David Barton: We Might Be On the Verge of Revolution

The Context

The South Carolina primary was Saturday and Donald Trump came out the big winner followed by Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz who were in a virtual tie for second place. David Barton joined the program and broke down the numbers behind the votes and what he found surprised him.

“Well, I thought there would be a revolution, but not in the sense of having a physical revolution,” Barton said Monday on The Glenn Beck Program. “I'm now more of a believer that it's a real thing. The numbers I saw in South Carolina . . . I was literally shocked. I was shocked at not only the numbers, but the words that were behind some of the numbers. The questions that were literally asked and how people responded to that, it really gave me a lot of pause in a way that I have not done in recent years.”

The Bubba Effect

If you've been a listener over the past few years, Glenn has talked extensively about a term called The Bubba Effect, something he believes is now here. The Bubba Effect is when a group of people feel they have been pushed over the edge by an overbearing government, and someone responds with force or violence. Even though they know it’s wrong, the majority of people support the violence.

“The Bubba Effect, I believe, is in full effect right now,” Glenn said. “I believe Donald Trump is The Bubba Effect, and I'll explain that later, based on some of these polls that are coming in. And they are frightening. They're truly frightening when you read the exit polls and you know what you're looking for.”

What was most frightening for David Barton? The term "betrayal."

“Well, the term we'll get into later is the term "betrayal," Barton said. “[Voters] feel betrayed. And when you look at betrayal and you look at what psychologists say that represents, that's a scary term. It's not like someone has just crossed me --- betrayal is deep stuff.”

Terrorism

The number one issue for South Carolina voters according to exit polling was terrorism at 32%, but the staggering number was that 75% of voters did not want Syrian refugees. Glenn explained why that is such a significant number.

“This is America saying, 'Look, we don't buy your bullcrap that it's a peaceful religion and the Muslim Brotherhood are largely secular.' What they know is, Muslims have come in from the Middle East, not necessarily American Muslims . . . Islamists is the better way to term this. Islamists are not peaceful. Muslims can be peaceful. But we have bent over backwards to say everybody is peaceful. And this guy is just a lone wolf, when we know that's bullcrap,” Glenn said.

What’s Sticking to Cruz

There may be several factors that hurt Cruz’ performance or why Rubio and Trump did so well, but there is one thing that Glenn believes is starting to take its toll on Ted.

“So here's the other thing that's hurting Ted Cruz that is sticking: that he's running the dirty campaign and that he's a liar. I have to tell you, I mean, I would not be with a liar. And I won't make any excuses,” Glenn said.

David has been hearing the same thing over and over and it might start to be something the Cruz campaign should be worried about even if it’s a lie itself.

“It's interesting the way they've gone at it. Trump says, [Cruz is] a liar. He lies about everything. He's the biggest liar --- just lie, lie, lie. That's the word [Trump] uses over and over, and people repeat that. And I say, 'Can you give me one example?' No, but [Cruz is] a liar,” Barton said.

Common Sense Bottom Line

If the exit polls in South Carolina prove anything it’s that we are a deeply divided country and at an extremely crucial point in our history. We have been pushed by an overbearing government and we might start to see violence, but we cannot let The Bubba Effect take root in our hearts. We must continue to be like Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and serve our fellow man with love.

“And this is why I have been saying, 'Jesus, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, pick one. Pick one.' You've got to hold on to who you are, the principles that you have, and you can't fight hate with hate.” Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN:  So glad you've tuned in.  We've run out of time for Courage Boys.  We'll have to move that or hit it tomorrow.  

I have David Barton here with us.  And he's been looking at the poll numbers out of South Carolina.  And we're going to get into those here in a bit.  But, David, I wanted to talk to you a bit because I know one of the headlines is going to be, "Glenn Beck says there's going to be a revolution."  I don't think you believed that until you saw the poll numbers coming out of the last three states.

