Owner of a Lonely Heart: Pat Laments Foreigner Being Overlooked AGAIN for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame

Let's just get this out of the way. Pat Gray is a hardcore Foreigner fan. Foreigner is the best freaking band ever (well, Foreigner and Boston). So any list of inductees into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame that doesn't include Foreigner will fall short in his eyes.

"I'm sure they're all incredibly deserving --- and certainly more deserving than Foreigner who can't even be nominated because they only had about 30 Top 40 hits. They only had, I don't know, 15 or 20 top ten hits. They only sold about 80 million records worldwide. They've only been icons for about 40 years," Pat said.

Who made the final cut for 2017? In the performance category, Joan Baez, Electric Light Orchestra (ELO), Journey, Pearl Jam, Tupac Shakur and Yes will be inducted.

"Joan Baez? Joan Baez?! Did you see the people's vote on the website for a month or two leading up to the actual decision? Joan Baez was at the bottom of that list, so the people's vote means nothing," Pat said.

Evidently, a 1960s protest song goes a long way, baby.

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

• Does Pat like any of the performers on the 2017 list?

• Does Rolling Stone magazine have a crush on Yes?

• Why did George Washington University remove US History as a requirement for history majors?

• How did a wild and crazy guy like Steve Martin become a target of feminists?

• Should Brent Musburger retire?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

PAT: In for Glenn. He just threw his back out about an hour ago. Technology is awesome. But what are the drawbacks? What are we becoming? We'll talk about some of the latest innovations to be in every home as we have been today.

We've been talking about your New Year's resolutions. We also want to get into Black Lives Matter. Do they?

We don't hear much about the black lives being lost in Chicago, do we? And what a year, 2016 was for murders in Chicago. Just unbelievable.

Also, the Russians influencing the election. Nah, that didn't happen. Had nothing to do with Russians, according to Julian Assange. And we certainly believe him.


PAT: Also, George Washington University has apparently removed US history from their curriculum. We'll start there, right now.


PAT: Yeah, Glenn just hurt his back pretty badly. Hopefully he'll be back on tomorrow, maybe I don't know, from a hospital bed or his own bed.

JEFFY: No kidding.

PAT: We'll see. 888-727-BECK. It's Pat Gray and Jeffy in. Stu is also sick today. So not a great start for those guys in 2017.

JEFFY: No doubt.

PAT: So -- the other thing that we were going to mention -- you just mentioned right before we came on. Apparently the Rock Hall of Fame --


PAT: Has decided who is going into the Hall of Fame for this year.

JEFFY: Yes, they have. And we were pretty close -- we were pretty close when we talked about who they were going to pick.

PAT: Tell us the nominations. Do you have that in front of you?

JEFFY: I just have who they picked. But we can certainly get it.

PAT: Who is actually going in this year? I'm sure they're all incredibly deserving, and certainly more deserving than Foreigner who can't even be nominated because they only had about 30 Top 40 hits. They only had, I don't know, 15 or 20 top ten hits. They only sold about 80 million records worldwide.

They've only been icons for about 40 years. You wouldn't want them in the Rock Hall of Fame. But you do want --

JEFFY: But -- Joan Baez.

PAT: Oh, my gosh. Joan Baez? Joan Baez! Did you see the people -- they always do the people's vote on the website for a month or two leading up to the actual decision.

JEFFY: I did. Right.

PAT: And Joan Baez was at the bottom of that list, so the people's vote means nothing.

JEFFY: We talked about it either here or on Pat and Stu. We did both. We talked about who we thought they would pick. And, you know, obviously who was in the running.

PAT: Right.

JEFFY: And we were pretty close. We were pretty close --

PAT: So -- because I think we said Joan Baez would be one of them. Because all you have to do is sing a protest song in the 1960s and you're in.

JEFFY: Oh, yeah -- and coffeehouse queen of that.

PAT: Oh, my gosh.

JEFFY: ELO. Electric Light Orchestra.

PAT: Okay. That's a good one.

JEFFY: That's worthy. That's worthy.

PAT: Absolutely belong. Should have been in a long time ago.


PAT: So ELO. Joan Baez.

JEFFY: Journey.

PAT: Journey, of course, had to get in. I mean, they deserve it.

JEFFY: Yeah. I know. Pearl Jam. We said there's no way they're not going to --

PAT: No way.

JEFFY: It's iconic.

PAT: The other thing besides protest songs is singing about how you were abused as a child.

JEFFY: It's an era. Yeah, it's an era. That's what they represent, right?

PAT: I hate my parents. I've never liked them. I got beaten when I was a kid. And you're in. You're in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. So who else?

So Joan Baez, ELO, Journey, Pearl Jam.

JEFFY: And, of course, Tupac Shakur. Who else do you think of in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, other than Tupac Shakur? Now, Tupac was not at the bottom, but he was down there.

PAT: Yeah, he was very near the bottom, with Joan Baez.

JEFFY: He was down there. Yes.

PAT: Unbelievable.

JEFFY: You knew there was no way they weren't going to put Tupac in. No way.

PAT: And he's not rock. But they don't -- they don't go back that for some reason. The Rock Hall of Fame really has very little to do with rock 'n' roll because a lot of rap artists are in. R&B. You know, so -- it's frustrating. It's really frustrating.

JEFFY: And finally we have --

PAT: Oh, there's another one?

JEFFY: Finally we have -- yes, of course. Of course.

PAT: Because they're a Rolling Stone favorite, right? If the Rolling Stone magazine liked the band, there's a good chance they're going to get in.

Name -- other than Owner of a Lonely Heart and Roundabout, name a Yes song.

JEFFY: Are you talking to me?

PAT: Yeah, I'm talking to you.

JEFFY: I can't.

PAT: Yeah.


No one can.

JEFFY: I want to. I want to look it up bad and give you one, but I can't.

I didn't even -- I would have just said Roundabout. Owner of a Lonely Heart, yeah, I know it, but --

PAT: Which was bigger than Roundabout. I mean, that was their biggest hit.

JEFFY: Yeah, I know. But Roundabout was longer, so you played it to take a longer break.

PAT: Yes, you did. If you ever had to go to the bathroom and you worked at a classic rock station, you go Roundabout. Because it was about seven and a half, eight minutes.

JEFFY: I'll be your roundabout, 80,000 times, you were good. You were good. No problem.

PAT: Roundabout and Stairway to Heaven were the two.

888-727-BECK. 888-727-BECK.

George Washington University in Washington, DC, has decided they're giving students more flexibility.

JEFFY: Isn't that nice?

PAT: They're going to give them more flexibility. That means freeing them up from taking required courses like US history.


PAT: Even if they're history majors, they don't have to take US history.

JEFFY: Come on now. That's agonizing. We should -- any government money they get should be taken from them immediately.

PAT: You xenophobic bastard. What are you talking about?

JEFFY: Should be taken from them immediately. I don't care if you tell me we don't like the US history they're teaching. I don't care. There should be US history. That should be a mandatory thing. It should absolutely be required.

