Did you guess who Glenn picked as 'Man of the Year'?

Screen Shot 2014-12-17 at 5.57.05 PM

After a lot of thought and debate, Glenn has picked his man of the year: Steve Green, president of Hobby Lobby.

His company began in a garage and is now worth over $3.3 billion with no plans of stopping. But they don't just invest in the company, they invest in people. The Green family pays their employees $5 more the minimum wage. They have the most immaculate warehouse Glenn has ever seen, and they just opened another 70 stores.

Steve Green deserves this recognition not just for his business success, but also for his principles. In 2014, Steve Green and Hobby Lobby took Obamacare to the Supreme Court to protect religious freedom from Obamacare's birth control regulations. They won.

The Green family has developed a four-year public school Bible curriculum they plan to have in thousands of schools by 2017. They also plan to unveil a Bible Museum in Washington, DC, filled with texts and artifacts.

Has anyone else had such an impact on the country?

Watch Glenn's interview with Steve Green below:

Glenn: And I welcome Steve to the program now. Hello, Steve. How are you, Sir?

Steve: Doing good. How are you doing, Glenn?

Glenn: I’m very good. I selected you for a couple of reasons. First, let me just start with the courage that it took to take on the most powerful man. You are going to be remembered, I think, very much like Mellon was remembered under FDR. He was a guy that the administration, FDR just took and just ravaged for years and years. He won in the end because he was right. Do you see your place in history on that one Obama lawsuit? Do you recognize that?

Steve: It’s hard to say. You know, I think that we know it was a significant decision, and the family knew that we really had no option but to take the administration to court because of the position that we were put into. I have felt like that a win would not be remembered as much because it’s more business as usual, but we hear from a lot of people the significance of the decision, and we feel like the religious freedoms that our founders gave us needed to be protected, and we were very excited about having a win.

Glenn: Okay so here’s another reason. I’ve got a whole list of reasons why I’ve selected you, but on that same topic, you are a freak of nature because you said what you just said, I had no choice, the family had no choice but to take this on. Yes, you did, Steve. You were threatened with $1.5 million fine a day. You could have lost everything with Hobby Lobby. So you did have a choice. What was it that…and was there a time that the family ever said or any of your advisers said geez, Steve, man, let’s fight another day here, this one is too big?

Steve: Well, we have stated as part of our statement of purpose for our company that we want to operate our business according to biblical principles, and for us to be able to do that, to live out our faith, that is where we didn’t have a choice. We either had to compromise our faith and walk away from what we believe or, you know, be willing to violate our conscience and in essence be willing to take life.

Glenn: Steve, I have to tell you, I know a lot of companies that say they want to operate on biblical principles, and I think this is why religious people sometimes get a really bad name, when push comes to shove, most times they fold. So wanting to select you as man of the year for what you guys have done, teach us, how do you hold the line when it gets so tough?

Steve: Well, I think it has to do with a personal relationship with God and realizing that one of the things that I think our family felt comfortable in or had a lot of comfort in is knowing that when we know that we’re making the right decision, when we’re making the right choice, we are ultimately in good hands. We put our lives, our business, in God’s hands, and we trust Him, which again is a part of our statement of faith. We believe that…or statement of purpose, we believe that God has protected us, and we trust Him for our future, and that needs to be more than just words. We have to live that out, and that’s what we strive to do on a daily basis.

Glenn: All right, so let me stay on business here for just a second. I’ve been to your warehouses. Who knew the hobby business could be what it is. I walk in…in fact, my son-in-law just said to me, he was out last weekend on Saturday. He came, and he had dinner with us, and he said hey, by the way, if you ever talk to the Greens, tell them we were in Hobby Lobby, and I can’t leave that store. We want to buy everything.

I went up to your facilities maybe a year ago. I still want to do an episode just on your facilities. It is immaculate. It is absolutely, I mean, you could eat off of the floor. The way you treat your employees, the fact that you take minimum wage, it’s seven…what, 7.25 an hour? You pay, your minimum wage is $15 an hour. Why do you operate that way?

Steve: Well, my father, who started this business, still very active in this business, has always had a drive and a certain knack for retail, and part of that is always to be the best that we can be, always been very orderly himself as an individual, so that comes into the business. And we know that our most precious commodity, most precious asset as a company is our people and that we are only as good as the organization that we build.

And when my father speaks to our new co-managers as they come in, one of the things that he always says is that their number one job as a manager of a store is to build a good organization. So we know the value of having good people, and part of that is by treating them well with respect, doing the best that we can for them, and then we know that in return, they work hard for us, and so that has always been what we have strived to do. There’s times when we fail, but that is what we try to do on a daily basis.

