Shakespeare: Too White for Ivy League Students

The outspoken and fantastically fierce Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke filled in for Glenn on The Glenn Beck Program today, Tuesday, December 20.

Read below or listen to the full segment from Hour 3 for answers to these questions:

• Will consumers ditch Cheetos for healthy snacks?

• Would you eat a PepsiCo quinoa or spinach dip at a party?

• Was political correctness given its last rights on November 8th?

• Why does diversity exclude white people?

• Are black lesbian poets more diverse that white male playwrights?

• Can tweets cause seizures?

• Is assault via the internet a federal crime if it crosses state lines?

• Have people killed in the name of Black Lives Matter?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

DAVID: Thanks for staying with the Glenn Beck Program. You're going to think this story came out of the Onion, you know, that satirical newspaper. But actually, this comes out of the Wall Street Journal.

Did you know that the chief executive of Frito-Lay has vowed to turn the maker of Fritos, Cheetos, and potato chips, and Pepsi into a health juggernaut? I'm not kidding.

This story here says: But while consumers say they all want to eat healthy, often all they really want are potato chips.

It goes on to say: But buoyed by less-healthy snack brands such as Doritos chips and Cheetos Puffs, PepsiCo's sales and volumes are on the rise and its profit margins have expanded in 15 quarters straight. Selling junk food. Yeah, that's what people want from Frito-Lay. They don't want health food.

If I want eat healthy, I'm not going to -- if I want to eat healthy, I'm not going to buy Frito-Lay products. I know where the produce section is in the store.

So it goes on to say that these are hard chews for big food companies. Taste is the biggest factor in snack purchased.

No kidding. Salt. That's what they want to taste.

So it says here: When people get together, they have snacks like potato chips and pretzels. They don't all sit around and snack on granola bars.

It says: Norman Deschamps' head market researcher Packaged Facts.

It's a lot easier for a food behemoth like PepsiCo to generate revenue by tweaking just the Lay's brand of potato chips, the world's top selling food brand, than to start from scratch with quinoa or spinach.

It says: The world's biggest food companies have been trying to wrap up healthier offerings for years, but consumers haven't given up their love for all things sweet and salty.

Do you think you'd have to pay a researcher to tell you that? This is fascinating.

If I was a shareholder, Frito-Lay, I wouldn't be happy about this. I'd say, keep selling the junk food. You know, McDonald's tried this.

McDonald's, hamburgers and fries, that's what people want when they go to McDonald's. But we've turned into the nanny state. Where government -- the federal government and the state government -- remember New York with Mayor Bloomberg and his elimination of the Big Gulp sodas to try to get people to eat and drink in a more healthy fashion? The government -- the federal government steps in and puts all these requirements on the food makers. Now they have to list all of the ingredients and all of the caloric intake and how much sodium and fat and carbohydrates. I never look at the wrapper at that crap when I go to eat it. If I'm eating a Baby Ruth or a Butterfinger, I just rip the package open and start eating it. I don't care what the ingredients are. I know what it is. It's a candy bar. It's sugar covered with chocolate. It tastes good.

I know where to find cucumbers and carrots. So we -- you know, you look at the stuff here from McDonald's. You know, they try to get into the healthy food eating. Remember that? They had this healthy menu section in their restaurants. It bombed.

You know, there's some people that went in there and wanted a salad. I wouldn't go to McDonald's to order a salad. You know what people want when they go to McDonald's? Grease!

Because it tastes good. French fries, cooked in oil. Hamburgers, which are -- they're Quarter Pounders with cheese. Now it's a double Quarter Pounder with extra cheese. And now they put bacon on it. That's what people want from McDonald's.

So McDonald's abandoned that healthy menu. You know why? They were losing money off of it. They realized -- they came to the realization, which they didn't have to pay some marketing research guy or woman this. They could have just asked me. How do you think this is going to work? We're going to offer a healthy menu at McDonald's. I'd say, "Are you guys nuts? Do your stockholders know this?" Do you know what people want from you, McDonald's? Quarter Pounders with cheese, french fries, and shakes. That's what they want. They don't want wraps, salad wraps. You know, some people eat that. They don't go to -- if you're a healthy eater, do you go to McDonald's to get your health food? Don't you go to Whole Foods or one of these other places that, you know, has a little healthier menu? Who -- what person that wants to focus on healthy eating steps foot in a McDonald's? What, so they can order a shake and fries with their healthy wrap?

I mean, this stuff is insane. It really is.

And this goes kind of in line with this other thing I came across here from The Daily Signal. Ivy League students tear down Shakespeare portrait in the name of diversity. That's how crazy this world has become -- actually this country, with this political correctness, I hope on November 8th of this year was given its last rights. I really do. It's going to take some time.