PAT: Especially -- especially if you're a history major.


PAT: How do you not study US history?

According to The College Fix, the new requirements allow for students to take an optional course in previously required courses or a high score on a placement test to opt out of the requirement.

JEFFY: Oh, well, good.

PAT: But there's no more mandate to take US history.

JEFFY: They changed a couple other things too. I will say they eliminated the requirements for US North American and European history, which, you know, even if you're a history major is absolutely wrong, as well as foreign language requirement. Those -- that's not required now for a major. So you could get -- you could get your US history major without that history. Big deal. Who cares.

PAT: And the reason that they're saying they decided to do this is because they want to recruit new students to better reflect a globalizing world. Because, Jeffy, we're citizens of the globe now.

JEFFY: Are we?

PAT: We're not US citizens anymore. We're citizens of the globe.

Citizens of this planet. You know, and --

JEFFY: That's good.

PAT: So this is a beautiful thing. They can take world history instead, European history. We are just -- we're begging for trouble.

JEFFY: Every dime.

PAT: Begging for trouble.

JEFFY: If they take a dime of taxpayer's money, it should be taken from them right now. That's fine. You can do what you want. I don't care what they do.

PAT: Right. Right. But you get no taxpayer money.

JEFFY: Come on now. You're a United States university. United States of America university.

PAT: I'm just really worried about what's going on in our colleges. Because even at the so-called conservative-leaning schools, they're teaching our kids garbage. Garbage.

JEFFY: Not really. Not really.

PAT: I was talking to my son over the Christmas break about what he was learning from his professors in history. And he said they hate Israel, for one thing.

JEFFY: Of course.

PAT: And the slant on Israeli/Palestinian relations was all Palestinian-leaning.

JEFFY: Of course.

PAT: And he said they didn't come right out and say that Israel is in the wrong, but everything they taught led you to believe --

JEFFY: And why not?

PAT: -- that Israel was in the wrong.

JEFFY: We got the United Nations. Our country is, we don't want to vote. We know what's going to happen. We got John Kerry telling us that they're wrong and bad.

PAT: Right.

JEFFY: Obama has been telling us they want -- well, they should go back to the 68 borders, and Israel is in the wrong. Why wouldn't you be that way?

PAT: And I told him, you know, do they even talk about the fact that the Palestinians had their shot at a homeland when the partition was made in 1948? When the UN gave birth to Israel, they also gave birth to a Palestinian state. And the Palestinians rejected it and instead went to war with their Arab brethren against Israel in 1948. What? What?

JEFFY: What?

PAT: That -- they never talked about it. They never talked about it! How is that possible?

And then they went to war again in 1956. And again in 1967. And again in 1973. And 1981. And so on and so forth through history.

And the Israelis had had enough by '67 and final kept the West Bank. Because the Palestinians have always been, "That's not enough." I mean, I don't know what enough is for them.

PAT: Well, enough is getting rid of Israel. It means getting rid of Israel.

JEFFY: And unless we do that, that's not enough.

PAT: That's right. And really, you have the UN going along with that. And now apparently you've got the Obama administration going along with the UN, in these resolutions.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: And Israel is pretty fed up with it. And I don't blame them. I don't blame them.

So what chance do our kids have when they're hearing all of this garbage in college and these are the people that we've set up as the authority figures. This is where you're going to go and learn all these great things to prepare you for life. And then they're hearing all of this stuff. And now they're not getting any US history on top of that, at places like George Washington University.

JEFFY: And that actually is the argument for not having to get the US history, right? You're hoping that maybe the history they get will be correct and not --

PAT: But it's not going to be.

JEFFY: No, it's not no.

PAT: It's going to be a worldview. It's going to be an anti-American view. And it's hard to overcome that slant. And so if your kids are attending universities, I'd -- I recommend talking to them about what they're learning from their professors so that you can at least provide them with the other side of it.

JEFFY: It may take a while.

PAT: And as I told Sean, I don't mind if they teach you both sides. I don't care about it at all. In fact, that's the way you should -- let them decide. Just teach them both sides of the issue. Don't slant it one ware way or the other.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: He said one of the things he liked best about one of his professors was, one day he would come in with one side of an argument, and he would argue the other side while the students came at him with questions.

JEFFY: Nice.

PAT: And then the next day, he would argue the other side of it and have them respond accordingly. And I thought, "Well, yeah. That's what you should be doing."

JEFFY: Absolutely.

PAT: Let them decide. But -- because otherwise, it's indoctrination.

JEFFY: Well...

PAT: And sadly, that's what's happening.

JEFFY: Yeah, absolutely.

PAT: 888-727-BECK. It's Pat and Jeffy in for Glenn on the Glenn Beck Program.

(OUT AT 10:20AM)

PAT: Pat and Jeffy in for Glenn on the Glenn Beck Program. He hurt his back. Threw it out again. And so hopefully he'll be back tomorrow.

888-727-BECK. Some people under fire for comments that they've made. Steve Martin -- this weird controversy.

JEFFY: Unbelievable.

PAT: Is one of the dumbest I've ever seen in my life.

JEFFY: And he deleted it.

PAT: Well, of course. Yeah, especially if these lefties in Hollywood -- they don't understand the insanity of the left because they're part of it. So the least little criticism they get, okay. I'm sorry. He actually said -- and I can't remember the exact tweet. But he tweeted out after Carrie Fisher died that she was beautiful, and she was also smart and talented. Something to that effect, right? Because he mentioned her intelligence matching her beauty. Something to that effect.

Well, the feminists went crazy. How dare you mention a person's appearance after they've died!


JEFFY: Right. Right.

PAT: When did that become a thing, that I can't do that. Are you kidding me? So if Brad Pitt dies, no woman better ever mention --

JEFFY: Not one word.

PAT: -- that he was good-looking, or we will hit the roof.


That is asinine. Do you have the tweet? It was innocuous. It wasn't offensive in any way. And yet, because he got so much flak, he deleted it. What was the original tweet?

JEFFY: From @SteveMartin. Think she was -- oh, let's see. These are the ones that are against him.

His tweet: When I was a young man, Carrie Fisher was the most beautiful creature I had ever seen. She turned out to be witty and bright as well.

PAT: Witty and bright as well.

JEFFY: How horrific. Steve Martin.

PAT: You'd think he committed genocide on women or something.

JEFFY: I think she aspired to something higher than just being pretty. How do you want to be remembered?

These are some of the ones -- the people that were so mad at him. Unbelievable.

PAT: Can -- can her looks not be one of the things you remember?


PAT: Okay. I guess not.


PAT: Is it really an insult -- if Carrie Fisher were alive today, would she say that's an insult?

JEFFY: Absolutely not.

PAT: How dare you say I was beautiful! How dare you!

JEFFY: And witty. I am not. I am not witty.

PAT: I am the dullest person going. I am so dull, you couldn't get butter with me! That's how dull I am!


Also under fire right now -- and maybe rightly so, and I've defended him in the past, Brent Musburger shouldn't broadcast anymore.

JEFFY: Oh, no. What did he do? I don't know this.