Glenn: How difficult is it to keep your store closed on the Sabbath?

Steve: You know, when we made that decision to do that several years ago, for a couple of years our profits struggled, but after we went through the cycle, and it took a couple years for us to do it store by store, state by state, our profits really took off. And we just feel that it was a bit of a test that God was putting us through—are you truly going to trust me and know that I’ve got your back?

And what we believe today is that we draw greater employees, they have a greater appreciation for the fact that they know they’ve got that day off, and again, they work that much harder for us and take care of our customers, which is ultimately what their job is. So the profits have been record almost every year, so the closing of the stores has not hurt us at all.

Glenn: You guys are kind of the Sam Walton of today. You started with nothing. I mean, still at the lobby of your business, you have that frame maker that you started making frames in the garage or in the dining room of the house, and now you are this, you know, several billion-dollar business, and yet, unlike Sam Walton, you don’t really get credit for anything. I have not seen the news reports that says wait a minute, these guys, we’re supposed to hate them, but look at the way they’re running the business, look at how they treat their employees, look at how their customers feel about them.

I know you well enough to know that you’re not going to say anything derogatory about anybody, so let me rephrase this question. What advice do you have for businesses that want to be successful and entrepreneurs that want to be successful that nobody has asked you for in the mainstream media?

Steve: You know, I think that it’s focusing on the business. It’s going into the office every day, working hard. I think of Jim Collins’s book, Good to Great, and as I read that, there’s many things that I say oh, well, that’s what my father taught me, just going in there, working hard.

You know, it was years, it was 20 years that there was not a lot of profits. It was just going into work and eking out an existence, and it was that long-term determination to say we can make this thing work that my father spent years doing that ultimately as it started growing, the Good to Great book of Jim Collins refers to this flywheel. And as that flywheel started going, you know, it kind of looks like that hockey stick chart that you talk about. It has just grown and been very successful, but it just took a lot of hard work and dedication and commitment to do the best that we can on a daily basis.

Glenn: Okay, so let me just end this segment, because I want to come back and talk about some other things that people don’t know about you. But let me just end this with this part…the backlash against you guys has been so vitriolic. You are an evil company that doesn’t want to provide birth control. The lies that have been said about you are phenomenal. How do you keep such a positive attitude? Everybody in your family, I mean, you are not kicked to the ground, and even when you were in the throes of it, nobody in your family throws stones. How do you do that?

Steve: Well, I think again it goes back to our faith. We just know that we are in good hands and that our reputation is not as important for us as how we represent our Lord and Savior Christ, and so we leave that to him, and if we take some hits, we’re fine with that. We just know that we serve a great God, and we trust Him in our business and in our future.

[BREAK]

Glenn: Talking to Steve Green, he is the guy I have selected as the man of the year for my program, and I wanted you to get to know him a little bit better. He and his family have started the Bible museum, the Museum of the Bible that is going to be built in Washington, D.C., and we’ll talk about that here in a second, but he has also reached out to people of all faiths, which is truly remarkable.

He has met with Pope Francis. You want to explain a little bit of what you guys have done with the Pope in Rome? Because I find it amazing that the Vatican is impressed by your collection. They’ve got probably one of the greatest collections of historical items in the entire world, and yet you are impressing them, and they’re borrowing stuff from you.

Steve: Well, one of the things is that a lot of the items that the Vatican has in their collection are not necessarily put on public display very often. From time to time they do, so when we started this journey five years ago, we knew that a museum was going to be several years off, and we wanted to start telling the story that our collection told. So we started a traveling exhibit, and the exhibit provided an opportunity for us to actually have one at the Vatican. So in 2012, we had an exhibit at the Vatican, and they asked us to come back, and so we did again this year, which was where I was able to have a meeting with Pope Francis and was honored to be able to speak with him for a few minutes.

Glenn: Did you get a chance, did they take you into the room of the winds?

Steve: We had gone to several of their rooms. I don’t know about that specific room, but they gave us a tour back in 2012.

Glenn: Okay, you need to go in. It’s where they came up with the Gregorian calendar. You’d know it if you’d been in it.

Steve: Okay.

Glenn: You have to ask them for that. I don’t know how I got invited in, but the Vatican Museum, the lady who was a curator of the Vatican Museum, the next day, I saw her, and she was giving me a tour, and she said, “You went into what room?” And I explained it to her, and she said I’ve worked here…they will never let me see that. You could get in. But it’s where they came up with the Gregorian calendar, and it’s awesome. Like only the Pope gets to go into it.