DAVID:  Well, I thought there would be a revolution, but not in the sense of having a physical revolution.  You know, I thought there would be political or something.  I'm now more of a believer that it's a real thing.  The numbers I saw in South Carolina -- you know, I told you the email shocked me.  I was literally shocked.  I was shocked at not only the numbers, but the words that were behind some of the numbers.  The questions that were literally asked and how people responded to that, it really gave me a lot of pause in a way that I have not done in recent years.

GLENN:  And, quite honestly, if we had responsible journalists and responsible press, they would be talking to you now.  And this is why I have been saying, "Jesus, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, pick one.  Pick one."  But you've got to hold on to who and you are the principles that you have.  And you can't fight hate with hate.  And that's exactly what's happening.

And people -- the Bubba Effect, I believe, is in full effect right now.  I believe Donald Trump is the Bubba Effect.  And I'll explain that later, based on some of these polls that are coming in.  And they are frightening.  They're truly frightening when you read the exit polls and you know what you're looking for.

DAVID:  Yeah.  The numbers are scary on this.  And the terms are scary too.

GLENN:  What do you mean "the terms"?

DAVID:  Well, the term we'll get into later is the term "betrayal."  They feel betrayed.  And when you look at betrayal and you look at what psychologists say that that represents, that's a scary term.  It's not like someone has just crossed me.  Betrayal is deep stuff.

GLENN:  So I want to make sure that you hear this.  Because the media will spin this out of control.  And they'll make it into another crazy conspiracy theory.  But I just want to point out: '99, I talked about Osama bin Laden in New York and said that there would be blood and bodies in the streets and the signature would be Osama bin Laden.  And nobody believed me.  In 2006 and '7, I talked to you about financial crash, the crash of biblical proportions, based on the housing market.  I told you that there would be a caliphate, and everybody mocked that.  I'm telling you, we are on the path for revolution.  And a violent revolution.

Right now, we're talking about a velvet revolution.  But if we make the wrong choice at this point, we are -- and I'll make this case, based on the polls and what we're seeing.  And nobody in the media is going to -- they're going to mock it.  Don't mock this warning.  Please don't mock this warning.

All right.  So we'll get into that here in just a second.  And I'm actually anxious for David to hear the -- the -- the founders, the black founders, because David is the one who originally turned us on to black founders.  We had absolutely no idea.

Pat, do you know who this -- which is the black founder that we're hitting today?

PAT:  Crispus Attucks.

GLENN:  Who played a huge, huge role.  I was just up in Boston a couple weeks ago.  And I asked people, "So where is the Old North Church?"  And they're like, "You know, it's been years since I've been there.  I'm not really sure."  

So what is that memorial over there?  

That's Bunker Hill, I think.  I'm not really sure.  

I mean, It's amazing that people who live in that, with all of that history, how many people just dismiss it.  And they're just -- it becomes old hat.  I don't really -- I learned that in school.  And I don't really remember.

PAT:  Yeah, they don't pay attention.  You only pay attention kind of when you go to Boston on vacation and you're there to see the revolutionary sites and do all of that, and then you appreciate that stuff.  I think when you live there, you just kind of -- it's like living around Disneyland.  You get immune to it.

STU:  All right.  But ask them where the nearest Dunkin' Donuts is.

PAT:  Oh, they know where that is.

STU:  They will know that.  They will know that.

PAT:  Yeah.  Yeah.  Ask them what channel the Apprentice is on, and they know that.  Right?

GLENN:  I will tell you that I've never seen them -- I was seeing them from the window.  I've been to Boston a hundred times.  I've never had the opportunity -- never had the time to do it.  It's something I have to do with my kids because it's amazing.  It's all still there.  It's all still there.  And maybe we should spend a little more time learning about it.  

We'll learn something that no one in the mainstream media, no one in the educational system wants you to learn.  The history of our black founders, next.