It says here: Students at the University of Pennsylvania have removed a portrait of William Shakespeare and replaced it with a picture of a black lesbian poet for the sake of having greater diversity.

The large Shakespeare portrait had resided near a staircase in Fisher Bennett Hall for years until a gaggle of activist students removed it and placed it in the office of the English department head. In its place, they taped up a photograph of Audre Lorde. I guess she's the black lesbian poet. Never heard of her.

The portrait won't be moved back, according to a statement from the English department head because a white male Shakespeare didn't embody the value of diversity.

To which I would ask, why not? If you listened to the program yesterday, you heard me ask -- or say that, you know, a lot of these -- these liberal mainstream media that were picking on -- picking apart Donald Trump's cabinet nominees as being too white -- and I said, "Somebody needs to ask these people: What do you got against white people?" So the diversity has to be to the exclusion of whites. You can't have whites, blacks, Hispanics. It can only be blacks, Hispanics, lesbians, transgenders, Muslims, but it can't include whites?

So this -- this department head said: Students removed the Shakespeare portrait and delivered it to my office as a way of affirming their commitment to a more inclusive mission for the English department.

So that doesn't include Shakespeare? He can't be a part of the inclusiveness -- their inclusive mission? Shakespeare can't be a part of the diversity? It can only be a black lesbian poet?

This is part of that totalitarianism on college campuses. The left knows better than anybody else, control the language, you control the narrative.

It's Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. We have to take a break. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

[break]

DAVID: Welcome back to the program. Merry Christmas from your host today, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

Here's another one that you think you would find in the Onion. This Newsweek writer claims assault by tweet from The Daily Caller.

Newsweek senior writer Kurt Eichenwald claimed Friday he was assaulted by a tweet that caused a seizure. Now, the seizure part isn't funny. But assaulted by a tweet. My God, would my Twitter handle be in trouble.

It all started with a tweet Thursday from Eichenwald's account that said @Jew_Goldstein to his wife: You caused a seizure -- I'm sorry -- this is his wife: You caused a seizure. I have your information. I've called the police to report the assault.

That's why I said you would think this was out of the Onion. This guy would call the police because someone sent him a tweet that he says caused his wife to have a seizure.

So it says the Twitter user Jew_Goldstein had sent a gif. G-I-F. An animated video of changing colors with text that said, "You deserve a seizure." The account has been suspended by Twitter.

Newsweek told The Daily Caller they could confirm that Eichenwald's wife, what she said was true. Oh, yeah, that means -- if Newsweek said it, then that's confirmation -- that's enough confirmation for them, I guess. It's not enough confirmation for me.

Eichenwald himself went back on Twitter Friday to say he's taking a hiatus from the social media site as he works with law enforcement to bring this guy to justice.

(chuckling)

You've got to be kidding me, that the police would even respond and spend time on -- I wonder what police agency this is. It doesn't say here.

The Newsweek writer also suggested that the FBI might get involved.

(laughter)

No, this is not from the Onion, folks. This is from TheDailyCaller.com.

So he wrote -- and this is this Eichenwald -- at this point, the police are attempting to determine if this is a federal crime because it appears to be crossing state lines.

(laughter)

The FBI did not respond to an inquiry about whether assault via internet gif is a federal crime.

Speaking to that, let's talk about fake news. Unbelievable.

And I want to talk about this Russian hacking -- all this uproar over Russian hacking and how the Russians were to blame for defeating Mrs. Bill Clinton and the Democrats. It was the Russians that led people in the swing states, including Wisconsin and now Michigan, that hadn't gone Republican for several decades -- and Pennsylvania, how it was the Russians -- I mean, I live in Wisconsin, right?

I voted for Donald Trump. Supported Donald Trump. What these stories suggest is that I was going to vote for somebody else. And I said, "Well, you know, since the Russians have hacked, I guess I'll go vote for somebody else. I guess I'll vote for Donald Trump." I mean, this is insane.

But this is what they've glommed on to. Remember, they started with the, it was James Comey's fault. That's why she lost. Then it was fake news. And now it's the Russian hacking.

And since not much is going on in the political world, most of the media is content to just report on this, this Russian hacking. And I'm not here to suggest. Because I don't know. I'm not hear to suggest that Russia doesn't try to hack into databases. They don't try to get an edge. The Americans do the same thing. But to say this caused Donald Trump to get elected is insane.

I mean, I'm looking at this piece here from Rasmussen. And it says: The New York Times story titled Russian Hackers acted to aid Trump in election, is based on entirely, what else? Unnamed sources, including political appointees of current President Barack Obama.

