Winners and losers of Democratic presidential debate according to Glenn


1. Martin O'Malley. He looked presidential. He was well prepped and articulate. He used the camera well and made connection with the viewer. He seemed like a left Progressive, but mainstream enough in his presentation to win the country. He could grab O'Malley-progressive Republicans.

2. (Tied with 1) Bernie Sanders. Line of the night, unfortunately, "We are tired of your emails." Notice where Republicans would have divided, he united! Also, I figured him out tonight. I understand his appeal. No one else can do what he has done, and the Republicans, by not understanding how he is connecting, could lose to him. It is more than his policies. In fact, his policies actually would prevent him from a win in the general, but only if others discover what his real strength is. (I want to refine my explanation and will present on radio.)

3. Anderson Cooper and CNN. Neither the network or Anderson pitched softballs. They did not play favorites nor did they hold back on a single candidate. While they didn't cover the things I would have, they covered many of them and hit them as hard as I would have. The real sign will be the number of calls Jeff Zucker gets from the campaigns tomorrow telling him they were unfair.


1. Jim Webb. Stop the whining. He just didn't belong. He was at his best when you forgot he was part of the debate.

2. Lincoln Chaffee. He looked clueless and like a small town mayor. His answer on the bank bailout was perhaps the worst answer I have ever heard any candidate give. He too was at his best when he was neither seen nor heard.

3. Hillary Clinton. She reminded America why her campaign and the DNC is fighting so hard not to have debates. She looks like a slimy flip-flopping politician. She is utterly unlikable and untrustworthy. I hope she wins the nomination because, other than Jim Webb and Lincoln Chaffee, she is the easiest to beat.

The thing that I worry most about: The country.

The Republicans are engaged in a clown show much of the time. They, unlike the Democrats, spend most of their time fighting each other. They come off to the average person as angry, small-minded and insincere.

The Democrats are Socialists, corrupt and insincere.

The country is in real trouble.

Most Americans understand that.

Bernie Sanders is the only one coming to the table with ground-shaking ideas and those ideas are 100 years old and discredited. But the old saying: "we have to do something" comes to mind. To many, his ideas are new and he seems sincere.

Our education system is churning out people that have no idea how to engage in critical thinking, the media is in the bag for big government, big political parties and big corporations.

We as a people not only do not see the same solutions, we don't even agree on the same set of problems. From climate change to All Lives Matter. We no longer can even agree that American culture is unique and good.

We are headed for real trouble.

The next president is going to face titanic-size problems. Perhaps Lincoln-style problems. Who is big enough to unite us and lead us? Who has the moral authority?

We need real statesmen, big thinkers that understand the possibilities of the tech of tomorrow along with the hatred and bigotry on all sides (race to wealth) of today.

There is one key that pulls everyone together and only ONE candidate tonight talked about it and it is why he is drawing huge crowds.

winners and losers of the #demdebateWINNERS:1. Martin O'Malley. He looked presidential. He was well prepped and...

Posted by Glenn Beck on Tuesday, October 13, 2015


Featured Image: Democratic presidential candidates Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (L) and Hillary Clinton take part in a presidential debate sponsored by CNN and Facebook at Wynn Las Vegas on October 13, 2015 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Five Democratic presidential candidates are participating in the party's first presidential debate. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

On the radio program Thursday, Glenn Beck sat down with chief researcher Jason Buttrill to go over two bombshell developments that have recently come to light regarding former Vice President Joe Biden's role in the 2016 dismissal of Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.

"Wow! Two huge stories dropped within about 24 hours of each other," Jason began. He went on to explain that a court ruling in Ukraine has just prompted an "actual criminal investigation against Joe Biden in Ukraine."

This stunning development coincided with the release of leaked phone conversations, which took place in late 2015 and early 2016, allegedly among then-Vice President Biden, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Ukraine's former President Petro Poroshenko.

One of the audiotapes seems to confirm allegations of a quid pro quo between Biden and Poroshenko, with the later admitting that he asked Shokin to resign despite having no evidence of him "doing anything wrong" in exchange for a $1 billion loan guarantee.

"Poroshenko said, 'despite the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges on [Shokin], and we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I asked him to resign,'" Jason explained. "But none of the Western media is pointing this out."

