EXCLUSIVE: Cruz Leaves the Door Open to Unsuspending His Campaign

So you're sayin' there's a chance!

Ted Cruz called in to the The Glenn Beck Program on Tuesday, giving Glenn and the crew a much-needed sliver of optimism for election coverage this evening. Co-host Pat Gray couldn't help but toss out a Hail Mary to the former presidential candidate.

"Ted, are you leaving the door open to . . . if Nebraska were to somehow, miraculously choose you tonight, is there . . . I mean, if that happened, would you consider getting back in the race?" Pat asked.

Cruz's response even caught both Pat and Glenn by surprise.

"Well, I am not holding my breath," Cruz said. "My assumption is that that will not happen. But, listen, let's be very clear: If there is a path to victory . . . we launched this campaign intending to win. The reason we suspended the race last week, it was Indiana's loss. I didn't see a viable path to victory. If that changes, we will certainly respond accordingly."

Pat's joy couldn't be contained as he gave Cruz supporters a call to action.

"Right. I don't know about you, Nebraska, but I take that as a, 'Yes!' Get to the polls and vote for Ted Cruz," Pat exclaimed.

"Yes! I take that as a big 'Yes,'" Glenn said. "That's interesting, Ted. That's interesting. That's very interesting."

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Ted Cruz is on with us now. Hello, Ted, how are you? Are you there, Ted?

TED: I am. It's great to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: Good to be with you. How are you feeling?

TED: You know, I am feeling great. Obviously, the election results were not what we had hoped for.

GLENN: Yeah.

TED: But I'll tell you, Heidi and I feel incredibly privileged to have had the chance to make this run, to be part of what was just an incredible grassroots movement.

And, you know, not a day goes by that we are not thankful for the men and women all across this country that we had the opportunity to meet, and they're just patriots fighting for this country. And that was inspirational. We came up short in this election. I would have preferred it otherwise.

PAT: Me too.

TED: But the movement still continues. And that's what gives me encouragement.

GLENN: Let's talk about that in two ways: First of all, can a conservative win happen with the media the way it is today? Facebook -- we just found out a couple days ago, Facebook -- like, for instance, dropped my speech from CPAC, dropped your speech from CPAC. They were manipulating what was trending if you were a conservative, especially one that was for Ted Cruz.

TED: Sure.

GLENN: You know how Fox behaved. How can someone like you win when the media is the way it is? Can you?

TED: Well, you can. Now, this election will be studied for the role of the media, and in particular, network executives, that they made in terms of promoting the candidate that they had chosen they wanted to win. You know, it's now -- you know, for example, Trump has received now over $3 billion in free airtime.

GLENN: Yeah.

TED: Strikingly, over the last 30 days, he had $500 billion in free airtime, 90 percent of which was positive. To put that in perspective, in the entire 13 months of the campaign, the aggregate coverage of my campaign was about 500 billion dollars' worth.

GLENN: You mean million.

TED: He got that in 30 days, and 90 percent of his was positive.

And that has a dramatic impact on the polls, when every network becomes effectively the super PAC for the candidate they want to win the nomination. And we're about to see that same ferocious fury now turn against Donald in an effort to elect Hillary. And there's no doubt we need to think hard about, what is the role of a handful of executives in manipulating and trying to deceive the voters? Because I think it's a very dangerous dynamic that we have right now.

GLENN: So, Ted, we have only about eight minutes. I know you're on a tight schedule, and we're on the network schedule. So I want to get some pretty important questions out.

There are people now -- we are getting hammered by two -- by two fronts. One, people saying, "You've got to convince Ted to run third party." And I keep saying, "I don't think he would do that." The other is, "You've got to support Donald Trump." And we can't do that.

What do the people that were for you, what do you think that we should do? What is your recommendation? And can you support Donald Trump?

TED: Well, listen, this is a choice every voter is going to have to make. And I would note, it's not a choice that we as the voters have to make today. The Republican convention isn't for another two and a half months. The election isn't for another six months.