PAT: He broadcast the Sugar Bowl last night with Oklahoma. Auburn.

JEFFY: Of course. Yeah, they still have Brent hang around for one more. He's one of the sportscaster icons.

PAT: I mean, he's a good sportscaster whose time has maybe passed him by.

JEFFY: Well, that was a while ago. But they still -- they still throw him the bone for a day or two. He's been around for long enough. He's got the name recognition.

PAT: Yes, he does.

But last night, he was talking about Joe Mixon, who in public punched a woman in the face. And the video was released recently, and, you know, it's horrific. It was a couple years ago when it happened. And he got suspended for all of the 2014 season.

So then he came back, and Musburger originally said it was troubling, very troubling to see. We've talked to the coaches, and they all swear this young man is doing fine. Like I said, Oklahoma thought he might even transfer, but he sat out the suspension, reinstated.

And, folks, he's just one of the best. And let's hope, given a second chance by Bob Stoops and Oklahoma, let's hope that this young man makes the most of his chance and goes on to have a career in the National Football League.

Now, as soon as he said that, I thought, "Oh, you don't know what you just said."

JEFFY: Brent.

PAT: That is not going to go over well.

JEFFY: No, it is not.

PAT: And it didn't. And so they're getting all kinds of tweet. And they're getting all kinds of social media backlash. And people are going crazy about it.

JEFFY: I bet. I bet.

PAT: And so later in the game, he came out again and said, "Apparently some people were upset when I wished this young man well at the next level. Let me make something perfectly clear: What he did with that young lady was brutal, uncalled for. He's apologized. He was tearful." So --

JEFFY: I know. But let's -- in Brent's -- go ahead. Finish what he said to say.

PAT: -- he got a second chance. He got a second chance from Bob Stoops. I happen to pull for people with second chances. Okay? Let me make it absolutely clear that I hope he has a wonderful career and he teaches people with that brutal, violent video, okay?

No, that's not okay!

JEFFY: In today's world -- in today's world --

PAT: You can't say that.

JEFFY: -- in today's world, you can't even live. You can't live. You can't walk down the street.

PAT: Nope.

JEFFY: You can't go out of your house if you're guilty of hitting a woman.

PAT: Well, that's true.

JEFFY: If you're a sports -- any kind of sports, any kind of athlete.

PAT: Yep. Uh-huh.

JEFFY: And there's video of it.

PAT: Well, I will say this, you certainly can't be celebrated, right?

JEFFY: No. No. You cannot. No.

PAT: Musburger should have left it alone. If I were them --

JEFFY: Great run by -- how dare you. He hit his woman. You can't --

PAT: I wouldn't have even brought up the whole incident. It's in the past. You should just leave it alone. You don't wish him well when you're talking about in the same breath, he beat some woman in the face.

JEFFY: He knows better than that. He used to -- you're right though. It may be time. It may be time.

PAT: It just may be time, Brent.

JEFFY: Brent, call it in.

(OUT AT 10:32AM)

PAT: Pat and Jeffy in for Glenn on the Glenn Beck Program. Threw his back out earlier. Hopefully he'll be back with us tomorrow. 888-727-BECK.

We were talking about Brent Musburger's problems last night. And this kind of follows up from, was it last year or the year before? It was a couple years ago now, right? Where he was talking about A.J. McCarron's girlfriend during the Sugar Bowl. Was it the Sugar Bowl? I don't know. One of the bowl games.

JEFFY: It was one of the --

PAT: Some Alabama game. Yeah, it was an Alabama game.

JEFFY: It might have been the SECC championship.

PAT: Possibly. But here's what he said then, which was somewhat interesting.

BRENT: Auburn. I want to admit that. But Miss Alabama -- and that's A.J. McCarron's girlfriend. Okay?

JEFFY: Oh, yeah.

BRENT: And right there on the right is Dee Dee Bonner. That's A.J.'s mother. Wow, I'm telling you, you quarterbacks, you get all the good-looking women.

JEFFY: Yeah, he sees the mom.

BRENT: What a beautiful woman. Wow.

VOICE: A.J. is doing some things right --

BRENT: So if you're a youngster in Alabama, start getting a football out and throwing it around the backyard.


JEFFY: You want to be a quarterback.

PAT: He got all kinds of flak for that.

JEFFY: He sure did.

PAT: I didn't think it was that bad.

JEFFY: Boy, social media, Twitter went crazy.

PAT: It went nuts. Because he's talking about, again, a beautiful woman. And I guess that's --

JEFFY: You're not allowed.

PAT: That's verboten. That's forbidden. You can't talk about --

JEFFY: You can't talk about the girl. You can't talk about the mother. You can't talk about the -- nothing.

PAT: And people made a big deal. That's a 72-year-old man talking about a 21-year-old girl.

He's not asking her for a date. He didn't try to sleep with her.

JEFFY: He's saying A.J. made a great choice.

PAT: Right.

JEFFY: And, wow, there's her mother.

PAT: And she's attractive too.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: Terrible? No.

JEFFY: And then he's got Herbstreit next to him, who was a quarterback, by the way, when he said, "Wow, you quarterbacks..."

PAT: Yes. True, right.

And last night was a little different deal. It was a lot different.

Last night, he deserved some criticism. And it wasn't just the Joe Mixon thing. Sort of, you know, celebrating him and hoping he has a great career after he punched a woman in the face.

And I guess, should that -- should that end his career for all time? There's a lot of people who think so.

JEFFY: Yeah, in today's world, there's a lot of people who think you should stop existing.

PAT: Yeah. And I don't think that Brent get that at this stage. What is he? Seventy-five now?

JEFFY: Probably, yeah.

PAT: But the other thing he was doing -- I don't know how many times he called these large football players rascals.


That rascal. That's a big rascal.

JEFFY: That's a big one.

PAT: And the other thing he kept sayings was youngin's. These youngin's and rascals.

JEFFY: Of course.

PAT: Okay. You're not in 1956 anymore, Brent. So, again, it just might be time.

JEFFY: No. It might be time, Brent. Just to -- we love you. Okay? And every once in a while --

PAT: And I do. I think he's great.

JEFFY: Every once in a while, come back around. Maybe do a press conference at the Bowl games every once in a while. The Sugar Bowl maybe gives you a special award. You're the Sugar Bowl guy.

PAT: You're the honorary color man for the Sugar Bowl.

JEFFY: You're the guy, from here on out.

PAT: We allow you to say three things during the Sugar Bowl.

JEFFY: We allow you to say, "And the Sugar Bowl winner this year is..."

PAT: So it just might be time.

JEFFY: We'll get you a ticket. You're up in the booth, and you're good.

PAT: And I will say, it definitely is time for the Obamas.

Now, this happened a couple of weeks ago, but we were on vacation when she said it. And I couldn't believe the insensitivity of it at the time.

But it reminded me how glad I am to see these two go. When Michelle Obama sat down with Oprah and because -- and they're talking about the Trump presidency and how the left is going crazy.

And here's what Michelle Obama said.