Anyway, but you’ve done other things. You have now gone, we just normalized relations, which I’m not really sure how I feel about normalizing relations with communist countries of Cuba, but we are now normalizing relations. But you guys did something amazing in Cuba that I don’t think anybody knows about. Explain what you did in Cuba.

Steve: Well, back in 2012, Pope Benedict of the time made a trip to Cuba, and while he was there, he was talking to the leadership of the Catholic Church there and saying well, maybe they would be able to bring that exhibit here to Cuba. And so as I’ve said, if the Pope is plugging your exhibit, you ought to check into it, so we made a trip down there really not thinking that it was going to work out, but doors opened. We got the approvals from the U.S. government as well as the Cuban government to bring an exhibit in.

So earlier this year, for 22 days we had a Bible exhibit at the National Cathedral there in Havana, and it was an honor for us to be able to go and share some of the history of the Bible with the people of Cuba, and there were lines to come into this exhibit. What was interesting is the opening night they were doing a celebration, and it was the Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches coming together to put on this production that actually was a production that told the story of the Bible from Genesis through Revelations with orchestra and dance and music, very well done.

And it kind of hit me that this exhibit, it took the American and the Cuban governments and the Protestants and the Catholics coming together to put this on, and I think only the Bible would be able to do that.

Glenn: So let me ask you a question, Steve, because this is really difficult, and you’re walking it expertly. You asked me to speak at the opening or at one of the introductions of the Museum of the Bible. Franklin Graham was speaking at the same one. Catholics were there. Jews were there. You have broken down the walls of all religions, yet you still are who you are. But this is really unusual, and it’s, I think, a really, really good thing. What is the secret, and why have you decided to say look, one God, not one sect, one religion, one God? Why are you doing that, and how can we get more people to do this?

Steve: Well, to some degree I think I’ve kind of learned a lesson from Billy Graham. I know that he spoke at both the Republican and the Democratic conventions, for example, and I’m sure many of them wanted him to weigh in on many of the political arguments and discussions of the time, but he just felt like that was not his role. And from that, you know, I was asked once when did we decide to include the Catholic, the Protestant, and the Jewish traditions in our museum, and I said well, I didn’t. The Bible runs through all those traditions, and so what our role is is just to highlight the Bible.

This is a book that has had an impact in our world, and if we can try to stay out of the weeds, and I kind of enjoyed some of those discussions getting into the weeds of what the Bible teaches, but our role is just to say here’s a book that has impacted our world. We want to celebrate the Jewish traditions. The scribal tradition, the Torah scroll collection that we have, tells the love that the Jewish people have of this word and how they meticulously transmitted it from generation to generation, you know, on into the Catholic and even the Protestant traditions, and so we’re not celebrating the traditions. We’re celebrating a book.

This is not about a faith tradition, a religion. It’s not about a church. It’s about a book and how that this book has impacted our world. The way I like to say it is set your religion aside. If you just set it aside and just take a look at this book and see how it’s had an impact on our lives, it’s a book that we ought to know about, and that’s what we want to do.

Glenn: Now, when you are going and taking this into schools, you’re taking this in all around the world. Your goal is to have it in how many schools? You have a curriculum, a Bible curriculum, which you say studies show that your test scores across the board go up if you are studying also the history of the book, the Bible.

Steve: Yes, there’s implications that when we took it out of our schools that scores plummeted, and I am convinced that as we do studies and as we show that as we teach the Bible in our schools, it will help in many different cases, and we want to do some of those studies as we get into schools. And so we are developing a curriculum that basically teaches the Bible. I am not interested in teaching religion. I’m interested in teaching about a book, and people ought to know about this book.

Glenn: Even Dawkins says, I mean, the atheist says this is an important book everybody should read and understand, an atheist.

Steve: Exactly. In his book, Richard Dawkins says…a leading atheist, in his book, The God Delusion, where he’s arguing that there is no God, he is honest enough to say that the King James Version of the Bible ought to be taught in our schools because of the amount of our language that comes from it, and he gives 100 examples, over 100 examples—an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and so forth.

I was on a CNN segment where I was showing some of the artifacts, and in the segment just before I went on, the newscaster was talking about a Good Samaritan story. If you don’t know the Good Samaritan story, you just lost the context for that story, and that’s what Richard Dawkins’s argument is.

