Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Election by Numbers: Stu's Final Count

November 08, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

Most polls and pundits are predicting a Hillary win tonight. What about Stu Burguiere, co-host of The Glenn Beck Program and poll aficionado?

"Stu's final board for the electoral college is being put together right now," Glenn said Tuesday on his radio program.

Making a few last-minute calculations, Stu revealed his final predictions for the Electoral College vote count.

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these nail-biting questions:

• Which state is Stu hedging on?

• Did Hillary make it into the Douche Hall of Fame?

• Does Glenn predict a blowout or razor-thin win?

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

GLENN: Stu, you want to give us one more look at the -- I know they're making all new maps for us tonight and everything. We have our coverage beginning at 7 o'clock Eastern. We are going to be looking at some of it as we go on. We'll be looking at some of the -- the -- the funnier or the crazier moments of this election. Because this election has been crazy from the beginning. And so we're looking for you on the feed. I know Jeffy is asking people on the feed. You probably tweet them to Stu show. Is that right? Stu show?

STU: Oh. @worldofStu.

GLENN: @worldofStu. And you can tweet @worldofStu for the craziest moments that you would like us to cover tonight and play clips from, as we watch this thing unfold.

I'm going to be on with NBC tonight and Tom Brokaw at -- on NBC, not MSNBC, but NBC, tonight at 10:00 something or other. I begin with them. But I'm also going to be covering it here on TheBlaze. And it's going to be radically different coverage here. But Stu is going to be looking at all of the exit polling and everything else, as he does for us every year. And he was very, very right last year. He was the only one in this -- on this show. We called him the little black rain cloud. He was the only one on this show that got it right. We wanted so desperately to believe.

STU: You know, it's a weird situation. And there's some -- if you are a Trump fan, you can look at some positives, as opposed to what happened to Romney. Because Romney was very close. Closer to Trump in the national polls. But the idea that Hillary could actually lose with -- in a close election is possible still.

If you go through -- someone went through and put the -- all the RealClearPolitics Averages into an electoral map, and it was like one state away, 272-266 or something, with Hillary.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: So it could be that close. There are states that Trump is winning by .2 percent that he's getting credit for in there. Of course, that's the way the system works. So he would get credit for those.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But they're just very unsure.

GLENN: It depends on who shows up today.

STU: It really does. You know, there's a -- there's a -- one of the arguments for Trump is, basically we've seen the story of two different groups: Hispanic voters, very activated, going out to vote in record numbers. Black voters, not as excited about this one. They were excited about Barack Obama, not as excited here. So their vote has fallen off a little bit.

The issue with that is Hispanic voters are very -- about half of Hispanic voters are located in two states. And neither of those two states are swing states, at least usually, California and Texas.

So the fact that they're very active may not do anything for either of them. And that's half of the population, roughly. So that's a big deal. However, a couple of states, something like Nevada could really easily be swung. We talked about some of the early voting data there. And it's not promising if you are a Trump supporter in -- in Nevada.

GLENN: Could I give you first what I heard today from internal polling? Put it up on the board and show me.

Let's give North Carolina -- they say it's too close to call in internal polling. Let's give North Carolina to Trump

STU: Okay.

GLENN: Let's give Maine to Trump.

STU: Okay. That's Maine, by the way, just the one district.

GLENN: Yeah, one district. Let's give Florida to Clinton.

STU: Florida, Clinton.

GLENN: Ohio to Trump.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: Nevada, I don't have any information on, so I'm going to give it to Clinton. And let's give Michigan to Trump, out of the Clinton pile.

STU: Wow. That's an interesting map.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Well, let's see. You would have -- the only thing we really changed here --

GLENN: Michigan and Florida.

STU: Yeah. I mean, problem is -- so you're gaining 29 for Hillary. You're pulling out 16 and you're pulling -- you're only losing 17 -- that would be worse for --

GLENN: Let me give New Hampshire too, to Trump.

STU: Again, I don't think that gets you there because new Hampshire is only four electoral votes. So you're pulling over 200 --

GLENN: Okay. That's being as generous -- okay. Now give Florida.

STU: Yeah, if he gets Florida with this, he definitely wins.

GLENN: He definitely wins.

STU: The issue is, he cannot lose Florida. To me -- realistically, he can't lose Florida or North Carolina. Either one of those states, he loses. It's over. Because --

GLENN: How about Ohio?

