this isn't making any sense.
Why the panic from people who are seemingly getting what they wanted all along?
Are they panicking?
Because now, you know, it's one thing in, say, September, August, September last year to dream about Trump destroying the party so that you can read.
But it's another thing to see it happen.
Uh-oh, I didn't really want this to happen.
Or to happen to happen.
Well, no, but it was always, if you say you can't support Trump no matter what, your principles, whatever do not permit you, for whatever reason, that Trump's a reprobate here, Trump's unqualified.
If you can't bring yourself to support Trump and you've been publicly saying so, and then you've been flirting with, supporting, raising money for, or even supporting Hillary, then why is any of this upsetting?
These people seem to me to be getting exactly what they want.
Is it the sudden realization that Trump imploding, if they think that's what's happening?
By the way, don't bank on that yet, folks.
Don't infer anything yet.
But they perceive it.
The media perceives it.
The media is trying to create the impression: is it that they are associating a Trump implosion with a party implosion?
Is it that they thought maybe they could arrange it so that Trump would bomb out, but that wouldn't have any effect on the party?
I don't know how it can be that when these people, the people I'm talking about, have made it clear that they're abandoning the party as long as Trump's there.
The party's not worth standing with and saving.
No, because Trump's ahead of it as the nominee, because Trump's saying he's a Republican, it's not worth saving the Republican Party.
Nope, I'm going to join the Democrats, or I'm going to join some third party, or I'm going to go independent, or I'm going to raise money for Hillary or whatever.
Why this now, the need for an intervention, now that story, that's coming from Trump supporters.
And by the way, who is it?
We've got it coming up with this.
Somebody's claiming Newt started that story, that it's not a genuine story.
Somebody, I've got it, the soundbite's coming.
I just quickly had a chance here to peruse the audio soundbite transcripts.
So we got Clint Eastwood.
Let's change gears because I've raised the questions.
And maybe some of you people out there on the phones want to tackle this.
Because I'm genuinely curious about it.
Clint Eastwood, an Esquire magazine article, has come out and said that he's for Trump, going to vote for Trump.
And that Trump, he loves Trump.
He said, Trump is the enemy of the Pusai generation.
And everybody said, holy cow, he said that.
Yes, he did.
He said that Trump is the enemy of the Pusai generation.
So all day on the drive-by media, they have been members of the Pusai generation on his guests.
And I saw on Fox not long ago a couple of women, apparently of this generation, and they were being asked what they thought of Eastwood, referring to their generation as a Pusai generation.
And they were outraged.
I mean, these women are in their 30s.
Who knows?
I'm guessing 30s, maybe, maybe early 40s.
I recognized one of them, and I didn't recognize the other.
And they were just livid.
They were telling Eastwood, stick to his own generation.
You know what?
Eastwood, he's just an old guy now, and just because he's a movie star, it doesn't have any effect on our generation.
He just sticks to what he knows.
He doesn't know us.
And then Eastwood grab audio soundbite number 23.
I mean, this just stands by itself.
This was on the TMZ website yesterday.
They're interviewing Eastwood about the presidential race.
And the TMZ reporter says, So you think that Trump should stop saying inflammatory things?
Or is it a bad thing to be too politically correct?
It's a bad thing to be too PC, but I think there's a limit to it.
I mean, you don't have to be rude to somebody.
But also, you know, the other guy was being exploited by a political party.
That's not good either.
Whether either party does it, exploitation shouldn't take advantage of some poor slob.
Okay, so Eastwood is weighing in on the Kazir Khan situation by suggesting that Trump should not be trying to take advantage of some poor slob.
Clint Eastwood, who carried on that magnificent imaginary conversation with Obama at the 2012 Romney convention, I thought it was great.
Some people thought it was hard for the younger generation to decipher and that it didn't quite hit home the way that everybody had hoped, but I liked it.
I thought it was brilliantly conceived.