MICHELLE: We're feeling what not having hope feels like, you know. Hope is necessary. It's a necessary concept. And Barack didn't just talk about hope because he thought it was just a nice slogan to get votes.

JEFFY: Yes, he did.

MICHELLE: I mean, he and I and so many believe that what else do you have if you don't have hope?

VOICE: Yeah.

PAT: Yeah, yeah.

MICHELLE: What do you give your kids if you can't give them hope?

PAT: I'm sorry. Was she saying that about the right, who almost lost all hope when her husband was elected, when her Marxist husband was elected in 2008? No.


PAT: They didn't care at all what the right was feeling. They didn't -- they didn't give -- they didn't care at all about anybody but themselves. And now all of a sudden, now they see that their reaction is much the same as ours. And they have no recognition of that. None!

They are the most unaware people. These liberals and progressives apparently can't see beyond their own noses. It's just amazing.

And it's -- it's one of the reasons I'll be very happy to say goodbye to them on January 20th, regardless of who is entering the White House. Just so they're going out the other door.

JEFFY: Yeah, they're gone.

PAT: Just so they're gone.

JEFFY: And he makes a big point now of continuing to say that he's still going to be involved.

PAT: I'm not going anywhere. I'm not going anywhere.

JEFFY: Still going to be in Washington.

PAT: Yeah, he told some little girl that.

JEFFY: Going to school.

PAT: I was only paying half attention to the news cycle when we were on vacation, but he was telling some little kid, "I'm not going anywhere." Because the kid was saying how he's going to miss him and all of that. And I thought, "I don't know if I can handle it if you don't go anywhere. You need to go somewhere and just leave us alone now okay? You've done enough."

JEFFY: There's no way he does that either.

PAT: It's fascinating to watch this though because, again, they are so unaware. Paul Krugman, Nobel-winning economist and liberal New York Times columnist said that he's lost faith in the future of the United States. Now, when we were saying this in 2008 and 2012, that we were concerned about the future --

JEFFY: What!

PAT: Who do you want to take the country back from? A black man? Well, who do you want to take the country back from? A white guy? A capitalist? A -- what do you say?

In a series of tweets following Trump's expected triumph in the electoral college, Krugman seemed to be despondent with the state of the US: So it's official, and it's vile. The loser of the popular vote installed by Russian intervention, a rogue FBI, an epic media malfunction, he tweeted. We should never accept this as okay. It may be a new normal. But that's a new normal in which the America we knew and loved is gone.

It's just agonizing.

JEFFY: It sure is.

PAT: It is agonizing. Are people noticing that the Trump economic team is shaping up as a gathering of Gold bugs?

JEFFY: Wait.

PAT: What is it -- I'm not sure what that means. Goldman Sachs people I guess he's talking about?

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: People who are successful economically, I guess he's talking about.

JEFFY: I hate those people.

PAT: You got to hate them.

JEFFY: I hate those people that are successful.

PAT: Krugman gave the highest praise to Larry Kudlow, who is expected to be named the head of the Council of Economic Advisers. In this crew, Kudlow, who thinks it's always the 1970s, but doesn't seem to hyperinflation under his bed is the most reasonable.

Okay. Well, I mean, it -- it's fascinating to watch their machinations now. It's fascinating to watch their panic, their fear, the fact that they're all buying shelters now. They're installing these -- these self-sufficient shelters that in some cases are costing seven, ten, $15 million. Now, when we said, "Hey, you might want to store some extra food," it was crazy. It was nuts.

JEFFY: What are you talking about? Preaching the end of times?

PAT: When we were saying, "Hey, maybe it's good to have 10 percent of gold in your portfolio." I'm not talking about buying all the gold in the universe, I'm just saying maybe 10 percent of what you own.

JEFFY: Oh, how crazy are you?

PAT: You're so crazy, you're just making money. And now they're taking these incredibly drastic measures. It's perfectly fine. It's perfectly fine. Nothing wrong with it.

JEFFY: It's okay. Not crazy at all.

PAT: Now when they say the end of the world is coming because of Donald Trump, it's perfectly fine. There's no problem.

Just -- I'm not asking them not to say it. I'm just ask them to notice that you thought all of that was crazy in 2008 when we were concerned.

JEFFY: It would be nice. There's no way.

PAT: And maybe you could learn the lesson from us that, "Okay. We thought that he would -- and he did fundamentally transform America. But we thought it might be to the point to where we would even have no place in it.

I'm not sure what we thought would happen. Economic collapse. Who knows.

And he did do a lot of damage. But we survived it. And here we are.

So it would be nice if they could learn that lesson, that we thought it was going to be catastrophic when he was elected. And he's been elected to two terms. And we survived it.

We'll survive this guy, no matter what. We'll survive him.

And that's -- you know, I think that's what's given me so much hope, is that realization. After the election, I thought, "Well, you know, we've survived a lot. We survived a Marxist president."

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: Who I don't think even has much admiration for this country.

JEFFY: Not a chance. No way.

PAT: And somehow we got through it all. We survived his socialist program, his Obamacare. We survived the government taking over 17 percent of the economy. Now, it's made things worse. There's no doubt about that. And a lot worse. And even for people who don't have Obamacare, it's made health care extraordinarily expensive and has ruined our coverage.

We used to have the best coverage I've ever had. It has declined so much over the last few years, since Obamacare. It's almost unrecognizable now.

JEFFY: It's quite a bit different.

PAT: It's a lot different.

JEFFY: I mean, I got --

PAT: I mean, Glenn was really proud of the fact that he offered the best insurance available, and he did.

JEFFY: And he should be.

PAT: And he should be.

JEFFY: Yeah, absolutely.

PAT: Yes. But now, you can't even get that insurance anymore. You can't even get it. They won't even put the parameters into the computer because they don't have those parameters anymore.

JEFFY: It was -- as long as we're down this road. It was frustrating in our gatherings with changing of insurance that we kept here. Well, this is the best it is. This is the best --

PAT: This is really great.

JEFFY: Nobody else has got --

PAT: It was so frustrating that I had to point out to them: Yeah, well, it's not to us. Because we used to have much better. Yeah, well, that doesn't exist anymore. So...

Okay. Well, thank you, Obamacare. Appreciate it.

JEFFY: Right. And that's why Nancy Pelosi is proud to tell the Republicans, "Look, if you break Obamacare, they own it. They break it, they own it."

PAT: It's already broken.

JEFFY: No kidding. Nancy.

PAT: I've got news for Nancy Pelosi: It's been broken since day one.

JEFFY: Day one.

PAT: 888-727-BECK. More of the Glenn Beck Program coming up.

(OUT AT 10:50AM)

PAT: Welcome. Pat and Jeffy. 888-727-BECK. Hopefully will be back -- feeling better tomorrow.

JEFFY: Well, if he doesn't move.

PAT: Yeah, if he doesn't move.

JEFFY: If he listens to us.

PAT: Because, again, he was sitting in a chair, doing just fine. And then moved. You can't do that.