Glenn: Steve, I want to thank you so much for all of the work you and your family have done in the last year and will continue to do to make our country better and the world a better place. Steve Green, our man of the year, God bless, have a great Christmas. Back in just a minute.

Steve: Thank you.

It's time for our April 29, 2019 edition of our Candidate Power Rankings. We get to add two new candidates, write about a bunch of people that have little to no chance of winning, and thank the heavens we are one day closer to the end of all of this.

In case you're new here, read our explainer about how all of this works:

The 2020 Democratic primary power rankings are an attempt to make sense out of the chaos of the largest field of candidates in global history.

Each candidate gets a unique score in at least thirty categories, measuring data like polling, prediction markets, fundraising, fundamentals, media coverage, and more. The result is a candidate score between 0-100. These numbers will change from week to week as the race changes.

The power rankings are less a prediction on who will win the nomination, and more a snapshot of the state of the race at any given time. However, early on, the model gives more weight to fundamentals and potentials, and later will begin to prioritize polling and realities on the ground.

These power rankings include only announced candidates. So, when you say "WAIT!! WHERE'S XXXXX????" Read the earlier sentence again.

If you're like me, when you read power rankings about sports, you've already skipped ahead to the list. So, here we go.

See previous editions here.

20. Wayne Messam: 13.4 (Last week: 18th / 13.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

A former staffer of Wayne Messam is accusing his wife of hoarding the campaign's money.

First, how does this guy have "former" staffers? He's been running for approximately twelve minutes.

Second, he finished dead last in the field in fundraising with $44,000 for the quarter. Perhaps hoarding whatever money the campaign has is not the worst idea.

His best shot at the nomination continues to be something out of the series "Designated Survivor."

Other headlines:

19. Marianne Williamson: 17.1 (Last week: 17th / 17.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Marianne Williamson would like you to pay for the sins of someone else's great, great, great grandparents. Lucky you!

Williamson is on the reparations train like most of the field, trying to separate herself from the pack by sheer monetary force.

How much of your cash does she want to spend? "Anything less than $100 billion is an insult." This is what I told the guy who showed up to buy my 1989 Ford Tempo. It didn't work then either.

Other headlines:

18. John Delaney: 19.7 (Last week: 15th / 20.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Good news: John Delaney brought in $12.1 million in the first quarter, enough for fifth in the entire Democratic field!

Bad news: 97% of the money came from his own bank account.

Other headlines:

17. Eric Swalwell: 20.2 (Last week: 16th / 20.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

The Eric Swalwell formula:

  • Identify news cycle
  • Identify typical left-wing reaction
  • Add steroids

Democrats said there was obstruction in the Mueller report. Swalwell said there “certainly" was collusion.

Democrats said surveillance of the Trump campaign was no big deal. Swalwell said there was no need to apologize even if it was.

Democrats said William Barr mishandled the release of the Mueller report. Swalwell said he must resign.

Democrats say they want gun restrictions. Swalwell wants them all melted down and the liquid metal to be poured on the heads of NRA members. (Probably.)

16. Seth Moulton: 20.6 (NEW)

Who is Seth Moulton?

No, I'm asking.

Moulton falls into the category of congressman looking to raise his profile and make his future fundraising easier— not someone who is actually competing for the presidency.

He tried to block Nancy Pelosi as speaker, so whatever help he could get from the establishment is as dry as Pelosi's eyes when the Botox holds them open for too long.

Moulton is a veteran, and his military service alone is enough to tell you that he's done more with his life than I'll ever do with mine. But it's hard to see the road to the White House for a complete unknown in a large field of knowns.

Don't take my word for it, instead read this depressing story that he's actually telling people on purpose:

"I said, you know, part of my job is take tough questions," Moulton told the gathered business and political leaders. "You can ask even really difficult questions. And there was still silence. And then finally, someone in the way back of the room raised her hand, and she said, 'Who are you?' "

Yeah. Who are you?

15. Tim Ryan: 21.6 (Last week: 14th / 20.7)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When you're talking to less than sixteen people in Iowa one week after your launch, you don't have too much to be excited about.

Ryan did get an interview on CNN, where he also talked to less than sixteen people.

He discussed his passion for the Dave Matthews Band, solidifying a key constituency in the year 1995.

Other headlines:

14. Tulsi Gabbard: 25.2 (Last week: 14th / 25.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Tulsi Gabbard torched Kamala Harris in fundraising!!!!! (Among Indian-American donors.)

No word on who won the coveted handi-capable gender-neutral sodium-sensitive sub-demographic.