Play that first clip for us, please.

OBAMA: But the larger point I want to emphasize here is that there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even -- you could even rig America's elections. In part, because they're so decentralized and the numbers of votes involved. There's no evidence that that has happened in the past or that there are instances in which that will happen this time.

And so I'd advise Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes. And if you got the most votes, then it would be my expectation of Hillary Clinton to offer a gracious concession speech and pledge to work with him in order to make sure that the American people benefit from an effective government.

DAVID: Now, that was before November 8th. That was President Obama. And that was when the Democrats were claiming at the time that Podesta's emails were hacked. They may have been. I don't know that the Russians did it. You heard the president.

He says it's impossible, with all the intricacies involved for them to -- not to get into these systems, but to swing an election. Then he accused Trump of whining. And he said -- this was before November 8th. If Trump gets more votes, Trump wins the election -- he apparently won the popular vote because of California. But if Trump wins the election, then she should graciously concede and let's move on. Well, that didn't happen.

So then we have all this stuff about the Russian hackers. There's no evidence at this point.

Now, post election, Obama has ordered an investigation into Russian hacking. Obama says, "We need to take action, and we will." Democrats are -- are saying that Americans believing fake news is sowing confusion.

This is incredible. The electoral college came back uneventful, no drama yesterday. I believe Trump ended up with 304, it might have been 305 electoral votes. Only two defectors in Texas, out of 36. And then he got one in Maine. I don't know if Maine doles theirs out proportionally or not. But one defector went for Trump -- I shouldn't say defector. He got one electoral vote in Maine. And Mrs. Bill Clinton got the other two. So he got 300 electoral votes. And the liberal mainstream media is saying, "Well, that's not a mandate. He better move cautiously."

I beg to differ. I like the fact that Paul Ryan, speaker of the house, has suggested that the Republicans need to go big on policy issues and policy recommendations. Don't squander this. You don't know how long it's going to last. They control the Senate, albeit, not necessarily filibuster proof. But they control the House of Representatives, and they control the White House.

I don't want to hear anymore complaining from the Republicans that they can't get anything done because they don't have any power. You strike while the iron is hot. You may not have the super majority for too long. The midterms are coming up in two short years. Often time, that favors the party out of power. So if we end up with a bifurcated Congress, where let's say the Dems win back the Senate -- I don't think they will, but who knows -- then we'll have gridlock. So they have to strike while the iron's hot. And they better.

We got to take a break. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke in for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Program. Coming up in the show is David French. We're going to talk about Black Lives Matter.

[break]

DAVID: Welcome back. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke. In for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Program.

Let's go in this direction: I have on the line David French. David French is a staff writer at National Review. He's an attorney. Concentrates his practice on constitutional law, the law of armed conflict. He's a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. And he recently penned an article in National Review, and it had to do with Black Lives Matter and this love affair with the late Fidel Castro. And I want to talk to him about that.

David, thanks so much for joining me today.

FRENCH: Thanks so much for having me, I appreciate it.

DAVID: Why don't you get right into it, this sickening essay from Black Lives Matter in terms of making Fidel Castro into some -- a guy that's to be admired?

FRENCH: Yeah, it's really amazing. Right after Fidel Castro died, Black Lives Matter published a piece, an essay -- I mean, you really have to read it to believe it. But it begins with: We're feeling many things as we awaken to a world without Fidel Castro. And it's a really remarkable essay that laments his death, talks about his revolutionary street cred, and then essentially -- and then thanks him for sheltering some of the most vicious cop killers in American history.

There were black revolutionaries who killed police officers, three of them, for example, hijacked a jet after they killed a police officer at knife point, sent the jet to Cuba, and Fidel Castro gave them sanctuary. And so what we're talking about here is a man who not only had a human rights effort, where over a million people left his own island to escape and where he ruthlessly suppressed dissent, he actually harbored in the United States -- I mean, harbored in Cuba cop killers, and Black Lives Matter was praising him for that.

DAVID: You know, one of those cop killers is Assata Shakur, who was -- Werner Foerster, I think was the New Jersey state trooper that she killed or she was involved in the killing. He had pulled over these individuals, this car for a traffic violation. And in part, she got out of the car. She was a passenger in the rear seat. And went over. Werner Foerster had been wounded. So he laid in the street. She ran over to him, grabbed his firearm, and shot him multiple times as he laid on the ground there. She was caught. She was convicted. She was sent to prison in the state of New Jersey. I think it was New Jersey, yeah.