JEFFY: How many times we say, "Sit down, don't move."

PAT: Threw out his back. Don't move. And maybe he's learned an important lesson here today.

JEFFY: I hope so. I hope so.

PAT: I sure hope so.

We were talking about the Rock Hall of Fame a little bit earlier. Who were the -- are there five or six -- there's five or six artists that have got into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame --

JEFFY: Strong.

PAT: Like Joan Baez. Who doesn't love Joan Baez?

JEFFY: I may have taken the full list down. But Tupac.

PAT: Tupac Shakur.

JEFFY: Journey.

PAT: Journey, who deserves it. ELO deserves it. And Yes.

JEFFY: Yeah.

Oh, Pearl Jam.

PAT: Oh, and Pearl Jam.

JEFFY: Pearl Jam.

PAT: So that's the other one.

Chris, in California, you're on the Glenn Beck Program.

CALLER: Hey. Absolutely.

So I think that we should probably go with Phoebe Snow. Because Phoebe Snow has got that '70s sound. We were all about '70s here, right?

JEFFY: I love Phoebe.

PAT: Poetry man? Right?

JEFFY: Come on now. Yeah.

CALLER: No, no, I was thinking more of Midnight in the Oasis.

PAT: Oh, that's Maria Muldaur.

CALLER: Oh. Maria.

JEFFY: I've got an album of Phoebe doing some covers, and she may have done that song on that album.

PAT: She might have. But nobody does it like the original done by Maria Muldaur.

JEFFY: I know. I know.

CALLER: Well, there you go.

PAT: Midnight at the Oasis.

JEFFY: Come on. Who doesn't love that song? Who doesn't love Midnight at the Oasis?

PAT: Oh, I think everybody does. I know I do.

JEFFY: Thank you. He's got a point with Phoebe Snow. I mean, Poetry Man is --

PAT: And as long as we're at it, why not put Minnie Riperton into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, the one who did loving you is easy because you're beautiful.

JEFFY: I mean, there should actually be like a wing to the Rock Hall and Fame, to the one-hit greatness of songs.

PAT: Well, there's definitely a wing for rap artists. There's a wing for R&B. There's a wing for people who are just influential.

JEFFY: Yeah, to their core.

PAT: That you've never heard of. But people were influenced by them, whether they were a producer or they were a writer or they were a band that nobody's ever heard of. But bands heard of them.

JEFFY: But the iconic band came from here.

PAT: Yes. And liked them, so they're in. So why not, a one-hit wonder wing? It's -- the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is a sham. It's a travashamockery. And I think we all know it.

JEFFY: So what happens? Do you change your tune if they -- if they put Foreigner in?

PAT: Well, it will help. I don't know if it will cure the disease. But it eases the pain a little.

JEFFY: It will ease the pain a little. That's just a throw-in.

PAT: But look how long it took to put Journey in. Come on. That's a no-brainer. I'm not a big Journey fan anymore because they're so overplayed. I just got sick of them. But it's Journey.

JEFFY: I'm not either, but it's Journey. It's Journey. Come on.

PAT: They sold 100 million plus.

JEFFY: It's not about that.

PAT: Chicago went in I think last year. They sold 125 million.

JEFFY: At least.

PAT: They're iconic. How do you leave those bands out? ELO just got in this year.

JEFFY: Well, so did Tupac. So that's good. That's good. Tupac is in.

PAT: Yes. And, I mean, he was shot nine times. So he should have been in a long time ago. A long time ago.

JEFFY: Right!

Featured Image: Promotional studio portrait of American rock group Foreigner, 1977. (L-R): Lou Gramm, Ian McDonald, Al Greenwood, Mick Jones, Dennis Elliot. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

As we move along this endless primary season, we implement our first major adjustments to our power rankings model. Because of all the changes on the model itself, we'll keep the write ups short this week so that we can get an update posted before we hit the second round of debates.

There are now 40 separate measures of candidate performance which are summarized by the 0-100 score that helps us makes sense out of this chaos.We also have a new style of graphs, where the section highlighted in blue will show the progress (or lack thereof) made by each candidate over the life of their campaign.

In this update, we have our first campaign obituary, a couple of brand new candidates (when will it ever stop) and plenty of movement up top.

Let's get to it.

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. 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.

Campaign Obituary #1

The Eric Swalwell Campaign

California State Congressman

April 8, 2019 - July 8, 2019

Lifetime high: 20.2

Lifetime low: 19.5

I ended my initial profile on Eric Swalwell with this:

"There's a certain brand of presidential candidate that isn't really running for president. That's Eric Swalwell."

amp only placement

It's now more true than ever that Swalwell isn't running for president, because he has officially dropped out of the race.

To any sane observer, Swalwell never had a chance to win the nomination. This was always about raising his profile with little downside to deter him from taking money and building a list of future donors.

In one of many depressing moments in his FiveThirtyEight exit interview, he noted that one of his supporters told him he definitely thought he'd eventually be president, but it wasn't going to happen this time. (This supporter was not identified, but we can logically assume they also have the last name Swalwell.)

Swalwell did outline a series of reasons he thought his ridiculous campaign might have a chance.

  1. He was born in Iowa. After all, people from Iowa will surely vote for someone born in Iowa, even if they escaped as soon as possible.
  2. He had what he believed was a signature issue: pretending there was no such amendment as the second amendment.)
  3. He's not old.

It was on point number three where Swalwell made his last stand. In an uncomfortably obvious attempt to capture a viral moment that would launch his fundraising and polling status, Swalwell went after Joe Biden directly.

"I was 6 years old when a presidential candidate came to the California Democratic Convention and said it's time to pass the torch to a new generation of Americans. That candidate was then-Senator Joe Biden." This pre-meditated and under-medicated attack, along with Swalwell's entire campaign future, was disassembled by a facial gesture.

Biden's response wasn't an intimidation, anger, or a laugh. It was a giant smile that somehow successfully communicated a grandfathery dismissal of "isn't that just adorable."

Of course, headlines like this didn't help either:

Eric Swalwell is going to keep comparing the Democratic field to 'The Avengers' until someone claps

The campaign of Eric Swalwell was pronounced dead at the age of 91 days.

Other headlines:

Eric Swalwell ends White House bid, citing low polling, fundraising

Republicans troll Swalwell for ending presidential campaign

Eric Swalwell Latest 'Cringe' Video Brags About Omar Holding his 'White' Baby

Eric Swalwell's message to actor Danny Glover is 'the cringiest thing I've ever seen in a hearing'

Eric Swalwell's 'I Will Be Bold Without The Bull' Bombs

25. Joe Sestak 11.0 (Debut) Former Pennsylvania State Congressman

Joe Sestak is a former three-star admiral who served in Congress for a couple of years in the late 2000s. Besides his military service, his most notable achievement is figuring out a way to get Pat Toomey elected in a purple state.

With Arlen Specter finally formalizing his flip from Republican to Democrat in 2009, he was expected to cruise to reelection. However, Sestak went after him in the primary, and was able to knock him off in the by eight points. Sestak then advanced to face Republican Pat Toomey in the general election. He lost by two points during the Tea Party wave election of 2010.