You and I both want to support a conservative. We want to support someone who will get the burden of Washington off of small businesses and bring back jobs and economic growth. We want to support someone who will defend the Constitution, defend the Bill of Rights, religious liberty, the Second Amendment. We want to defend someone who will stand by our friends and allies, including especially the nation of Israel, and we want to defend someone who will be a strong, serious commander-in-chief.

More broadly than that, Glenn, you and I both want a president we can trust, a president we can trust with power, who demonstrates a temperament not to abuse that power. That's what elections are about.

The voters in the primary have seemed to have made a choice. And we'll see what happens as the months go forward. But I think we need to watch and see what the candidates say and do.

PAT: Now, you say we need to watch and see. Ted, are you leaving the door open to -- if Nebraska were to somehow --

GLENN: It's not going to happen.

PAT: -- miraculously choose you tonight.

GLENN: Pat's going for the hail Mary.

PAT: Is there -- I mean, if that happened, would you consider getting back in the race?

(chuckling)

TED: Well, I am not holding my breath. My assumption is that that will not happen.

But, listen, let's be very clear: If there is a path to victory -- we launched this campaign intending to win. The reason we suspended the race last week, it was Indiana's loss. I didn't see a viable path to victory. If that changes, we will certainly respond accordingly.

PAT: Right. I don't know about you, Nebraska, but I take that as a yes!

GLENN: Yes! I take that as a big yes.

PAT: Get to the polls and vote for Ted Cruz.

GLENN: Now, I want you to know, the minute you would unsuspend your campaign, John Kasich would do the exact same thing.

PAT: I bet he would. I bet he would.

JEFFY: I bet he would too.

GLENN: I bet he would.

That's interesting, Ted. That's interesting. That's very interesting.

(laughter)

PAT: That's very, very interesting.

GLENN: Yeah, very interesting.

PAT: I like that.

GLENN: Can I ask you --

TED: You know, I will say, Glenn, a lot of folks in the media are trying to spin this election results as the death of the conservative movement. And that's a media narrative that the media loves. But also, a lot of the Washington establishment loves.

GLENN: Yeah.

TED: And I got to tell you, I think it's complete nonsense. I think the conservative movement remains strong and vibrant. I think the conservative movement unfortunately was divided. That doesn't mean it is -- it lacks its potency, but it is true that when conservatives are divided, we are far less effective. And there are a lot of reasons for that.

GLENN: So that brings us to what the G.O.P. is saying.

Two weeks ago, Ted, Reince Priebus had -- wanted to spend the day with us. And spend the day, do television, do radio, and then have some conversations off air because he was courting our listeners. Since you dropped out, the guy won't even return our phone calls. This is the week it was supposed to happen. He was going to do Hannity, us, and Rush Limbaugh. Yesterday was Hannity. Now he's saying, "We never planned on coming down." I mean, it's incredible what happened.

And so how do we get behind a group of people who don't have any interest in asking conservatives for their vote?

TED: Well, I -- I hope that proves not the case. And, you know, from my perspective, this fight was about a lot more than one campaign or one candidate. This fight is about principles that are eternal, the free market principles that built America that allowed millions of small businesses to lift hundreds of millions out of poverty and into prosperity. Those principles are as true today as they were every day of our country's history. The constitutional liberties and the Bill of Rights that protect our God-given rights from being violated by the federal government, those rights are true and as valid today as they have been throughout history.

And so the movement continues -- what my energy is directed at, what my focus is directed at is to continue to strengthen and speak for that movement, to all of the grassroots activists, the over 7 million people across the country who voted for me, allowing us to win 12 states across the country. This fight will continue because the country is worth it.

And, you know, whether those in Washington will listen in the short-term, that will be their choice. But I think the answer, the only force strong enough to change the path we're on is the grassroots. And so my energy and focus is going to remain where it always has been, working to listen to the people and to fight for the people, each and every day.