She received a mostly false rating for her attack on the Trump administration regarding its new policy on pork inspections, a topic not exactly leading the news cycle. Being from Hawaii, the state which leads the nation in Spam consumption, she was probably surprised when this didn't go mega viral.

Other headlines:

13. Andrew Yang: 27.2 (Last week: 12th / 27.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Yang has a few go-to lines when he's on the campaign trail, such as: "The opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math." Another is apparently the Jeb-esque "Chant my name! Chant my name!"

Yang continues to be one of the more interesting candidates in this race, essentially running a remix of the "One Tough Nerd" formula that worked for Michigan Governor Rick Snyder.

I highly recommend listening to his interview with Ben Shapiro, where Yang earns respect as the only Democratic presidential candidate in modern history to actually show up to a challenging and in-depth interview with a knowledgeable conservative.

But hidden in the Shapiro interview is the nasty little secret of the Yang campaign. His policy prescriptions, while still very liberal, come off as far too sane for him to compete in this Stalin look-alike contest.

Other headlines:

12. Jay Inslee: 30.4 (Last week: 11th / 30.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If you read the Inslee candidate profile, I said he was running a one-issue climate campaign. This week, he called for a climate change-only debate, and blamed Donald Trump for flooding in Iowa.

He also may sign the nation's first "human composting" legalization bill. He can start by composting his presidential campaign.

Other headlines:

11. John Hickenlooper: 32.2 (Last week: 10th / 32.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

John Hickenlooper was sick of being asked if he would put a woman on the ticket, in the 0.032% chance he actually won the nomination.

So he wondered why the female candidates weren't being asked if they would name a male VP if they won?

Seems like a logical question, but only someone who is high on tailpipe fumes would think it was okay to ask in a Democratic primary. Hickenlooper would be better served by just transitioning to a female and demanding other candidates are asked why they don't have a transgendered VP.

Other headlines:

10. Julian Castro: 35.7 (Last week: 9th / 36.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Lowering expectations is a useful strategy when your wife asks you to put together an Ikea end table, or when you've successfully convinced Charlize Theron to come home with you. But is it a successful campaign strategy?

Julian Castro is about to find out. He thinks the fact that everyone thinks he's crashing and burning on the campaign trail so far is an "advantage." Perhaps he can take the rest of the field by surprise on Super Tuesday when they finally realize he's actually running.

Other headlines:

9. Kirsten Gillibrand: 38.1 (Last week: 8th / 37.8)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Gillibrand wants you to know that the reason her campaign has been such a miserable failure so far, is because she called for a certain senator to step down. The problem might also be that another certain senator isn't a good presidential candidate.

She also spent the week arm wrestling, and dancing at a gay bar called Blazing Saddle. In this time of division, one thing we can all agree on: Blazing Saddle is a really solid name for a gay bar.

Other headlines:

8. Amy Klobuchar: 45.1 (Last week: 7th / 45.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Klobuchar is attempting a run in the moderate wing of the Democratic primary, which would be a better idea if such a wing existed.

She hasn't committed to impeaching Donald Trump and has actually voted to confirm over half of his judicial nominees. My guess is this will not be ignored by her primary opponents.

She also wants to resolve an ongoing TPS issue, which I assume means going by Peter Gibbons' desk every morning and making sure he got the memo about the new cover sheets.

Other headlines:

7. Elizabeth Warren: 45.3 (Last week: 6th / 46.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Elizabeth Warren is bad at everything she does while she's campaigning. I don't really even watch Game of Thrones, and the idea that Warren would write a story about how the show proves we need more powerful women makes me cringe.

Of course, more powerful people of all the 39,343 genders are welcome, but it's such a transparent attempt at jumping on the back of a pop-culture event to pander to female voters, it's sickening.

We can only hope that when she's watching Game of Thrones, she's gonna grab her a beer.

Other headlines:

6. Cory Booker: 54.9 (Last week: 5th / 55.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Booker is tied with Kamala Harris for the most missed Senate votes of the campaign so far. He gets criticized for this, but I think he should miss even more votes.

Booker is also pushing a national day off on Election Day—because the approximately six months of early voting allowed in every state just isn't enough.

Of course, making it easier to vote doesn't mean people are going to vote for Booker. So he's throwing trillions of dollars in bribes (my word, not his) to seal the deal.

Bookermania is in full effect, with 40 whole people showing up to his appearance in Nevada. Local press noted that the people were of "varying ages," an important distinction to most other crowds, which are entirely comprised of people with the same birthday.