Needless to say, losing to the former president of the fiscally conservative Club For Growth isn't exactly an accomplishment that is going to help Sestak in the Democratic presidential primary.

Unfortunately, with the current state of the party— his distinguished service in the Navy probably isn't helpful either.

Other headlines:

Joe Sestak on the issues, in under 500 words

Joe Sestak, latest 2020 candidate, says it's not too late for him to gain traction

Sestak aims to 'heal the soul of America' with presidential bid

Joe Sestak Would Move the US Embassy 'Back Out of Jerusalem'

24. Mike Gravel: 12.5 (Previous: 24th / 15.3) Former US Senator from Alaska


Gravel was able to get celebrities and other candidates to send out pleas to raise funds in effort to get above 65,000 donations and qualify for the second debate.

We may never know if it was grift or incompetence, but Gravel probably should have known that crossing this line made no difference. He'll still be yelling at the TV when the debate starts.

Other headlines:

Gravel meets donor threshold to qualify for Democratic primary debate

Gravel spends a bit of cash to run an ad against Joe Biden in Iowa

Mike Gravel: Why the American People Need Their Own Legislature

Mike Gravel Is the Anti–Joe Biden

23. Wayne Messam: 12.7 (Previous: 23rd / 15.8) Mayor of Miramar, FL


Messam has made no impact in this race so far, and has fundraising numbers that don't even get into the six digits, let alone seven. He's not really running a campaign at this point, so there's no real downside in staying in for now.

Other headlines:

Wayne Messam: Money Kept Me Out of the First Democratic Debate. Will It Keep Me Out of the Second?

22. Seth Moulton 17.2 (Previous 20th / 21.5) US Rep. from Massachusetts 


Seth Moulton is the invisible man on the campaign trail. Most people don't even know who he is when they're talking to him. His appeal to the Democratic party is heavily flavored with his military service and appeal to patriotism.

Good luck with that Seth.

Other headlines:

Moulton: Buttigieg Was a Nerd at Harvard

Moulton: Democrats shouldn't go on 'moral crusade' against Trump

Moulton talks reclaiming patriotism from Trump, Republicans

Moulton: 'Trump is going to be harder to beat than many Democrats like to believe'

Presidential candidates hear challengers' footsteps at home

21. Tim Ryan 18.4 (Previous: 18th / 24.3) US Rep. from Ohio


Tim Ryan's first debate performance was so bad he lost about a quarter of his score with this update. He's not without a plan to get that support back though. He wants to bring hot yoga to the people.

Other headlines:

Tim Ryan on CNN: Trump 'clearly has it out for immigrants'

Ryan Falls Way Behind in Q2 Fundraising Race, New Poll

20. Marianne Williamson 20.7 (Previous: 21st / 20.6) Author, Lecturer, Activist


Williamson is not going to be the nominee for the Democrats, but if you throw a debate watch party, she might supply the most entertainment. So much so, Republicans have started to donate to her campaign to keep her in future debates.

Other headlines:

"I call her a modern-day prophet": Marianne Williamson's followers want you to give her a chance

Williamson Uses Anime to Explain 2020 Candidate's Holistic Politics

What Marianne Williamson and Donald Trump have in common

Marianne Williamson's Iowa director joins John Delaney's 2020 campaign

19. John Hickenlooper 22.5  (Previous: 11th / 32.0) Former Gov. of Colorado 


Hickenlooper has been shedding campaign advisors at a relatively furious pace as he admits "there's just a bunch of skills that don't come naturally to me" when it comes to campaigning.

Probably best to pick another line of work.

Other headlines:

Hickenlooper defends campaign fundraising to The Onion: 'The race is wide open'

WP: 'You are who?' The lonely presidential campaign of John Hickenlooper

Gary Hart Warns John Hickenlooper Against Campaigning On Bipartisanship Message

Hickenlooper refuses to condemn protesters who hoisted Mexican flag at ICE facility

18. Michael Bennet 27.4 (Previous: 14th / 28.8) US Senator from Colorado


Michael Bennet is a bit of a boring no name, but give him credit for actually trying to differentiate himself from the field. He's one of the only candidates willing to criticize his socialist opponents from the center, calling out the open borders crowd and student debt. Obviously this has no chance of success in the democratic party, but at least he's trying.

Other headlines:

George Will touts Bennet to beat Trump in 2020

Bennet: America doesn't know what the Democratic Party stands for

17. Steve Bullock 28.3 (Previous: 16th / 27.7) Gov. of  Montana 


Bullock's biggest moment of his campaign, and quite possibly his only important moment , will come in this round of debates. He missed the first round, but squeaks in for round two after Eric Swalwell decided to take his zero percent and go home.

Bullock has a theoretical argument that doesn't look half bad on paper, but it seems impossible for another "moderate*" to make noise with Biden still hanging around.

(*-None of these moderates are actually moderate.)

Other headlines:

For Democratic presidential hopeful Steve Bullock, it's all about the 'dark money'

Steve Bullock hates 'dark money.' But a lobbyist for 'dark money' donors is helping his campaign.

Steve Bullock looking to introduce himself as someone who won in Trump country

Bullock said he's not one to eliminate all student-loan debt

Steve Bullock raises $2 million for 2020 bid in second quarter, campaign says

Lowering of state flag at capitol draws criticism

15. John Delaney 29.5 (Previous 19th / 20.3) Former US Rep. from Maryland 


The power ranking model likes Delaney more than voters seem to like him. He continues to pour his own money into the race and at some point you have to believe someone in his life stops him from setting his cash on fire.

He did steal a key advisor from Marianne Williamson's campaign, which doesn't seem like a path to success.

Other headlines:

Delaney: "Non-Citizens Are Not Covered By My 'Better Care' Plan, But…"

Delaney says he opposes decriminalizing border crossings

Undaunted by low polling, John Delaney keeps his show on the road

Delaney presidential campaign theme: fix what's broken, keep what works

14. Andrew Yang 30.0 (Previous: 15th / 28.3) Attorney and Entrepreneur 


Before the campaign started, if you would have said Yang would be in the middle of the pack at this point, he probably would be happy with that result. His embrace of quirky issues like banning robocalls, giving everyone free cash, and spending $6 billion to fix the nations malls is enough to keep him in the news.

His fundraising was decent, and he remains an interesting and thoughtful candidate. But, Yang has a better chance of dropping out and running on a third party ticket than winning in this Democratic Party.

You do have to wonder how long it will be before the word "Math" moves from his campaign slogan to the reason he needs to drop out.

Other headlines:

Andrew Yang Is Targeting The 'Politically Disengaged' To 'Win The Whole Election'

You can't turn truck drivers into coders, Andrew Yang says of job retraining

Yang's plan to give $1000 a month to everyone is popular with young, poor Democrats

13. Jay Inslee 31.4 (Previous: 12th / 30.4) Gov. of Washington state


Expect Inslee to capture the king-czar-chancellor role of the new climate police or whatever draconian nightmare the actual Democratic nominee creates if they win.