Hour 2

GLENN:  I'll number Durango Hills today in Las Vegas.  At noon.  And 4 o'clock, I'll be in Elko, Nevada, which I've never been.  And then in Reno tonight.  Which is a beautiful city.  And then tomorrow, we'll be around another few places tomorrow in Nevada.  Just check GlennBeck.com for all the details or my Facebook page.  We'll make sure you can find out where we are.

So in South Carolina, quite honestly, it was like a kick to the gut in South Carolina.  But we learned an awful lot about what is happening in America and how high the anger is in America.  We never make a good choice -- how many times have you ever said these words, "I was so angry today, and I made the best choice I've ever made?"  We always start our apologies with, "I'm really sorry.  I flew off the handle.  I was really angry."  Never have I made a good decision when I was angry.

And David is going to take us through some of the poll numbers and what really happened in South Carolina.  David Barton is with us.

DAVID:  You want to start with the angry side --

GLENN:  You take us where you think we need to go.

DAVID:  Well, I'll tell you the way it started for me.  I was not in South Carolina the night the results came in.  I was speaking at a big event in east Texas.

PAT:  I'm just wondering if this is the David Barton --

GLENN:  Come on.  Let's get something out.

DAVID:  What is the website, Pat?

GLENN:  Oh, jeez.

PAT:  Keepthepromise.com.

GLENN:  We got it.  Let me just say -- if you would like to help the super PAC for Ted Cruz, you can go to keepthepromise.com.  Now, can we please move on?

JEFFY:  So this is the David Barton from --

GLENN:  Stop it right now.  Please, I'm begging you guys.  Turn the mics off, Sarah, in Dallas.  

Okay.  David, tell us what happened.

DAVID:  So I looked at the result after the event that night was over, and I saw all sorts of headlines.  I saw what had happened, that Cruz had come in third.  I saw that evangelicals had abandoned him.  That they did not do well.  The conservative state did not go for him.  And so I saw all these headlines.  Then as I was with you this weekend --

GLENN:  And you were as shocked as I was.

DAVID:  I was shocked.  I was absolutely shocked.  Our numbers were not close to what the results came in as.  Really, nobody's numbers were close.  They missed Rubio by a long way.  Trump overperformed.  Cruz underperformed by what was predicted.  So it was a gut blow.  It was kind of a gut blow.

So I had not thought about it much.  You asked -- you sent me the email and said, "What happened?"  So I sent you back a few articles that had exit polls, but I hadn't really looked at them.  And so as we were talking last night, I spent time going through the exit polls.  And the headlines completely misportrayed what the numbers show.

So, for example, you take -- and let me put it in perspective and then we can talk about how things felt.  The biggest issues that were on voters' minds in South Carolina, which were really different from Iowa and elsewhere, but the biggest issues that were out there -- number one issue was terrorism.  That was the number one issue at 32 percent, followed by jobs and the economy for 28 percent, government spending 27 percent, immigration 10 percent.

GLENN:  Okay.  Listen.  Now, when it comes to terrorism, it's specifically the Syrian refugees.

DAVID:  That's right.

GLENN:  And as I explained to David last night, this is the Bubba effect.  Because David is like, where are the Syrian refugees?  How is that even a story right now?

DAVID:  And, by the way, the reason I was struck with that was 75 percent of South Carolina voters said we like Trump because he doesn't want any Syrian -- and I had no clue it would be 75 percent.

GLENN:  Right.  And why is that number so high?  And I explained to David, this is the Bubba Effect.  This is America saying, "Look, we don't buy your bullcrap that it's a peaceful religion.  And the Muslim Brotherhood are largely secular."  What they know is, Muslims have come in from the Middle East, not necessarily American Muslims and Islamists is the better way to term this.  Islamists are not peaceful.  Muslims can be peaceful.  But we have bent over backwards to say everybody is peaceful.  And this guy is just a lone wolf, when we know that's bullcrap.

