Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcast
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

Pro-Choice! Pro-Amnesty! Pro-Oprah! All the reasons you should NOT vote for Donald Trump

July 09, 2015
Staff

WRITER

It’s no secret that Stu isn’t a big fan of Donald Trump, but some listeners seem to think he’d be a great candidate. In fact, many polls have shown him near the top. People seem to love his “straight talk” and “hard stand” on illegal immigration. But what are his real policies? Stu dedicated the opening of last night’s show to explain — using facts and quotes from Trump himself - to show why there is NOTHING remotely conservative about Donald Trump and his candidacy.

Latest polls are out, and Jeb Bush is leading the field of 10,687 GOP presidential hopefuls with 19% of the vote. If that doesn’t make you suicidal, this will. In second place at 12% is Donald Trump, Donald freaking Trump. It’s so absolutely ridiculous. It kind of feels like we’re at the beginning of Back to the Future 2. If we had a DeLorean and fast-forwarded a couple years to life under President Trump, the country would look like Hill Valley when it was run by Biff Tannen.

That’s kind of a terrible analogy actually because Trump would never, ever win, never. He’s not going to win, but yet for some reason, people think he’s going to win. We do this every election, we say we’re going to stick to principle, and then we panic and go running to the first shiny thing that walks by. When I say we, I’m not really referring to this audience. I’m referring to America as a whole.

We have our own poll going on at GlennBeck.com, and Donald Trump does not perform very well with this audience. I’m so proud of you guys. Really, I am. How Trump gets anyone, let alone conservatives, to support him is the eighth wonder of the world or the Fourth Horseman of the Apocalypse, depending on your level of fatalism, I guess that is. Not only is he the most obnoxious guy in the world, he’s arrogant, he’s one of the most annoying celebrities of all time, his views are as insane as his love for gaudy brass decor.

Enough is enough. Someone has to stand up and be the adult in the room, so today I offer America a public service. That’s right, it’s time. I present to you the ultimate takedown of Donald Trump, GOP candidate. We start with the Mexico stuff. Watch.

VIDEO

Donald Trump: They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. Some I assume are good people.

I love Mexico. I love the Mexican people. Two waiters came up to me tonight, “Mr. Trump, we love you.” I said, “Where you from?” “Mexico.” I said, “That’s great. I love you too.” These countries aren’t sending their finest. They’re sending people that are like got a lot of problems. Doesn’t that make sense?

I basically said this, we need to strengthen our borders, and they said I’m a racist.  

To get the cars and trucks and everything over here, let the illegals drive them in. They’re coming in anyway.

I do great with Latino voters. I employ so many Latinos. I have so many people working for me.

I’ve taken a lot of heat, and it’s unnecessary, very unfair heat, because first of all, I love the Mexican people. How can I not love people that give me tens of millions of dollars for apartments? You have to love them.

But I love them for a lot of reasons. I love them for their spirit.

And then I talk about Mexico, and I love Mexico, but every time I talk about it, they accuse me of being a racist.

You have illegals that are just pouring across the borders. I was really criticized for the border, but the truth is it’s true. They think it’s like Mother Teresa is coming across the border.

Well, I said drug dealers, I said killers, and I said rapists. They made the word rapists, they really picked that up.

I tell you, I love the folks from South America. They’re friends of mine. Many work for me. Many are friends. Many buy apartments from me. I have great love for the Mexican people, and I always have, and they like me.

No apology because everything I said is 100% correct. All you have to do is read the newspapers.

So, there you go. He’s obviously riding the populist wave there. He’s trying to give voice to people’s frustration with illegal immigration, and he’s done it, of course, with the eloquence of a baboon. Yes, I am not a fan of spineless companies like NBC Universal, Macy’s, the PGA, and others who are disassociating themselves with Trump. Let’s be honest, the progressive mob is trying to add another scalp, and some conservatives are having an understandable response. They can’t stand the media, they see a Republican getting attacked by the media for being outspoken, and they rush to his defense. I get it, but please, please, let’s take off our reactionary caps for a minute and put on our thinking caps.

But Stu, he’s right on the money. These darn illegals are sinking the ship. At least Trump is saying something. Okay, great. I will give him his fair shake. Let’s see where he stands on immigration policy. Watch.