STU: Ohio, he -- I'm kind of counting that for him. While it's still pretty much

technically a swing state --

GLENN: Okay. They're counting.

STU: -- you can't get anywhere Trump winning without Ohio. And he's actually winning the polls there. So I expect him to win Ohio tonight, which is usually the biggest swing state. Ohio and Florida bounces back and forth.

North Carolina is not usually the biggest swing state. But it does seem to be this time. And North Carolina, I think the early voting actually looks fairly good for him. You can't predict states by early voting.

GLENN: Yeah. Today -- today, as of this morning, the Republicans are counting on North Carolina. They're counting on a win for the Senate. That will be the last Senate seat that will put them in charge of the Senate. They are not counting on Florida. They are counting on Michigan.

When I say counting, I should say, they think that it's in play and they could win it.

Maine. Ohio, they are counting on. Michigan, they believe they could win today. New Hampshire, they believe they're going to win. So it's only Florida that they think they're not going to win. And Nevada looks horrible, doesn't it?

STU: Nevada looks really bad. I mean, to give you a sense on Nevada, the early vote, the Democrats led by a large margin. Going into Election Day, all the assumptions that are pretty rational and probably pretty favorable for Trump -- if you take favorable assumptions, he needs to win today by about ten points.

Now, that is -- you know, Romney lost on Election Day in Nevada last time. Trump does not have the ground game that Hillary has. This is -- we've talked about this yesterday in that, in a way, Nevada has turned into one of the -- sort of like the new Michigan, in that like it's all -- it's all unions there now. The Reid machine in Nevada is still very powerful, and they think that they've been able to put that one away.

If you do that, it gets very difficult. Because then you're looking at picking off -- you know, probably the easiest map for him to get there was to win Nevada and then also win New Hampshire out of our leaning Democrat column because New Hampshire he actually had some really good polls. New Hampshire is difficult to poll. It's not a -- it's a very crazy sort of state with polling.

And, you know, maybe he's -- he would be able to pull that one out. There's a good Senate race there. So you would think a lot of Republicans would be activated to get out for that as well, even if they're not maybe huge Trump fans. So if he could pull that out and then get Maine's second district, he can get right to 270. But without Nevada, that's not possible. You know, assuming he doesn't pick off some other more unlikely state.

So right now, he's in a position where it is -- there is no room for error. And he needs to really go beyond that.

GLENN: What are the states -- what are the absolute firewall states that we're going to be seeing first tonight? That if he loses -- like, we won't know Florida until at least 9 o'clock.

STU: Right. It's going to take a long time -- they called it -- it took four days for them to call it last time.

GLENN: God help --

STU: So that's -- it's going to -- you're not going to get any Florida calls, really. I mean, that takes a long time.

GLENN: Really?

STU: But that's the thing, if you get a call of one of those two states early, it will basically be over. They will not make the mistake of 2000 and call that thing super early without knowing for sure.

GLENN: Right.

STU: At least you would expect they wouldn't.

GLENN: But if it's called early for Trump, that's good.

STU: Oh, yeah. If it's called early for Trump, he's in it. But it's not enough for him.

GLENN: No, I know that. But if it's called early, it might mean that he has such a groundswell that, you know, the people are showing up and -- I mean, right now, he is, in internal polling, behind in Florida by two. And so if they call it early, it means that there was a real groundswell, that that thing might have been four or five points off.

STU: And right when we get on with Blaze coverage tonight, we will go into this. Because what you're getting out of early closings on the east coast is not how the election -- you're not going to get a sense of, "It's over." You get a sense of what the environment is. The environment tends to set up basically the same way around the country. If Donald Trump is going to win this, he's going to be activating a lot of voters that aren't showing up in polling for some reason.

GLENN: Right.

STU: If that happens, you'll see it right away in these states.

GLENN: What should we look for in exit polls today, early? Because, remember, by 4 o'clock in last -- in 2012 -- now, we didn't say this, but by 4 o'clock in the afternoon in 2012, we know -- we knew who was going to win. Pretty sure.

We didn't want to believe it. But we were pretty sure because of the exit polling.

STU: Exit polls -- some exit polls leaked. However, exit polls leaked for Kerry in 2004, which showed him winning. So, I mean --

GLENN: No, it wasn't the leaked stuff that we saw. It was, we saw internal stuff. Remember? We were -- we were tipped off.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: And we were like, "What?" But we didn't believe it.