STU: Ted, looking back at Barack Obama in 2008, he comes along. He has this big victory. Everyone predicts the end of the Republican Party, the end of the conservative movement. It's just going to be a regional party from now on.

Two years later, you have the Tea Party wave election. So that's proved wrong. And it wasn't that Americans seemingly turned towards progressivism, they just really seemed to like Barack Obama. He was this guy who hit -- who hit the right tones at the right time somehow. I didn't see it. But obviously America did at some level. Do you see that the same way with Donald Trump, in that it's not necessarily that the Republican Party is turning away from conservatism. They just see this guy as the right personality for this time.

TED: Well, listen, there's no doubt about the power of celebrity. And by any measure, Donald Trump is a phenomenon. And it has been a phenomenon heavily fueled by media executives who have run him 24/7.

GLENN: So --

TED: And that's -- that is one of a kind.

GLENN: So wait, wait, wait, Ted. Is it? Or has the Democratic Party that has the whole stable of celebrities looked at that and said, "Well then, why don't we go for a Will Smith/Angelina Jolie ticket?"

TED: Look, there is -- that is entirely possible. You know, one of the disturbing things about this election -- and there are many -- is that it opens the door potentially for what comes next. And what comes next is not likely to be sound, stable leaders with good judgment and the understanding of the problems facing this country, our economy, and the challenges and threats facing us across the world.

You know, that's -- you know, I'm still a little bit old-fashioned in that I think we ought to be able to look up to our president. We ought to be able to be proud if our kids want to be like the president. And that's -- that's a test that, you know, many presidents from JFK to FDR to Ronald Reagan, there were millions of kids who wanted to be like those presidents. And their presidents were proud that that was the model that they were emulating. I sure hope that we don't move away from that to a system where you would be less than proud if your kids said they wanted to be like the president.

GLENN: So, Ted, I only have two minutes left. When Marco Rubio left, he said he had a regret.

A, do you have any regret? And, B, where are you going next?

TED: Well, look, my biggest regret is that we weren't able to accomplish the task and that we let down the millions of grassroots activists across the country who fought so hard.

Heidi and I and the girls, we poured everything into it we've got. But we weren't able to get it done. And, you know, I wish we hadn't disappointed so many incredible people across the country. But, you know, where do I go next? I'm actually driving to the airport right now, flying to Washington to go back to the Senate and the very same principles that I was fighting for to execute from the White House: Jobs, freedom, security.

PAT: They're going to be happy to see you.

GLENN: Yeah, they're going to love to see you.

TED: Those are my priorities in the Senate.

GLENN: Is there a possibility of a third party in the future of people that think like you?

TED: You know, I don't think that's very likely, but it's always talked about. I don't know that it's something that's likely to happen.

What I do think is imperative is that we actually get the job done: And the job is getting the burden of Washington off of small businesses so that we have wages going up again, we have jobs coming back to America, we have people having a chance again at the American dream. I mean, we are trapped in a stagnation, and people are hurting.

And, you know, I'm very dismayed that the odds are increasing that we simply keep going down the same road, we don't fix those problems, and people end up hurting even more.

And that's where my focus is going to be, is fighting for small businesses, fighting for the American worker, to get Washington off your back. And I believe we're going to accomplish that. But it just may take more time.

GLENN: Ted, great to talk to you. We'll talk to you again, I'm sure, when you're in Washington. And what you're saying is, if Nebraska goes the right way, there's still a chance.

STU: There's a chance!

GLENN: He's just saying there's a chance.

All right. Thanks a lot, Ted. I appreciate it.

TED: Thank you, gentlemen.

Featured Image: Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) speaks during a campaign rally at the Indiana State Fairgrounds on May 2, 2016 in Indianapolis, Indiana. Cruz continues to campaign leading up to the state of Indiana's primary day on Tuesday. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

From Muhammad to Marx

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

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

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

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

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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