So when the government is not protecting us, that is the secret of the Bubba Effect.  When the government isn't protecting, the people push back on that.  They get angry and say, "You know what, get out of our town.  We know what the truth is, and you're part of the problem."  And that's why the Syrian refugees was the -- by far, the number one concern of the people who went to the polls in South Carolina.

DAVID:  And for those folks, Trump was their guy.

GLENN:  Because he says no Muslims.

DAVID:  He says, Muslims, shut it down.  That's where they went.  Although there were these other issues, 75 percent, that was a stunning number to me.

GLENN:  Right.

DAVID:  And the other numbers that stood out to me, is I was told -- let's see if I get the numbers.  74 percent were evangelicals that voted.  As it turned out, 74 percent were not evangelicals.  That was evangelicals born again.  So in the evangelicals, Cruz did really good with the evangelicals.  But among the born agains -- and evangelicals are born agains who are serious about their faith.  So those serious about their faith, Cruz did really well with.  Those who were not serious about their faith and not very conservative, that's where Trump cleaned up.  And so the media said, oh, all the evangelicals are going for Trump.  No, not so.  There was a definite categorization difference between those who practice their faith and those who didn't.

GLENN:  And actually those who practiced their faith, it was split between Rubio and Cruz.

DAVID:  That's right.  Rubio and Cruz had the high percentage of those who were serious about their faith.

GLENN:  So here's the other thing that's hurting Ted Cruz that is sticking, that he's running the dirty campaign and that he's a liar.  I have to tell you, I mean, I would not be with a liar.  And I won't make any excuses.  I think -- you know, I think like -- what was it?  Oh, the thing in Iowa where he said, you know, they sent out fliers --

DAVID:  Ben Carson.

GLENN:  No, no.  The fliers that they sent out and said, "You're in violation of voting violation."  That's been done over and over again by the Democrats and the Republicans.  So it's nothing new.  I don't like it.  I wouldn't have done that myself.  But it's totally fair game.  Nobody has ever had a problem with that in the past.

He's not playing dirty ball.  But the problem is, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, and Donald Trump are all saying the same thing because they know, if they take him out, then the whole landscape changes.  And so he's an impediment to them.  So they're doing what they did to, you know, Mitt Romney and everybody always does.  You -- you target one, take him out.  Then you retarget another one and take them out.  So they're all targeting Marco Rubio -- Ted Cruz.

DAVID:  It's interesting the way they've gone at it.  Trump says, he's a liar.  He lies about everything.  He's the biggest liar -- just lie, lie, lie.  That's the word he uses over and over.  And people repeat that.  And I say, "Can you give me one example?"  No, but he's a liar.  

Give me an example.  

Well, he's a liar.

And it goes back to what William James said in the 1800s.  He said, there's nothing so absurd, but that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.

GLENN:  Hitler said the same thing.

DAVID:  That's right.  And that's what's been happening.  That did hurt Cruz in South Carolina.  The negatives went up on him.  We really can't trust him because he's a liar.  No evidence of that.  That's just a claim.

GLENN:  I know Ted Cruz.  That's the most incredible thing I've heard.  He's trying to be friends with everybody.  He's not taking these guys out.  He's the only one not engaging in those nasty -- you know, this nasty kind of --

DAVID:  Well, I'll tell you, when I -- when they asked me to take the super PAC and I did.  I said, "Here's the deal, I'm not going to be an attack dog.  I'm not going to do a super PAC that's going after everybody attacking.  I believe in Romans 12:21.  You overturn the evil with the good.  We'll run positive messaging.  I don't mind contrast ads.  I don't mind if someone is vote is somewhere, I'll show that.  But I'm not going to be attack dogs and demean the character of others."  And that's the way we run this thing.  And now we're liars for having run really a pretty straight-up campaign.  Now, we can't speak for everybody that does everything in the name of Ted Cruz.  But the super PAC side, our super PAC Keep the Promise.  Oh, wait a minute.  Keepthepromise.com.  Our super PAC,keepthepromise.com, we have really run a straight-up thing.  Because that's Ted's character.  That's what we want to reflect.

