Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

News Flash, MSM: People Voted for Trump Because They're Fed Up

November 11, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

The mainstream media is scratching their heads, trying to figure out what went wrong with the election --- but the answer is right before their eyes.

"I'm so tired of listening to the pundits on television trying to figure this election out. This election is really, really simple. Really simple," Glenn said Friday on his radio program.

RELATED: Opinion--Dear Anti-Trump Protesters, This Temper Tantrum Is Truly Embarrassing

While there are certainly fringe elements of Trump's supporters that may be racists or misogynists (just as there are racists and anarchists on the left), the vast majority of Trump's supporters are hard-working Americans that see their future and the country they love slipping away.

"People were afraid they were going to lose their God and their guns. They were afraid that freedom of religion . . . was on the ropes. That freedom to be yourself, to chart your own course was on the ropes," Glenn said Friday on his radio program. "They were tired of not being listened to. They're tired of being talked down to. They're tired of being called racist."

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these simple questions:

• Why do political pundits keep calling conservatives racists and misogynists?

• What's the real reason people didn't vote for Hillary Clinton?

• Do Democrats have any self-awareness?

• What would Glenn ask Katie Couric and her ilk?

• Did Obama oversee the biggest collapse of new companies being created in American history?

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

STU: But, I mean, if you think about that, they're going to be put -- that wing of the party is going to be empowered. They're going to say, from their perspective, Hillary Clinton wasn't liberal enough. She was all -- you know, talking about Wall Street. She was in bed with Wall Street. She didn't try to vilify the Republicans enough.

And that was the complaint during the campaign by many of the aides who wanted to say, Donald Trump is just a continuation of everything the Republicans have been doing.

Hillary tried to say, in most cases, hey, look, this guy is not even a Republican. He's too crazy for even the Republicans. The Republicans, I know you're good people. It's him. He's the crazy one. They will blame -- I'm not saying it's right.

GLENN: I'm so tired of listening to the pundits on television trying to figure this election out.

This election is really, really simple. Really simple.

People were afraid they were going to lose their God and their guns. They were afraid that freedom of religion, which it was, is on the ropes. That freedom to be yourself, to make your -- to chart your own course was on the ropes, that our jobs were going away. And they're going away because of regulation.

Now, most people just think it's other -- it's those companies moving to California. But if you had somebody that really could explain it to the American people, those jobs are moving away because of regulation and high taxes.

So it's not to punish the companies. It's to make this the most stable and the most attractive place on earth for companies to come and relocate. And they will come here.

We didn't do that. So they're afraid of their jobs going overseas. They don't see a future, except in many cases, people think it's a Marxist future.

Okay.

On the other side, Hillary Clinton, it's not that we voted for hatred. I'm surprised that Donald Trump could -- could win in this country. I am truly surprised. That's not a surprise to anybody who has been listening to me. I didn't think the guy could win. So now try to figure that out.

All right. I have to then say, "The people of the country are racist and misogynist." No, they're not. They're not. They're not. They're not. They're not. They're not.

So what are they? They were frightened.

PAT: Fed up.

GLENN: They were fed up. They were tired of not being listened to. They're tired of being talked down to. They're tired of being called racist.

PAT: And they're downright angry about all that stuff.

GLENN: Exactly right. And so -- but they're not misogynist. They're not racist.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: They see what they love being torn apart, exactly like the left is afraid right now. That the country that they thought that they were living in and they were building was being torn apart.

When the left is now in the streets saying, "We got to take our country back," I would ask the same thing that Katie Couric and her ilk said to me, "From whom? From whom?"

PAT: From whom?

GLENN: They were making it into a racist thing.

PAT: From a white guy? Are you taking it back from a white guy?

GLENN: Right. So -- that -- they're feeling exactly the same way now.

PAT: Yeah. And there's no self-awareness though. They don't understand that.

GLENN: No self-awareness. And the other big piece of this election is Hillary Clinton is corrupt.

PAT: Terrible. Terrible. Just a terrible --

GLENN: But beyond terrible. If she was just terrible, she might have won.

PAT: I don't know. People don't like her.

GLENN: I know that.

PAT: Don't like her.

GLENN: But they also know Benghazi. They also know she is -- she has been corrupt.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: The Clintons -- they like Bill Clinton, so they'll give her -- they'll give him a pass.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But I don't know if even Bill Clinton would have gotten the pass.

PAT: Not anymore. Not anymore.

GLENN: Remember, Bill Clinton -- no, Bill Clinton was even shouted down. Bill Clinton didn't draw big crowds. Because he has sold out and they know it.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: And she's corrupt. I have not heard anyone from the left on television saying, "You know, guys, do you think maybe we shouldn't run somebody who has taken emails and thinks she's above the law?"

PAT: Well, they had nobody else, other than Biden who turned it down. Who did they have? Other than a 74-year-old socialist.

STU: Could we stop for a moment and think about how pissed Joe Biden is?

PAT: And nobody else.

Oh -- oh, my gosh. He probably would have won.

GLENN: Hmm.

STU: I mean, this guy -- I mean, he wouldn't have had the FBI thing, probably.

PAT: Right.

STU: And that's really -- again, she was ahead until 12 days before that thing. And the FBI thing happened, and he was able to close that gap. I mean, you know, something else may have happened with Joe Biden.

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: But the negatives of Joe Biden are also very similar to the negatives of Trump when it comes to campaigning. They say they have gaffes. They see things that are outlandish at times. It would have been interesting.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: Now, this. President Obama's economy created 220,000 new companies in the first quarter of 2016. Sounds like a lot, right?

PAT: What? Yeah.

GLENN: Yeah. 220,000 new companies in the first quarter of 2016. This is the latest data.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: This is down from 246,000 created in the fourth quarter.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: This is the biggest collapse of the creation of new companies in American history.

PAT: Really?

GLENN: Nobody's talking about it.

Wednesday, as President Obama comes to the end, company creation rates are as dismal as they were when he was inaugurated. New business creation, especially small business, that's the backbone of America and a growing economy, as we hit another stumbling block -- and it will happen. Don't cheer at the stock market going up under Trump. This could be become a bigger bubble. Be careful.

Featured Image: Supporters of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump cheer during election night at the New York Hilton Midtown in New York on November 8, 2016. (Photo Credit: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.