And I thought it was flawlessly executed.
But I look at things from a different way sometimes.
I look at the degree of difficulty in the performance and then bringing in the performance.
That was a tough thing to do.
And Eastwood did it well.
So to me, it was pretty hip.
So we have that out there.
What else do we have out there?
We've got, oh, yeah, we've got, what soundbites this?
Liz Mayer.
She's a Republican consultant.
Let me find this.
Can somebody tell me you're enough top?
Does anybody know?
17, I'm told that it is.
Cookie, when I get up today, first thing I do when I get up is the second thing that I do when I get up is I check the email, and there was an email there from Cookie.
And it said, Liz Mayer actually called Trump.
Do you want me to bleep it, or do you want me to use it?
So I'm still in the newly awakened, freshly awakened haze.
So I said, I'm not going to make a hasty decision here.
So I grabbed my glasses and I put my glass on, reread it, and I said, go ahead, use it.
She said it.
She said it on CNN.
She said it to Anderson Cooper.
Anderson Cooper didn't flinch.
So if Anderson Cooper didn't flinch, CNN aired it.
Here we go.
Question from Anderson Cooper to Liz Mayer.
She is, by the way, a spokeswoman for the Johnson Weld third party campaign.
And she has done spokeswoman work, I think, or consultancy work of some kind for the RNC.
The question: Have you lost any hope that the GOP can rein Trump in to be more traditional or at least more disciplined as a candidate?
I lost all hope of that probably seven, eight months ago now, quite candidly.
It's amazing to me that anybody's still having a discussion about having some sort of an intervention or bringing him back on message.
This is his message.
His message is being a loudmouthed dick.
We're going to continue to see the Republican nominee basically acting as if he's on a suicide mission and aiming to take the whole rest of the party down with him.
It was just earlier this week that I was telling people how proud I am that I have been able to maintain the high standards of refined and sophisticated communication.
For example, by not slinking low and using the word that begins with a P to describe urinate.
That word's common.
You hear it all over everywhere.
You hear it on cable news, you broadcast TV primetime.
You hear it on talk radio.
I am very proud that I have not resorted.
And so I get here today and I'm faced with this dilemma.
Do I play a soundbite from a babe calling Trump a loudmouth dick?
And then I look over here and Eastwood is referring to millennials as the Pusai generation.
And then the Washington Post, there isn't really anything magical about it.
Why more millennials are avoiding sex?
You know why they're avoiding sex?
Why?
It's too much time on the phone.
They're spending too much time streaming video on YouTube.
They're living vicariously.
They're having sex vicariously on the phone.
Not with the phone phone, not with it.
But while using it.
You know, I knew this generation, there was something different about them.
When I first learned they weren't interested, the guys in the millennial generation were not interested in cars.
I thought that was a big moment.
That was seminal.
I mean, that could, I said to myself at the time when I saw that, this could signal a tremendous shift in American cultural attitudes and behavior because people, and not just young men, people's relationship infatuation, people's interest in cars has been in the top five things that you would say are distinctly American.
I mean, in Europe, they don't care about them.
You got to buy something no bigger than a matchbox to fix the streets that haven't been modernized since the 1700s over there.
So you can't even get a real car over there that you can go everywhere in.
But here, other than Germany, but here it's always been a different story.
And then we've got, in addition to all that's going on with Trump, and we're going to get into this today, we've got the, there's a plethora of news about the $400 ransom payment, single-payer ransom program, Barack Hussein Obama.
And if you like your hostage, you keep your hostage, is the slugline of the single-payer ransom program.
Now, yesterday, Hillary Clinton said, that's old news.
You're asking me about something that happened.
I don't, it's old news.
What difference does it make now?
Which is a standard Clinton technique.
That's old news.
Nobody cares about that anymore.
And one of the things that the regime was saying, they had their State Department spokespeople go out and say, hey, this is just a coincidence.
It was just a coincidence.