GLENN:  I will tell you this, David is in because he does want to raise money for the super PAC because he believes that the only reason why Kasich is still in is he wants to win Ohio.  And Ohio, it doesn't even look like he'll win Ohio.  And the super PAC needs to have the money to be able to go on and continue to fight.  So if you do believe in Ted Cruz, you can donate to the super PAC.

Now, let me switch to -- and, Pat, I don't know if you have this audio.  What Marco Rubio said this weekend on, I don't know if it was Meet the Press

PAT:  I got the Stephanopoulos audio where he was --

GLENN:  Okay.  So I want you to listen to what he said.

VOICE:  For what it's worth, PolitiFact has never been able to find -- none of us have been able to find any instance --

PAT:  That's.  Hang on a second.

GLENN:  And this is important.  Because here's the thing -- there's never been -- in modern history, there's never been somebody who has made it to the presidency without winning Ohio, New Hampshire, or South Carolina.  You have to win one of those three.  In modern history, nobody has made it without winning one of those three.  Hang on just a second.

On the other side, Bill Clinton didn't win anything until Georgia, which was March 1st.  So I want you to remember the comeback kid.  He did win South Carolina.  But South Carolina came later.  It came March 6th.  The first time he won any state was March 1st.  So no matter what's happening at this point, it doesn't matter.  You can win with the momentum.  So don't be discouraged if you happen to be for a candidate.  You know, I think you'll have a hard time -- anybody who hasn't won any of those three states.  That's the only thing that's an impediment.  This is truly a two-man race.  Okay.  Go ahead play the audio.

VOICE:  Three big contests so far.  You've come in third, fifth, and now second in South Carolina.  The big question for you is:  Where do you win?

GLENN:  Now, listen to this.

MARCO:  Well, when we get to these winner-take-all states, we have to start winning because they award all their delegates to one person.  And if you look at what we're doing now, we're going to be doing a national campaign.  I mean, I'm in Tennessee today.  Then I'm going to Arkansas.  Then we finish up in Nevada.  And tomorrow, more of the same.  We're campaigning everywhere.  

So the way this process works, for people that are watching is, these states right now are awarding delegates proportionally.  And -- and -- but come March 15th, if you win a state, you get all of their delegates.  That's when it's really going to start to matter, and we'll be in real good shape for that.

VOICE:  And Florida needs to be a win?

GLENN:  Okay.  Stop.  

Go ahead.

MARCO:  Well, I think that's true for everyone in this race, and it's always been true.  We feel real good about Florida.

VOICE:  True for everybody in this race.

GLENN:  Okay.  Stop.  True for everybody in this race that you have to win Florida.  He is currently polling third in his home state.

DAVID:  And notice he was asked what state can you win, and he hasn't named one.  He's naming where he's going to be, he's naming what they're going to work for, he hasn't given a state where he can win.

GLENN:  Right.  And if his strategy is, I'm going to win in Florida.  It's too late.  That was the -- what's-his-name's strategy?

DAVID:  Jeb Bush.

GLENN:  No.  Not only Jeb Bush, but Giuliani.  It doesn't work.  It just doesn't work.  So I don't know what that strategy is.  But you can't win if you say I'm going to win in Florida and you're polling third and it's your home state.  Imagine if, you know, Ted Cruz was polling third in Texas.  By the way, how is he polling in Texas?

DAVID:  He's polling first in Texas.

GLENN:  First in Texas.  Yeah, I mean, you just can't do that.  You just can't poll third in your own state at this point.  Rubio is not -- is not a winner.  He's just not a winner.  People are looking at him and saying, "Well, he can win in the general."  I'm not so sure.  

Featured Image: Supporters cheer as the South Carolina primary is called for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at his election night party February 20, 2016 in Spartanburg, South Carolina. The New York businessman won the first southern primary decisively. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

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.