Watch the video below for more details:

Listen to the released audiotapes in full here.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and "unmasking" of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

Rice's email details a meeting in the Oval Office on Jan 5, 2017, which included herself, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Vice President Joe Biden, and former President Barack Obama. Acting Director of National Intelligence, Richard Grenell, fully declassified the email recently amid President Trump's repeated references to "Obamagate" and claims that Obama "used his last weeks in office to target incoming officials and sabotage the new administration."

On Glenn Beck's Wednesday night special, Glenn broke down the details of Rice's email and discussed what they reveal about the Obama administration officials involved in the Russia investigation's origins.

Watch the video clip below:

Fellow BlazeTV host, Mark Levin, joined Glenn Beck on his exclusive Friday episode of "GlennTV" to discuss why the declassified list of Obama administration officials who were aware of the details of Gen. Michael Flynn's wiretapped phone calls are so significant.

Glenn argued that Obama built a covert bureaucracy to "transform America" for a long time to come, and Gen. Flynn was targeted because he happened to know "where the bodies were buried", making him a threat to Obama's "secret legacy."

Levin agreed, noting the "shocking extent of the police state tactics" by the Obama administration. He recalled several scandalous happenings during Obama's "scandal free presidency," which nobody seems to remember.

Watch the video below for more:

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Colleges and universities should be home to a lively and open debate about questions both current and timeless, independent from a political bias or rules that stifle speech. Unfortunately for students, speaking out about personal beliefs or challenging political dogma can be a dangerous undertaking. I experienced this firsthand as an undergraduate, and I'm fighting that trend now as an adjunct professor.

In 2013, Glenn Beck was one of the most listened to radio personalities in the world. For a college senior with hopes of working on policy and media, a job working for Glenn was a ticket to big things. I needed a foot in the door and hoped to tap into the alumni network at the small liberal arts school where I was an undergrad. When I met with a career services specialist in early March 2013 about possible alumni connections to Glenn Beck, she disdainfully told me: "Why would you want to work for someone like him?" That was the beginning and end of our conversation.

I was floored by her response, and sent an email to the school complaining that her behavior was inappropriate. Her personal opinions, political or otherwise, I argued, shouldn't play a role in the decision to help students.

That isn't the kind of response a student should hear when seeking guidance and help in kick starting their career. Regardless of the position, a career specialist or professors' opinion or belief shouldn't be a factor in whether the student deserves access to the alumni network and schools' resources.

Now, seven years later, I work full time for a law firm and part time as an adjunct teaching business to undergraduate students. The culture at colleges and universities seems to have gotten even worse, unfortunately, since I was an undergrad.

College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions.

I never want to see a student told they shouldn't pursue their goals, regardless of their personal or political beliefs. College is a time to explore, dream big and challenge assumptions. I never got access to the alumni network or schools' resources from the career services office.

Lucky for students in 2020, there are several legal organizations that help students protect their rights when an issue goes beyond what can be handled by an undergraduate facing tremendous pressure from a powerful academic institution. Organizations like Speech First and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), for instance, are resources I wish I knew about at the time.

When I experienced mistreatment from my college, I spoke up and challenged the behavior by emailing the administration and explaining what happened. I received a letter from the career services specialist apologizing for the "unprofessional comment."

What she described in that apology as a "momentary lapse of good judgement" was anything but momentary. It was indicative of the larger battle for ideas that has been happening on college campuses across the country. In the past seven years, the pressure, mistreatment and oppression of free expression have only increased. Even right now, some are raising concerns that campus administrations are using the COVID-19 pandemic to limit free speech even further. Social distancing guidelines and crowd size may both be used to limit or refuse controversial speakers.

Students often feel pressure to conform to a college or university's wishes. If they don't, they could be expelled, fail a class or experience other retribution. The college holds all the cards. On most campuses, the burden of proof for guilt in student conduct hearings is "more likely than not," making it very difficult for students to stand up for their rights without legal help.

As an adjunct professor, every student who comes to me for help in finding purpose gets my full support and my active help — even if the students' goals run counter to mine. But I have learned something crucial in my time in this role: It's not the job of an educator to dictate a student's purpose in life. I'm meant to help them achieve their dreams, no matter what.

Conner Drigotas is the Director of Communications and Development at a national law firm and is a Young Voices contributor.