It just so happened that we made a payment to the Iranians for their infrastructure rebuilding program, don't you know, of $400 million.
It's just a coincidence that they released an American hostages the same day.
And now we find out from the Wall Street Journal, the Justice Department raised objections to the cash payment to the Iranians.
The administration was discussing it.
There was no coincidence.
It was planned.
It was an actual Obama policy.
You know, I mentioned to you yesterday that the pallets, the crates of money delivered to the Iranians were not in U.S. dollars because international law, because of the sanctions, does not permit that.
So we had to print a bunch of money.
We had to then convert it into Swiss francs and Euros and other currency.
And Dr. Krauthammer made the point on Fox News last night.
That is money laundering, folks.
The regime laundered $400 million in American currency in order to legally, quote unquote, give it to the Iranians.
And he made the point that if any American CEO had done that, he'd be in jail before the trial even began.
Okay, have speak fast here.
Not a lot of time.
Mike Huckabee on Fox last night after the Bella Fox Business Network.
David Asmond said, hey, Mike, Governor Huckabee, people like Rush Lindbaugh are saying you can't judge this campaign by the same measures you've used in others because Trump isn't ideological.
There's not any ideological component in this race.
What do you think about that, Governor Huckabee?
I think they're largely right.
It doesn't mean he can just go off and do anything because ultimately there are undecided voters.
But here's what is true.
This is not an ideological election where people are voting traditional Democrat or Republican lines.
It's a disruptive election.
Now, it may be ideological on the Democrat side.
I think Hillary's getting votes because there's a D next to her name.
But on the Republican side, this is true, whether you like it or not.
Trump is not an ideological guy.
He's not running an ideological campaign, meaning Trump's not running against liberals.
He's running against status quo establishment.
Now, Robert Costa used to be a reporter at National Review.
He was so admired by the Washington Post, they hired him away.
And he's now a reporter on the presidential campaign.
He was on Charlie Rose last night.
And Charlie Rose said, how deep and long, how deep and wide is the movement that Trump has?
How long can it last?
It's wider than any party.
I mean, it includes some Bernie Sanders supporters.
It includes some libertarians.
The most important voter in this movement, when I travel around the country, is the previously disengaged voter.
They're almost a nonpartisan voter, but they've given up not just on the political process, but they've disengaged from civic society.
They don't really follow politics.
If that is a real coherent voting block, then Trump, regardless of the polls, will have a shot in November, and regardless of all this mistakes, because that is a huge block.
There's so much of this country that rarely, if ever, votes.
And if for some reason they come to the polls in droves, that changes everything.
This is why they're scared, and this is why all the panic that doesn't seem to be sensible.
Why panic when the guy you don't like is important that they are?
More on this in just a second.
I'm going to play this Bob Costa, Robert Costa, soundbite again, and there's actually a follow-up soundbite that goes along with it.
I want to share a little story here with you.
We introduced at rushlimbaugh.com, Rush24-7.
This is the, on the pay side of the Rush Limbaugh website, there's a free side, which is just fabulous.
But the subscriber or member side is just out of this world in terms of the collection of knowledge organized, the data, the historical record of this program.
And it just, it's incredible.
And so every now and then we offer little premiums to new subscribers, and it always irritates people who subscribed when that particular premium was not available.
And the last one that caused this controversy or minor little headaches is the never Hillary bumper sticker.
It's a never Hillary bumper sticker that we made available a little bit a month ago.
We cannot keep these things in stock.
They are flying off the shelves.
We've got people signing up and becoming members of Rush 24-7.
And don't get mad, folks, because I never talk about this.
I don't talk about this nearly as much as I should, in fact.
But we've got people signing up at a rate that almost duplicates when we rolled out our website 15 or so years ago.
It's incredible.
And so we added in the EIB store where we have some merchandise, not a lot, t-shirts and golf shirts and bags that'll do dads.