And she escaped. There was an unbelievable escape. Some people came in. They took many of the prison guards hostage. They got her out. She fled to Cuba. She resides in Cuba to this day. And she's one of the ones that I have pleaded with -- with no success, to the Eric Trump-led attorney -- United States Department of Justice to get her back after President Obama normalized relations with Cuba. I said, "Okay. Something good can come of this normalization of relations with Cuba. Let's get those cop killers back here." And, of course, they're not interested in that.

But I have said -- and I have been very vocal about it, I have labeled Black Lives Matter as a hateful ideology. They foster division, as you write in your story here. They support an anti-cop rhetoric, cop hatred. And there are people who have killed law enforcement officers in the name -- name of -- of Black Lives Matter. Why do you think -- other than the obvious, you know, that they look at Cuba and they look atrophied he will Castro, that murderous dictator, and they idolize somebody like that.

FRENCH: Well, you know, they look at everything in the United States through one lens and one lens only, and that's race. And so Fidel Castro, as part of his anti-American campaign, decades-long anti-American campaign was constantly trying to create greater racial tension in the United States.

And one of the ways that he did that was by -- was by backing and explicitly supporting, both rhetorically and providing, you know, a home for people who are a part of organizations like the Black Panthers or the Black Liberation Army.

And so these guys -- these Black Lives Matter activists who are really the spiritual descendents, so to speak, of the Black Panthers, for example. They look at that history. And because they're only looking at it through the lens of race and race only, they don't realize -- or at least don't care, the extent to which Fidel Castro was cynically using American race tensions to advance its own agenda.

I mean, this is a guy who in Cuba discriminated against black Cubans in ways that were grotesque. And he was only exploiting racial divisions in the United States for his own communist means.

So he wasn't -- he wasn't some sort of social justice warrior. He was a communist dictator thug, but these people refused to see it.

DAVID: You know, part of the problem with this hateful ideology is these people who wrap their arms around it, people who have been invited to the White House, I should add, numerous times to hold counsel with the president of the United States, they don't know their history. They don't know the history here.

It's kind of like Colin Kaepernick, the quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers, you know, taking a knee. Sitting down initially and then taking a knee during the playing of the national anthem. He's another one that showed up at a post-game conference. You know, you do the thing after the game. He shows up with a T-shirt with a picture of Fidel Castro on it. And I look -- first thing I think when I see this: These people don't know their history. They don't know what they're talking about.

But when I look at Black Lives Matter and I look at how this ugly chapter and what it's been and what it's meant for the American law enforcement officer -- and like I said, a couple minutes ago, you know, it's led to the death -- people have killed in the name of Black Lives Matter. But this has also caused police in ghetto communities throughout the United States to not be as assertive as they need to be, to not engage in the kind of discretionary policing, quality of life enforcement, some people call it, and it has led to an increase of crime.

You look at the city of Chicago -- and I talked about it on the program yesterday. They're up to like 753 murders in the city of Chicago in 2016 alone, compared to about 495 last year. And last year's total outpaced the year before that. And in the city of Chicago, you have over 3,000 people who have been hit by gunfire in non-fatal shootings.

So you look at that sting across America, and then these people have the nerve, the audacity, to run around saying black lives matter. But you look at stuff like that, where are they? They're nowhere to be found.

Black people -- good law-abiding black people in many cases, children, you have seniors living in fear in these ghetto communities. And where are they? You know, they're nowhere to be found. And that's the phoniness of, you know, their mantra, the phoniness of their claim, their slogan, if you will. Black Lives Matter. What are your thoughts on that?

FRENCH: Yeah, it's one of the most clever marketing campaigns in history, that's contradicted by then about everything that the group actually stands for.

For example, on its website, it says flatout that they want to destroy the nuclear -- the Western prescribed nuclear family. Well, the destruction of the family is one of the main drivers of social conflict, not just in black communities, but in American communities at large.

And when it comes to -- to -- to violence, what you are seeing about the change in policing tactics, which are changes in tactics that Black Lives Matter has been pushing for, there's mathematical -- there's strong mathematical correlation.

If you look in -- if you look in Chicago, there's been a decrease in the number of stops. There's been a decrease in the number of -- consequently, decrease in the number of drug confiscations -- I mean, gun confiscations. A decrease in the number of arrests. And a corresponding dramatic increase in the number of murders. I mean, all of this is -- is very well documented. And so, you know, if you're talking about what -- what is it that saves black lives? Well, one of the key things that helped end the murder crisis of the late '80s and early '90s, was very aggressive policing. And also with -- and this is something that a lot of people don't realize, with the active and enthusiastic participation of black communities in the US. Everything from pastors to politicians, the congressional black caucuses out front in the late '80s and early '90s in trying to have -- in moving towards tougher policing. There was -- there were African-American lawmakers in states around the country seeking relief from this crime epidemic. And so it was the black community that really rallied in the late '80s and early '90s. And now along comes Black Lives Matter. As you said, they don't know their history. And they're trying to undo a lot of the reforms that the black community had led America in advocating for generations -- a generation ago, that has since saved countless lives. So I'm not sure, you know, which community they purport to be speaking to.