Other headlines:

5. Robert Francis O’Rourke: 60.2 (Last week: 4th /62.6)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Kirsten Gillibrand gave less than 2% of her income to charity. The good news is that she gave about seven times as much as Beto O'Rourke. Robert Francis, or Bob Frank, also happens to be one of the wealthiest candidates in the race. His late seventies father-in-law has been estimated to be worth as much as $20 billion, though the number is more likely to be a paltry $500 million.

He's made millions from a family company investing in fossil fuels and pharmaceutical stocks, underpaid his taxes for multiple years, and is suing the government to lower property taxes on a family-owned shopping center.

He's also all but disappeared. It's a long race, and you don't win a nomination in April of the year before election day. If he's being frugal and figuring out what he believes, it might be a good move.

But it's notable that all the "pretty boy" hype that Bob Frank owned going into this race has been handed over to Mayor Pete. Perhaps Beto is spending his time working on curbing the sweating, the hand gestures, and the issues with jumping on counters like a feline.

Other headlines:

4. Pete Buttigieg: 62.9 (Last week: 3rd / 62.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When we first put candidates in tiers earlier this year, we broke everyone into five categories from "Front Runners" to "Eh, no." In the middle is a category called "Maybe, if everything goes right," and that's where we put Pete Buttigieg.

Well, everything has gone right so far. But Mayor Pete will be interested to learn that the other 19 candidates in this race are not going to hand him this nomination. Eventually, they will start saying negative things about him (they've started the opposition research process already), and it will be interesting to see how Petey deals with the pressure. We've already seen how it has affected Beto in a similar situation.

The media has spoken endlessly about the sexual orientation of Buttigieg, but not every Democratic activist is impressed. Barney Frank thinks the main reason he's getting this amount of attention is because he is gay. And for some, being a gay man just means you're a man, which isn't good enough.

When you base your vote on a candidate's genitals, things can get confusing.

Other headlines:

3. Kamala Harris: 68.6 (Last week: 1st / 69.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

There are a couple of ways to view the Harris candidacy so far.

#1 - Harris launched with much fanfare and an adoring media. She has since lost her momentum. Mayor Pete and former Mayor Bernie have the hype, and Kamala is fading.

#2 - Harris is playing the long game. She showed she can make an impact with her launch, but realizes that a media "win" ten months before an important primary means nothing. She's working behind the scenes and cleaning up with donations, prominent supporters, and loads of celebrities to execute an Obama style onslaught.

I tend to be in category 2, but I admit that's somewhat speculative. Harris seems to be well positioned to make a serious run, locking up more than double the amount of big Clinton and Obama fundraisers than any other candidate.

One interesting policy development for Harris that may hurt her in the primary is her lack of utter disgust for the nation of Israel. There's basically one acceptable position in a Democratic primary when it comes to Israel, which is that it's a racist and terrorist state, existing only to torture innocent Palestinians.

Certainly no one is going to mistake Harris for Donald Trump, but a paragraph like this is poison to the modern Democratic primary voter:

"Her support for Israel is central to who she is," Harris' campaign communications director, Lily Adams, told McClatchy. "She is firm in her belief that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, including against rocket attacks from Gaza."

Just portraying the rocket attacks as "attacks" is controversial these days for Democrats, and claiming they are responses to attacks indicates you think the Jeeeewwwwwwwws aren't the ones responsible for the start of every hostility. Heresy!

Someone get Kamala a copy of the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' before she blows her chance to run the free world.

2. Bernie Sanders: 69.2 (Last week: 2nd / 68.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If Bernie Sanders hates millionaires as much as he claims, he must hate the mirror. As a millionaire, it might surprise some that he donated only 1% to charity. But it shouldn't.

It's entirely consistent with Sandersism to avoid giving to private charity. Why would you? Sanders believes the government does everything better than the private sector. He should be giving his money to the government.

Of course, he doesn't. He takes the tax breaks from the evil Trump tax plan he derides. He spends his money on fabulous vacation homes. He believes in socialism for thee, not for me.

Yes, this is enough to convince the Cardi B's of the world, all but guaranteeing a lock on the rapper-and-former-stripper-that-drugged-and-stole-from-her-prostitution-clients demographic. But can that lack of consistency hold up in front of general election voters?

If Bernie reads this and would like a path to credibility, clear out your bank account and send it here:

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Funds Management Branch
P.O. Box 1328
Parkersburg, WV 26106-1328


Other headlines:

1. Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.: 78.8 (NEW)

Joe has run for president 113 times during his illustrious career, successfully capturing the presidency in approximately zero of his campaigns.