We created t-shirts that are modeled after the bumper sticker.
And those are flying off the shelves.
I mean, there is so much anti-Hillary sentiment out there.
Now, you're not seeing any of this in the media.
I don't mean my website.
You're not seeing any of the anti-Hillary sentiment reported.
It's just not being mentioned.
The media, I think Media Research Center did some calculations, and there are, for every negative story of Hillary, there are like 100 negative stories on Trump.
And it's not, it may even be worse than that.
So what I did, I went up to Connecticut for an annual golf tournament I play in back on July the 13th, 14th, and I took 50 bumper stickers with me.
I got them free because I own the company.
So I took them up there with me.
And everybody that saw one wanted one, but only 10 people took them.
They were afraid that there would be vandalism on their cars or that liberal friends of theirs would criticize them.
So they didn't want to publicize their anti-Hillary opinions.
They didn't want anybody to know.
Now, Connecticut is obviously a deep blue state.
And the number of conservative Republicans there is not that great.
But even the ones who are do not want it known.
There's a genuine fear.
Now, part of this fear is common.
There are a lot of people who don't tell you what they really think about things because they just don't want to get into arguments.
And particularly with people on the left, because those people are vile.
They're disgustingly mean and potentially dangerous.
This is what people think.
So it's best not to provoke them.
Now, I'm not extrapolating this to mean anything.
I'm not suggesting that because of this little anecdotal story that you can expand it and suggest there's all kinds of anti-Hillary support out there, but they're not going to tell anybody, including pollsters.
But I think there's some.
Well, heck, I know there is.
And it cuts both ways.
There are people who are for Trump who don't want to say so.
They see what happens to Trump supporters.
I mean, if you're a Trump supporter and you see what the media every day is about what kind of degenerate and reprobate or whatever else Trump is, well, my God, why would anybody want to say publicly I support that guy?
But obviously a lot of people do.
And then I double back.
Pardon the repetition here, but I really want to make this point.
I don't understand this panic.
I understand if there's panic within the Trump campaign, but I honestly, I don't know whether to believe that either.
That could all be a media manifestation, media creation.
I know that if you just look at this and your only source of data is the media, you can't help but conclude you have to fight the conclusion that Trump is in trouble.
That's what everybody wants you to believe, and it may well be.
I don't know.
But what doesn't make sense to me is the people in the Republican Party who have opposed Trump since July being in a state of panic over what's being reported as Trump's campaign unraveling.
Why would they be in a state of panic?
Why wouldn't they be celebrating?
Instead of telling reporters how panicked they are and how desperate times are and how, oh my god, we're going to get creamed, they think, why aren't they out there dancing?
Because these are the people, at least some, who are supposedly panicking.
These are the people that never wanted Trump.
These are the people who are hoping and praying every week that Trump would implode.
Many of them predicted that Trump would implode, and many of them said they're going to vote Democrat.
Many of them said they're going to abandon the Republican Party.
Many said they're going to sit out.
Many said they're going to work for Hillary.
Some said they're going to endorse Hillary.
Why are those people panicking?
It doesn't make any sense.
And if they answer that, well, we're panicking because look what's happening to our party.
Well, I'm sorry, but isn't this what you wanted to happen to the party?
Now, I know a lot of Tea Party people are not unhappy that a Republican Party may be in the process of imploding and then have to be put back together again.
But I'm talking about establishment, Republican types.
I mean, if you don't want to stand and preserve your party, and I'm talking about establishment types, if you proudly, loudly affirm your opposition to the nominee, in this case, the Trumpster, and then you say you're joining Hillary or you're sitting out or you're voting third party or whatever.
Well, by definition, you are helping whatever your fear is happening to the Republican parties.
I just don't understand the panic.
I think there would be, I mean, the people supposedly panicking don't want Trump to win anyway.
And the people supposedly panicking are the ones mostly who predicted that this kind of thing would happen, that Trump would implode.