In the meantime, he should try to avoid cringe inducing nonsense like this.

Other headlines:

Presidential hopeful Jay Inslee says Trump's immigration policies will 'end his presidency'

Crowd roars for Elizabeth Warren, Jay Inslee follows to tepid applause

Inslee on listening to Carole King, wanting an anchor tattoo

Inslee Says He Tried to Arrest Fleeing Republicans

12. Tulsi Gabbard 33.4 (Previous: 13th / 28.8) US Rep. for Hawaii 


Tulsi Gabbard really wants to be Joe Biden's vice president. Or, at least, she wants to hold an important role in his cabinet, like Secretary of Defense.

Gabbard has been running interference for Biden, aggressively going after Kamala Harris for her very successful but substance free bussing attack, while hammering Harris as not qualified to be President. These have been among the harshest criticisms levied by any candidate in the race so far, and there is definitely a purpose to all of it. Her presence in the same debate as Biden and Harris should be something Harris prepares herself for. Expect incoming fire.

Along with Yang, Gabbard remains among the most interesting Democratic candidates to Republicans and Libertarians, which is not helpful to her chances of actually winning the Democratic party nod.

Other headlines:

Gabbard says Harris used "political ploy" to "smear" Biden on raced

Which U.S. Wars Were Justifiable? Tulsi Gabbard Names Only World War II

Tulsi Gabbard Says It's A 'Good Thing' Trump Met With Kim Jong Un

Gabbard Sympathizes With Amash, Says the Two-Party System Sucks

Tulsi Gabbard Files Bill To Study Hemp's Uses For Just About Everything

Gabbard: '14-year-old girl hacked into a replica of Florida's election system'

11. Tom Steyer 33.5 (Debut) Billionaire hedge fund manager

Tom Steyer is a Democratic billionaire that has spent millions plastering his face all over MSNBC for the past two years begging people to consider impeaching Donald Trump.

The campaign power ranking model loves Steyer's potential because of his unlimited money and theoretical ability to put together a serious campaign team.

All of this is theory at this point though, as the millions spent so far has lead to a giant pile of zilch. If he's serious enough, he should be able to buy his way into the low single digits, and squeak his way into a debate or two.

Steyer's billionaire status isn't an obvious fit as the party of inequality attempts to take down Donald Trump. But, he does have legitimate movement credibility, tons of cash to buy support, and a long developed immunity to embarrassment—so the sky is the limit.

Other headlines:

Tom Steyer on the issues, in under 500 words

Tom Steyer announces 2020 bid, reversing course

Why We're Not Treating Tom Steyer As A 'Major' Candidate (Yet)

Steyer banks on South Carolina in 1st presidential bid stop

10. Kirsten Gillibrand 37.1 (Previous: 9th / 36.7) US Senator from New York


There is probably no candidate that enters the second round of debates more clearly in do-or-die mode than Gillibrand. With headlines like "The Ignoring of Kirsten Gillibrand" lighting up her feed, she needs something big to happen, and fast. Her performance in the first debate wasn't actually horrible, but still went unnoticed.

She has zero percent in lots of polls, and that includes all of the benefits she says she's received from white privilege. Imagine if she didn't have that going for her.

Other headlines:

Gillibrand: I'd Tell Concerned Coal Miner the Green New Deal Is 'Just Some Bipartisan Ideas'

Struggling in White House bid, Democrat Gillibrand seeks bump in Trump country

Gillibrand Annoyed by Question About Immigration 'Reversal'

9. Robert Francis O’Rourke 40.7 (Previous: 6th / 52.8) Former state Rep. from Texas


The free fall continues for Betomania.

When campaigns show signs of death, reporters start to write long profiles that aim to tell the story of the demise, or launch the amazing comeback.

Politico's headline (What Beto O'Rourke's Dad Taught Him About Losing) probably wasn't all that helpful.

Beto did secure Willie Nelson's vote though, meaning he can now count on 2 votes, assuming his "Republican" mother votes for him.

Other headlines:

Welcome to America—It's a Hell Hole!

A desperate Beto O'Rourke goes for broke, claims America was founded on white supremacy

Beto O'Rourke finds 'personal connection' to slavery, argues for reparations to unite 'two Americas'

Beto boldly vows not to prosecute people for 'being a human being'Rebooto O'Rourke

Fact Checker: Has Beto O'Rourke visited the most Iowa counties? No.

Beto O'Rourke: Let's Forgive All Student Loan Debt For Teachers

8. Amy Klobuchar 42.9 (Previous: 8th / 41.9) US Senator from Minnesota 


Klobuchar has been a massive underachiever so far, but is still sticking around in that third tier of candidates. Along with Beto, Booker, and maybe Castro— they aren't exactly eliminated, but can't seem to catch fire. Or even get warm.

Klobuchar would serve herself well to focus on the fundamentals and avoiding desperate pleas for attention if she wants to remain in the Biden VP sweepstakes. Or she could totally shake things up by throwing binders at her opponents in the debate.

Other headlines:

Klobuchar: I Don't Support Open Borders Like Warren, Castro

Deportation raids are about distracting from issues: Amy Klobuchar

Klobuchar hoping 'nice' finishes first

Sports bookmakers put Klobuchar as "heavy underdog" in presidential race

7. Julian Castro 43.2 (Previous: 10th / 34.5) Former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development


Castro is a good example of how overblown debates can be. His first debate performance was quite solid, but did more to sink Robert Francis O'Rourke than actually help his own candidacy.

One more good debate performance should be enough to get him into the next round of debates, as he has already passed the donor threshold. Polling, however, has been elusive. Perhaps there is a swath of America that is uncomfortable voting for a Castro for president, like say, all of south Florida?

Still, in a field of a zillion candidates that have shown no potential, he stands out as a long shot with a punchers chance to make some noise. This is reflected with a nice bump in his score for this update.

Other headlines:

Julián Castro Doubles Down On Decriminalizing Migration: Repeal Felony For Reentry, Too

Julian Castro: 'Instead of breaking up families, we should break up ICE'

Bill Maher rips Julián Castro for remark about abortion for trans women

Julián Castro declines to hold baby

Julián Castro can't speak Spanish

Julian Castro wants to solve homelessness by 2028

A consulting firm made specifically to prevent sexual harassment is providing Castro and other 2020 campaigns advice and training

5. Pete Buttigieg 65.8 (Previous: 2nd / 68.8) Mayor of South Bend, IN


There probably isn't a campaign that has been more bizarre than Mayor Pete. He was a complete nobody to the public, though as we initially noted, he had support from a bunch of Obama era celebrinerds.

This helped him rise to a top tier candidate with all the money and momentum to make a run at the nomination. Since then we've seen a complete fizzle. He is using the cash to build the infrastructure to make himself a serious candidate, and he should last a while, but he probably must win Iowa to have a chance at the nomination.

Also, finding one African American who will vote for him would be nice.

Other headlines:

Pete Buttigieg goes on hiring spree after top fundraising quarter.