I think they're speaking for a media community that loves them a great deal. And like I said, they have a very clever marketing slogan. I mean, of course, everyone believes that black lives matter. But what's behind that slogan is a very, very radical agenda that is actually costing lives.

DAVID: Right. And, really, in essence though, black lives do not matter, at least to these individuals. They matter to you. They matter to me. Matter to a lot of people, but not these individuals. They put out some manifesto not too long ago where some of the tenets were, you know, railing against Israel for the treatment of the Palestinians. Railing against -- or demanding more money for global warming studies.

And when I read this manifesto, I said: You know what, black people do not care about global warming. They do not care about what's going on in Israel. Not that we shouldn't care about what's going on in Israel. We do. But I said, here's what black people care about: They care about jobs. They care about better schools for their kids to be able to go to. And they care about safer communities.

David, I want to thank you for joining us. Keep up the good work and Merry Christmas.

FRENCH: Thanks so much for having me. And Merry Christmas to you too.

DAVID: Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke in for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Radio Program, and we have to take a break.

[break]

DAVID: Welcome back to the program. Final segment. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke in for Glenn Beck. This is the Glenn Beck Program. This has been fun. Two straight days. This was new for me. I've done fill-in radio. I've told you that before. I've been a guest host nationally on some programs, as well as locally back home. But I've never done successive days.

I'll tell you, I got a new admiration, not that I didn't before, but for people who do this for a living, who are good at this, people like Glenn and others. He comes in -- he's got to do this five days and no weekends off, of doing other things. Putting these programs together takes a lot.

Again, I want to thank the people on the set here, the producers and everybody involved in the production of this program. You guys have been great. You really have provided -- you guys with the training wheels for the -- you know, in case the bicycle got a little wobbly, I'd have the training wheels to rely on. You guys are what makes the show go. I don't know if Glenn tells you that enough, but you do. He probably does. But thanks for everything that you've done. It's been great.

And, you know, it's kind of interesting -- I want to close with this. And, again, this is kind of like the gift that keeps on giving.

To rehabilitate the Democratic Party, Obama plans to coach young talent.

So Obama to the rescue again. He spent eight years destroying this republic, and now he wants to coach new talent.

He says here: What I'm interested in is just developing a whole new generation of talent, Obama told NPR's Steve Inskeep in an interview on Morning Edition.

There's such incredible young people, who not only worked on my campaign, but I've seen in advocacy groups.

You know, he's the community organizer.

I've -- I've seen passionate about issues like climate change or conservation or criminal justice reform, you know, campaigns too for a livable wage and health insurance, and make sure that whatever resources, credibility, and spotlight that I can bring to help raise them up, that's what I want to do. That's something I think I can do well.

Because, you know, he excels at everything. There's nothing that Barack Obama can't do. You know, there's no short suits in his talent box. At least that's what he thinks.

I hope that he's serious about this because what he'll end up doing is he will coach a generation of young starry-eyed liberals in the area of community organizing in this Democrat Party that is in free fall, will continue to flounder. So what I always tell people when they point out what's wrong with the Democrat Party -- I'm talking people on the right -- I say, "Be quiet. Leave them alone." I say, "They're doing fine. They will figure this out on their own." So we'll see what happens there.

Again, it's been a pleasure to be with you these last two days. I want everybody to have a very Merry Christmas, a blessed Christmas. A Happy New Year. And remember, Donald Trump is going need to all of us to provide that pushback against the people that want to see him fail. And he's going need to our energy as well in order to make America great again. Put the country first. Leave the other stuff out of it and everybody will be fine. This is the Glenn Beck Radio Program. David Clarke. Thank you very much.

Featured Image: The first four folios of William Shakespeare's work during an unveiling for auction at Christie's King Street on April 19, 2016 in London, England. The preview of the sale commemorates 400 years since the death of Shakespeare (1564-1616). The auction will be led by an unrecorded copy of the first folio, the first collected edition of Shakespeare's plays, which contains 36 plays and is estimated at £800,000-£1.2 million.The folios will go on public display in London from 20 to 28 April and then later being put up in a four lot auction on 25 May 2016. The sale is expected to reach in excess of £1.3 million (Photo by Chris Ratcliffe/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.