VIDEO

Donald Trump: The biggest problem is that you have some great, wonderful people coming in from Mexico that are working the crops, they’re working cutting lawns, they’re doing a lot of jobs that I’m not sure that a lot of Americans are going to take those jobs. And that’s the dichotomy. That’s the big problem because you have a lot of great people coming in doing a lot of work, and I’m not so sure that a lot of other people are going to be doing that work. So, it is a very tough problem, but I do say this, you have a law, or at least you have to establish a law, and I guess we’re sort of a country and other people aren’t supposed to be coming into our country illegally.

Bill O’Reilly: Now, the 15 million illegal aliens already in the United States, what do you do with them?

Donald Trump: I think right now you’re going to have to do something. It’s hard to generalize, but you’re going to have to look at the individual people, see how they’ve done, see how productive they’ve been, see what their references are, and then make a decision.

Bill O’Reilly: All right, on a case-by-case—going to take a long time and a lot of people.

Donald Trump: A long time, but you know, you have some great, productive people that came.

You have to give them a path. You have 20 million, 30 million, nobody knows what it is. It used to be 11 million. Now, today I hear it’s 11, but I don’t think it’s 11. I actually heard you probably have 30 million. You have to give them a path, and you have to make it possible for them to succeed. You have to do that.

You have to give them a path, a path to citizenship. Where have I heard that one before? I know, Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham and of course every Democrat as well. He’s zero for one there. There could be negatives of talking tough, but I’m willing to accept that if you’re going to get the truth and the policy that I want, but I don’t want someone making stupid mistakes that the media can easily exploit.

With Trump, you’re getting all of the negatives of someone who says tough, dangerous, stupid things along with the policy of Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham. Let’s try some other issues though. How about taxes? When Trump ran for president in 1999, he proposed a gigantic wealth tax on the American people, a 14.25% levy that he calculated would raise $5.7 trillion and wipe out the debt forever in one fell swoop—a wealth tax, going into your bank account and pulling out money from bank accounts. Obama is into his second term, and he hasn’t even suggested that.

On the plan, Trump said, “By my calculations, 1 percent of Americans who control 90 percent of the wealth in this country would be affected by my plan.” Is this the guy in the second place of the GOP primary or a guy second in line to get into a rape tent at Occupy Wall Street? The only place that’s conservative is in Sean Penn’s wildest economic fantasies. But Trump has never been a conservative. He’s got some serious political identity issues.

Since the 80s, he struggled so much with his identity, he has switched parties five times. Remember, a few months ago when people wanted George Stephanopoulos fired because he gave to the Clinton Foundation, remember that? Well, Donald Trump has given even more to the Clinton Foundation than Stephanopoulos did. He’s given over $100,000 to the Clintons. So, we want to fire a media member for donating to the Clintons but want to hire a GOP candidate that’s done the same? Is that what you want in a candidate who is likely to face, I don’t know, a Clinton? Really?

It doesn’t stop there though. Since 1990, he’s given at least $541,650 to Democrats, far more than he gave to Republicans. The guy gave money to Rahm Emanuel and Harry Reid, Harry freaking Reid. So, that’s zero for two, okay?

Now let’s go to an easy one. Everyone gets this one right, right? Abortion—1999, Trump said, “I’m totally pro-choice. I hate it and I hate saying it. And I’m almost ashamed to say that I’m pro-choice but I am pro-choice because I think we have no choice.” What? And “I believe it is a personal decision that should be left to the women and their doctors.” Here’s what he says now.

VIDEO

Donald Trump: So, it’s pro-life, right, but it’s life of the mother, very important, incest and rape.

Mark: Okay. So, say a woman is pregnant, and it’s not in any of those exception categories, but she chooses to have an abortion.

Donald Trump: It depends when. The answer is—excuse me, if it’s not in those, I’m pro-life. Mark, very simple, pro-life.

Very simple. I mean, that was seriously one of the single worst explanations of being pro-life I’ve ever heard someone give. Now, remember how suspicious we all were of Mitt Romney’s conversion to pro-life? You’re going to let Trump get away with that? I’d say he’s zero for three.

Okay, well, at least he’s got to have a good take on who the worst president of all time is. You know, he’s a businessman. Maybe it’s FDR for price controls and confiscating gold, right?