Not that he is.
I'm reacting to media coverage.
That's all anybody else is doing either.
Except, folks, overflow crowds at every Trump event.
You can't get into them.
The people that do get in are as raucous as ever.
They're as supportive as ever.
I have talked to a lot of people that have attended these rallies.
I had a guy tell me, Rush, you don't know what walking a rope line and signing autographs is until you do it with Donald Trump.
And then he said, well, maybe you do, Rush.
But I'm telling you, most people don't.
It's just, it's phenomenal.
In the midst of all of this, all of that, that support that was with Trump from day one, is still there.
You just don't see it reported anymore.
And the reason for that supposedly is that Trump isn't saying anything new.
And so the media has grown tired and bored.
And while all of this is going on, can anybody find Hillary Clinton?
We need a search party.
We need an APB.
She hadn't had a press conference over 200-some odd days.
She's not out there by design because the people who don't want Trump to win, the vast majority of them realize that Hillary can't win it.
They've got to take it away from Trump, or they've got to make it, they've got to gin it up so people are voting against Trump, not for Hillary, because she can't pull that off.
Maybe in her base, maybe she can energize her base, but no more than that.
So given all this, I want to go back to Robert Costa last night on Charlie Rose on PBS.
He's formerly the National Review now at the Washington Post.
And amidst all of this panic, and by the way, there's celebration too.
The media and the Democrats are celebrating whatever is going on or whatever they're reporting is going on with Trump.
I mean, let's face it, they're reporting an implosion.
Can I just use the word without feeling worried about it?
They, in effect, are reporting the campaign's imploding.
They're reporting it's the worst two weeks any candidate for president's ever had.
That's what they want everybody to think to conclude.
But I don't see, I don't know, I don't see the dancing in the streets metaphorically.
I don't see all this happiness that would accompany that.
So here's Costa.
He's a young guy.
He's okay.
But he was being asked by Charlie Rose about the Trump campaign.
And some people still not sure about things because they know some of this is outside the establishment's ability to comprehend it when plugged into traditional formulas.
So first question, Mr. Costa, how deep and how wide is the movement that Trump has, in a sense, accepted as his reason for being.
That's a convoluted question.
What he's asking him here, who are these people?
How big is this Trump movement?
Is it bigger than what we see?
How deep is it?
Tell us.
You're covering it.
It's wider than any party.
I mean, it includes some Bernie Sanders supporters.
It includes some libertarians.
The most important voter in this movement, when I travel around the country, is the previously disengaged voter.
They're almost a nonpartisan voter, but they've given up not just on the political process, but they've disengaged from civic society.
They don't really follow politics.
If that is a real coherent voting block, then Trump, regardless of the polls, will have a shot in November, and regardless of all this mistakes, because that is a huge block.
There's so much of this country that rarely, if ever, votes.
And if for some reason they come to the polls in droves, that changes everything.
Well, now that is interesting, isn't it?
Nobody's talking about that group.
You ever heard anybody talk about because you can't poll them?
The group that traditionally doesn't vote, and there are tons of them.
You probably know many of them.
You know what they say.
I'm so fed up about it.
My vote doesn't count.
Those people are cheating as left.
It doesn't matter.
Don't waste your time voting.
It doesn't matter.
The thing's all set up.
It's all rigged.
You and I don't have a prayer.
A lot of people like that.
Mr. Costa here says Trump's connected with them.
And nobody knows anything about him.
Nobody knows how big the group is.
Nobody knows if they're actually going to vote.
But at every Trump rally, no matter where it is, no matter the size of the arena, it's overflowing.
People have to put in satellite rooms with video monitors.
So Charlie Rose then said to Mr. Costa, Well, what is your best evidence that Trump may be able to pull this off?
Remember now, this question's asked right smack dab in the middle of what's being reported as there's an intervention coming.
Trump's bottoming out.
Trump's blowing up.
Trump's imploding.