However, when the eternally woke Barack Obama had a chance to elevate a person of color, woman, or anything from the rainbow colored QUILTBAG, he instead chose the oldest, straightest, whitest guy he could find, and our man Robinette was the beneficiary.

Biden has been through a lot, much of it of his own making. Forget about his plagiarism and propensity to get a nostril full of each passing females' hair, his dealings while vice president in both Ukraine and China are a major general election vulnerability— not to mention a legal vulnerability for his children. But hey, win the presidency and you can pardon everyone, right?

His supposed appeal to rust belt voters makes him, on paper, a great candidate to take on Trump. The Clinton loss hinged on about 40,000 voters changing their mind from Hillary to Donald in a few states—the exact areas where victory could possibly be secured by someone named "Middle Class Joe" (as he alone calls himself.)

No one loves Joe Biden more than Joe Biden, and there's a relatively convincing case for his candidacy. But we must remember this unquestionable truth: Joe Biden is not good at running for president.

He's a gaffe machine that churns out mistake after mistake, hoping only to have his flubs excused by his unending charisma. But, will that work without the use of his legendary groping abilities? Only time, and a few dozen unnamed women, will tell.

Also, yes. Robinette is really his middle name.

If only Karl Marx were alive today to see his wackiest ideas being completely paraded around. He would be so proud. I can see him now: Sprawled out on his hammock from REI, fiddling around for the last vegan potato chip in the bag as he binge-watches Academy Awards on his 70-inch smart TV. In between glances at his iPhone X (he's got a massive Twitter following), he sips Pepsi. In his Patagonia t-shirt and NIKE tennis shoes, he writes a line or two about "oppression" and "the have-nots" as part of his job for Google.

His house is loaded with fresh products from all the woke companies. In the fridge, he's got Starbucks, he loves their soy milk. He's got Ben & Jerry's in the freezer. He tells everyone that, if he shaved, he'd use Gillette, on account of the way they stand up for the Have-Nots. But, really, Marx uses Dollar Shave Club because it's cheaper, a higher quality. Secretly, he loves Chic-Fil-A. He buys all his comic books off Amazon. The truth is, he never thought people would actually try to make the whole "communism" thing work.

RELATED: SOCIALISM: This is the most important special we have done

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism. They use their status as corporations to spread a socialist message and encourage people to do their part in social justice. The idea of companies in America using socialism at all is as confusing and ridiculous as a donkey in a prom dress: How did this happen? Is it a joke? Why is nobody bursting out in laughter? How far is this actually going to go? Does someone actually believe that they can take a donkey to prom?

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism.

On the micro level, Netflix has made some socialist moves: The "like/dislike" voting system was replaced after a Netflix-sponsored stand-up special by Amy Schumer received as tidal wave of thumb-downs. This summer, Netflix will take it a step further in the name of squashing dissent by disabling user comments and reviews. And of course most of us share a Netflix account with any number of people. Beyond that, they're as capitalist as the next mega-company.

Except for one area: propaganda. Netflix has started making movie-length advertisements for socialism. They call them "documentaries," but we know better than that. The most recent example is "Knock Down the House," which comes out tomorrow. The 86-minute-long commercial for socialism follows four "progressive Democrat" women who ran in the 2018 midterms, including our favorite socialist AOC.

Here's a snippet from the movie so good that you'll have to fight the urge to wave your USSR flag around the room:

This is what the mainstream media wants you to believe. They want you to be moved. They want the soundtrack to inspire you to go out and do something.

Just look at how the mainstream media treated the recent high-gloss "documentary" about Ilhan Omar, "Time for Ilhan." It received overwhelmingly bad ratings on IMDb and other user-review platforms, but got a whopping 93% on the media aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.

This is exactly what the media wants you to think of when you hear the word socialism. Change. Empowerment. Strength. Diversity. They spend so much energy trying to make socialism cool. They gloss right over the unbelievable death toll. BlazeTV's own Matt Kibbe made a great video on this exact topic.

Any notion of socialism in America is a luxury, made possible by capitalism. The woke companies aren't actually doing anything for socialism. If they're lucky, they might get a boost in sales, which is the only thing they want anyway.

We want to show you the truth. We want to tell you the stories you won't hear anywhere else, not on Netflix, not at some movie festival. We're going to tell you what mainstream media doesn't want you to know.

Look at how much history we've lost over the years. They changed it slowly. But they had to. Because textbooks were out. So people were watching textbooks. It was printed. You would bring the book home. Mom and dad might go through it and check it out. So you had to slowly do things.