VIDEO

Donald Trump: I think Bush is probably the worst president in the history of the United States.

 Bush has been so bad, maybe the worst president in the history of this country. He has been so incompetent, so bad, so evil that I don’t think any Republican could’ve won.

Bush, worst president. I mean, he wasn’t perfect, really, but Bush, over helicopters burning in the desert Jimmy Carter, over creator of the welfare society LBJ, over racist Woodrow Wilson? And sure, he doesn’t say he likes Obama now. Of course, he’s not going to say that now, but when he was running the first time, Trump said Obama had a chance of going down as a great president.

VIDEO

Donald Trump: I think he has a chance to go down as a great president. Now, if he’s not, if he’s not a great president, this country is in serious trouble.

I think he’s going to lead through a consensus. It’s not going to be just a bull run like Bush did. He just did whatever the hell he wanted. He’d go into a country, attack Iraq, which had nothing to do with the World Trade Center, and just do it because he wanted to do it.

Just from a judgment perspective, he thought Obama was going to rule by consensus? Really? He also went on to call him—he said he was one of Obama’s biggest cheerleaders. It’s not a surprise because in the past Trump wrote, “We must have universal healthcare.”

He indicated his ideal vice president would be diehard Obama supporter Oprah Winfrey, and he was a registered Democrat until 2009—not 1979, 2009.

Surely there’s got to be something he’s good on, some issue that we can see a shred of conservatism present. He is a business guy, of course. How about eminent domain? Years ago, Trump was looking to add a few more parking spots to one of his casinos in Atlantic City. To do so, he needed to acquire the property of Vera Coking, a senior citizen who had lived there for over three decades. So, did he make her an offer she couldn’t refuse? No, he decided to use eminent domain. Yes, this conservative argued that the government needed to take a wrecking ball to this sweet old woman’s home, her private property, because it was an eyesore.

VIDEO

Donald Trump: Everybody coming into Atlantic City sees that property, and it’s not fair to Atlantic City and the people. They’re staring at this terrible house instead of staring at beautiful fountains and beautiful other things that would be good.

John Stossel: Basic to freedom is that if you own something, it’s yours, that the government doesn’t just come and take it away from you.

Donald Trump: Do you want to live in the city where you can’t build schools? Do you want to live in the city where you can’t build roads or highways or have access to hospitals? Condemnation is a necessary evil.

John Stossel: But you’re not talking about a hospital. You’re talking about a building a rich guy finds ugly.

Thank God for John Stossel. He publicly humiliated her, demeaned the place she called a home, all so he could have a few extra parking spaces and have more people gamble a few more dollars at his crappy casinos.

That’s not all on eminent domain, of course, because the big one is when the government destroyed people’s homes in Connecticut so an office building could be built in the Kelo decision which might be the worst Supreme Court ruling of my lifetime. Trump said he backed the government 100%. Eminent domain is more than something he supports. It’s his business plan. In fact, a nice chunk of Trump’s wealth has come from using the force of government to take property from private individuals to line his pockets. Beyond the sheer lack of basic humanity, it definitely takes a liberal progressive to do something like that.

There is nothing remotely close to conservative about Donald Trump, and thus there is no reason he should garner your support, zero, nada, zip. If you want a pro-amnesty, pro-wealth tax, pro-donating to Rahm Emanuel and Harry freaking Reid and his likely opponent Hillary Clinton, pro-choice but pro-life during election season, thinks Bush is the worst president in history, wants Oprah to be the VP, self-described Obama cheerleader, believe we must have universal healthcare, pro-using the government to steal homes from elderly people, pro-a losing candidate that has zero chance of winning, and a progressive, then Donald Trump is totally your guy.

There you have it, America. The science is settled. Let’s just once and for all stop with the Donald. Let’s just stop. As Glenn would say, never again is now.

Featured image: NEW YORK, NY - JULY 06:  Donald Trump attends the 2015 Hank's Yanks Golf Classic at Trump Golf Links Ferry Point on July 6, 2015 in New York City.  (Photo by Andrew H. Walker/Getty Images)

Washington Post EXPOSED: How Watergate editors almost published a fake Pulitzer Prize-winning story

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.


5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and two who haven't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

Former President Barack Obama: DID NOT ENDORSE

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November? 

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?