It's a mistake.
The Republicans are regretting it.
Everybody thinks it's horrible.
Trump may even quit.
You know.
You've heard all that.
And yet here they are on Charlie Rose talking how he can win it.
So Charlie now's, Mr. Costa got his attention.
Charlie's a little concerned.
Charlie says, okay, well, what's your best evidence that Trump can actually pull this out?
I'm seeing it everywhere I go.
People are just frustrated with the country at large, not just with a specific party.
And Trump may be the benefit of that, but he's not entirely making an overture to them in a straightforward way every day.
He's a symbol of someone who's an outsider, an interloper, someone who's against the establishment and the elite class, however people want to describe it.
And they are the ones that are carrying out the daily destroy mission on Trump.
Understandably so.
So this is interesting.
And so Costa, he knows they're out there, and he knows that if anybody, this group is going to be attracted to Trump.
But then he says Trump not really making an overture to them.
In other words, Trump may not even know to whom he's appealing and how far and wide.
Which makes my point that this movement, whatever you want to call it, existed before Trump.
It's not dependent on Trump.
And that's another reason the establishment is very worried and concerned, because it doesn't depend on Trump.
Trump came along and connected with it like nobody else has.
And that's why they're standing with Trump.
They're not going to let people take Trump out.
It just isn't going to happen.
I got to take a quick timeout here, my friends.
It seems like I go along in this segment.
It's because, well, they're all good.
Let's admit it.
Okay, so numbers to go along here with Mr. Robert Costa's point.
Voter turnout in 2008 was 62.3%.
In 2012, it was 57.5%.
So a 5% dip in voter turnout.
Almost half the people in the country who could vote don't, or in 2012 didn't.
Probably about 45% who could vote didn't.
If they show up, if Trump gets a fraction of them, it would totally upend every formula everybody has out there.
These people are not polled.
Also, keep this in mind.
And I never see anybody dispute this.
Let me just ask you, see if you recall.
The latest number, in whatever poll you want to take, the number's pretty consistent poll to poll.
Percentage of the American people think the country's head in the wrong direction.
What's the number?
It's 70.
It is 70%.
This, I think, is why Mr. Costa, making the point that he is not Costas, Robert Costa.
There's no S there.
Don't make the mistake of discounting the guy because you think he's a gun control nut on Sunday night football.
It's not the same guy.
Here's Bob in Coronado, California.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
I have two comments that I think are the reason that people are fearing an implosion.
The first one, which I think is less important, applies to Republicans and non-supportive Republicans and the liberals.
And I think that's the wilder effect, which you can explain better than I. But I think that scares that group.
But what I think really scares the Republican establishment is if, in fact, this group of people that you're talking about doesn't show up to vote, they're going to vote for Trump.
And that's why they're going to the polls.
If they get disgruntled and say, I'm not going to vote for Trump, I can't take it, they're going to stay home.
And that is minus one Republican vote for that senator, that House person.
And they need the voter to go to the polls.
And the Donald supporter, if he gives up, isn't going to vote for the rest of the ticket.
Well, now, wait a minute.
Okay, now that's a good point.
But these people should have thought of that.
They should have thought down ballot.
If they're going to abandon the Republican Party because of Trump, they're abandoning the Republican Party.
They can't say they're going to work for Hillary and then I guess they could say they're going to turn around and work for their favorite senator or what have you.
Anyway, we'll throw that in the hopper.
There's a couple of good points there, particularly the second one.
We'll be right back.
Yeah, you got to be very careful.
Folks, I am not.
I'm not saying the Trump campaign's imploding.
I don't believe that it is.
The media wants you to think so.
You know, all these stories about there going to be an intervention, everybody reputed, supposedly in charge of that, says it's not true.
Other than Rudy, who said Newt made up the story, but there isn't one.
But don't misunderstand me.
I'm just referring to what the media wants you to believe.
▲
Export Selection