Well, they're not anymore. There are no textbooks anymore. Now, you just change them overnight. And we are losing new history. History is being changed in realtime.

RELATED: 'Good Morning Texas' joins Glenn to get an inside look at Mercury Museum

You have to write down what actually is happening and keep a journal. Don't necessarily tell everybody. Just keep a journal for what is happening right now. At some point, our kids won't have any idea of the truth. They will not have any idea of what this country was, how it really happened. Who were the good guys. Who were the bad guys. Who did what.

As Michelle Obama said. Barack knows. We have to change our history. Well, that's exactly what's happening. But it's happening at a very rapid pace.

We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased.

I first said this fifteen years ago, people need clay plots. We have to preserve our history as people preserved histories in ancient days, with the dead see scrolls, by putting them in caves in a clay pot. We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased. And I don't mean just the history of the founding of our country. I mean the history that's happening right now.

And the history that's happening right now, you're a problem if you're a conservative or a Christian. You are now a problem on the left, if you disagree and fall out of line at all. This is becoming a fascistic party. And you know what a fascist is. It doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican or an independent. If you believe it's my way or the highway, if you believe that people don't have a right to their opinion or don't have a right to their own life — you could do be a fascist.

Christianity might seem pretty well-protected in the U.S., but that's not the case in many parts of the globe.

On Easter Sunday, suicide bombers made the news for killing 290 innocent Christians in Sri Lanka and injuring another 500. On Tuesday, ISIS claimed responsibility for the massacre. Of course, the Western world mourned this tragic loss of life on a holy day of worship, but we forget that this isn't an isolated incident. Indeed, Christians are discriminated at extreme levels worldwide, and it needs to be brought to light. And whenever we do highlight brutal persecutions such as the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka, we need to call them what they are — targeted attacks against Christians. Sadly, many of our politicians are deathly afraid to do so.

RELATED: Hey media, there is absolutely a war on Christians!

A 2018 Pew Research Center study found that Christians are harassed in 144 countries — the most of any other faith — slightly outnumbering Muslims for the top of the list. Additionally, Open Doors, a non-profit organization that works to serve persecuted Christians worldwide, found in their 2019 World Watch List that over 245 million Christians are seriously discriminated against for their religious beliefs. Sadly, this translates into 4,136 Christians killed and 2,625 either arrested, sentenced, imprisoned, or detained without trial over the year-long study period. And when it comes to churches, those in Sri Lanka were merely added to a long list of 1,266 Christian buildings attacked for their religion.

These breathtaking stats receive very little coverage in the Western world. And there seems to be a profound hesitation from politicians in discussing the issue of persecution against Christians. In the case of the Sri Lanka bombings, there's even a reluctance to use the word "Christian."

After the horrific Pittsburgh Synagogue and New Zealand Mosque shootings, Democrats rightfully acknowledged the disturbing trend of targeted attacks against Jews and Muslims. But some of these same politicians refer to the Sri Lanka bombings with careless ambiguity.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face?

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, for instance, certainly did — calling the incursions "attacks on Easter worshippers." Understandably, the term confused and frustrated many Christians. Although, supporters of these politicians argued the term was appropriate since a recent Associated Press report used it, and it was later picked up by a variety of media outlets, including Fox News. However, as more Democrats like 2020 presidential candidate Julián Castro and Rep. Dan Kildee continued to use the phrase "Easter worshippers," it became clear that these politicians were going out of their way to avoid calling a spade a spade.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face? For starters, Christianity in democratic countries like the U.S. is seen differently than in devastated countries like Somalia. According to Pew Research, over 70% of Americans are Christian, with 66% of those Christians being white and 35% baby boomers. So while diverse Christians from all over the world are persecuted for their faith—in the U.S., Christians are a dominant religion full of old white people. This places Christians at the bottom of progressives' absurd intersectional totem poll, therefore leaving little sympathy for their cause. However, the differing experiences of Christians worldwide doesn't take away from the fact that they are unified in their beliefs.

By refusing to name the faith of the Sri Lankan martyrs, politicians are sending a message that they have very little, if no, concern about the growing amount of persecution against Christians worldwide.

Martyrs don't deserve to be known as "Easter worshippers." They should be known by the Christian faith they gave their lives for. Decent politicians need to call the tragedy in Sri Lanka what it is — a vicious attack on the Christian faith.

Patrick Hauf (@PatrickHauf) is a writer for Young Voices and Vice President of Lone Conservative. His work can be found in the Washington Examiner, Townhall, FEE, and more.