STU: Right. Right. Right.

But, you know, what I'm saying, those exit polls that were leaked were legitimate, just wrong. Exit polling is difficult to do. You're polling before polls are even closed. There's a lot of, you know, messiness when it comes to that stuff. Of course, I'm going to sit here and obsess about it all day, obviously. I can sit here and stare at every one of them, but you have to take all of that with a big grain of salt.

So I think if you see early on indications that Trump is doing a good job, bringing out white voters from -- from outside of the normal sort of Republican base, voters who are, you know, blue color Democrats.

GLENN: I think you'll see that in Ohio.

STU: In Michigan, there's one county where everyone points to, which is the Reagan Democrat county: Macomb, I guess I think it is. And they always say that's the Reagan Democrat -- every analyst says the same thing: That's the Reagan Democrat county.

If you see that coming out and that swinging towards Trump heavily, you'll get an indication that he's actually activating those voters.

And if he does that, he has a chance to win. Again, this early voting data just says, if there are Republicans or Democrats that have come out, not if they're winning the vote. If every Democrat came out and voted for Trump, it would look the same way.

So they're assuming that all the Democrats are coming out and voting for Clinton. Maybe they won't.

GLENN: Hold on just a second. I have Blake in Missouri who just voted. He wants to tell us his vote. Go ahead, Blake.

CALLER: Yeah, Glenn. I know you guys are focusing on the election between Clinton and Trump. And that's all important, I guess. But I think we really need to talk about what happened yesterday on the Pat & Stu show, when I had the honorable pleasure of partaking in the vote to put Hillary Clinton in the Douche Hall of Fame.

PAT: Thank you. That's incredibly important.

STU: Wow.

JEFFY: Thank you.

GLENN: So you did vote for Hillary Clinton. I want all your friends to know that.

CALLER: I absolutely did vote for Hillary Clinton.

PAT: Yeah. And she made it. She made it into the Douche Hall of Fame. To her credit, she got a surprisingly low 98 percent.

GLENN: Wow.

PAT: Surprising.

STU: Yeah.

CALLER: Yeah, I was -- I was disappointed. I was hoping for that 100 percent, but it just didn't happen.

STU: Our models all showed 99.2 percent, and it just didn't happen.

PAT: It just didn't happen.

[break]

GLENN: Stu's final board for the electoral college is being put together right now.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: And it is final, 308 for Hillary Clinton and for Donald Trump --

STU: 230.

PAT: Why do you want Hillary to win!

JEFFY: Why?

PAT: Why do you want Hillary to win! Why! I knew it. I knew it. I knew you wanted Hillary to win! Why?

GLENN: 230?

PAT: Hillary! Win! Why!

STU: Florida, I'm really hedging on, but it doesn't make a difference in the outcome. I -- I had Florida on one column. I just moved it over right before we came back.

PAT: It's just a matter of, is it a bigger win?

STU: Yeah. Right.

GLENN: 230-278.

STU: Right. It wouldn't make a difference for Hillary.

GLENN: For Hillary, it won't make a difference.

JEFFY: Wow.

GLENN: We'll see you tonight.

STU: I wouldn't be --

GLENN: I wouldn't be surprised if it was a blowout or if it was razor thin sharp.

PAT: Either way, get out and vote.

Featured Image:

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck joins Megyn Kelly LIVE — One night ONLY in Fort Worth!

Get ready for sparks to fly. For the first time in years, Glenn will come face-to-face with Megyn Kelly — and this time, he’s the one in the hot seat. On October 25, 2025, at Dickies Arena in Fort Worth, Texas, Glenn joins Megyn on her “Megyn Kelly Live Tour” for a no-holds-barred conversation that promises laughs, surprises, and maybe even a few uncomfortable questions.

What will happen when two of America’s sharpest voices collide under the spotlight? Will Glenn finally reveal the major announcement he’s been teasing on the radio for weeks? You’ll have to be there to find out.

This promises to be more than just an interview — it’s a live showdown packed with wit, honesty, and the kind of energy you can only feel if you are in the room. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss your chance to see Glenn like you’ve never seen him before.

Get your tickets NOW at www.MegynKelly.com before they’re gone!