Buttigieg, Struggling With Black Voters, Releases Plan to Address Racial Inequities

South Bend police call out Buttigieg for sending pizza rather than apology after race comments

CNN's Axelrod Rips Buttigieg: Blacks Doing Worse Under His Leadership

Only Pete Buttigieg gets standing ovation from Corn Feed audience

New Republic Drops Out Of Climate Forum Over Backlash To Pete Buttigieg Op-Ed

Pete Buttigieg says it's "almost certain" we've had gay presidents

Pete Buttigieg Sets Hollywood Fundraisers With Ellen DeGeneres, Chelsea Handler and More

4. Elizabeth Warren 70.4 (Previous: 5th / 53.4) US Senator from Massachusetts 


Looking back at my initial analysis of this field, I'd say it's played out pretty closely to what I expected. Warren has surprised me though.

In an election where beating Trump is the most important characteristic for democratic voters, she seems to be grown in a lab to lose to him. She comes across as a stern elementary school principal who would make kids terrified to be called into her office, because she'd bore them to death by reading them the handbook.

Her DNA kit roll out was so catastrophic, I assumed democrats would see that her political instincts are awful. When put under the intense pressure Trump is sure to bring, she's going to collapse, and I figured democrats would recognize that.

Instead, she's in the top tier. This rise has been legitimately impressive for Warren.

It's also a dream come true for Donald Trump.

Other headlines:

The Activist Left Already Knows Who It Wants for President

Netroots Nation was the day Elizabeth Warren became president of the American left

Elizabeth Warren pledges to decriminalize border crossings

Warren plans to increase annual refugee admissions nearly 800 percent from FY2018

Warren, Biden Campaigns Appear to Find Loophole Around Paid Internships

Warren says she'll push to end Israel's 'occupation'

Warren staffer: 'I would totally be friends with Hamas'

Elizabeth Warren reintroduces legislation requiring corporations to disclose climate risk exposure

Elizabeth Warren Wants Reparations For Same-Sex Couples

Elizabeth Warren proposes executive orders to address race and gender pay gap

This is how Elizabeth Warren plans to close the pay gap for women of color

How much would a wealth tax really raise? Dueling economists reflect new split in Democratic Party

Elizabeth Warren Brings Ad Buying In-House

Elizabeth Warren says she raised $19 million in the second quarter of the year

3. Bernie Sanders 71.1 (Previous: 3rd / 67.2) US Senator from Vermont


Sanders has fallen slowly but steadily in the polls the past couple of months, and while not every metric yet reflects it, the socialist wing seems more likely represented by Warren.

That being said, Bernie holds her off for third place. Warren and Bernie have reportedly struck a truce to not attack each other, an arrangement which benefits Warren far more than Sanders.

Bernie's machine and name recognition continues to keep him near the top of the heap, but one wonders how long that lasts as name recognition for other candidates get higher, and Iowa gets closer.

No matter if he wins or loses, he's moved the Overton window of the party in a dramatic way. And don't underestimate the appeal of his Medicare-for-all-humankind dream. Bernie may be too old and cranky to see socialized health care into the end zone, but he has advanced that ball much further than he had any right to.

Other headlines:

Bernie Sanders has 'deep sense of satisfaction' his positions are now 'centrist' among Dems

Bernie Sanders: I Will Cancel All $1.6 Trillion Of Your Student Loan Debt

Sanders hits back at Biden over criticism of 'Medicare for All'

Bernie Sanders: Nancy Pelosi shouldn't 'alienate' freshmen House Democrats

Why Sanders Wanted His Meeting With a Rabbi Kept Secret

Bernie Sanders Says Being the First Jewish President Would Be 'Another Barrier Broken Down'

Liberal billionaire calls Bernie Sanders a 'Communist' and 'a disaster zone'

Blackstone's Byron Wien: Markets are terrified of far-left Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren

Antiwar candidate Bernie Sanders faces backlash over the $1.2 trillion war machine he brought to Vermont

The time Bernie Sanders ranted about baseball in a low-budget film

Bernie Sanders shows off sword Ross Perot gave him

Bernie Sanders Raises $18 Million in 3 Months, Trailing Buttigieg

2. Kamala Harris 79.2 (Previous: 4th / 65.9) US Senator from California 


Harris has given back a good chunk of her post debate bounce, which is to be expected. While she rockets to number two in the power rankings, there are a few things to worry about.

The difference between Warren and Harris is notable. The candidates are nearly tied in most polls, but much of the strength of Harris is based on one spectacular moment. Warren alternatively seems to have a lower ceiling, but a stronger foundation.

The good news for Harris is she does incredibly well among voters that are actually paying attention, while her weakness lies with those who haven't really tuned in yet.

At some point, Harris has to clean up her mess of a policy package, which includes supporting a Bernie style Medicare for All without the Bernie style middle class tax hikes-- a combination that even the left admits makes no sense.

Quotes like this still feel way too accurate, "She's the easy-to-listen-to, poorly defined identity candidate." This needs to be sorted out eventually if she's actually going to win.

Other headlines:

It's Hard To Have A Conversation With Kamala Harris When She Doesn't Even Know What She's Talking About

Kamala Harris: Immigration Raids Are 'A Crime Against Humanity', there are 'babies in cages'

Harris doubles down on criticism of Biden's busing comments on The View

Mother Jones: Kamala Harris Wants to Bring Back Busing? Really?

Kamala Harris's Call for a Return to Busing Is Bold and Politically Risky

Race is 'America's Achilles' heel,' Harris tells African-American group

Kamala Harris claims her campaign is being targeted by Russian bots, also says she's not a plan factory

Harris proposes $100 billion plan to increase minority homeownership

What's Kamala Harris's record on Israel?

Kamala Harris Called Young People "Stupid" in 2015

Kamala Harris lags behind top-tier candidates in Q2 fundraising

Utah man arrested after alleged scheme to plan fake Kamala Harris fundraiser

1. Joe Biden 80.8 (Previous: 1st / 82.3) Former US Senator from Delaware and Former Vice President


Biden's polling has mostly rebounded to his pre-debate status and he remains the favorite to be the nominee.

He can't survive too many more performances like his first debate however, and he needs to show voters that he can stand up to the heat President Trump is going to bring. In other words, don't get smoked again, fall over on your walker, or look like your dentures are going to fall out in the middle of a debate.

This is a real test for Biden's candidacy. He's had time to prepare, and he's had time to stretch the old muscles. No more excuses.

If Joe can get spry, he probably wins the nomination. But, that is far from a sure thing.

Other headlines:

NBC/WSJ poll: Biden tops 2020 Democratic field...

Joe Biden Decides He Doesn't Need to Stay Above the Fray After All

Biden campaigns as Obamacare's top defender

Biden says Democrats haven't been straightforward about 'Medicare for All'

Biden under fire for mass deportations under Obama

Biden refuses to apologize for high deportation numbers during Obama years

Joe Biden's campaign office opens in Philly with a protest, not a party

AOC: Segregationist controversy and debate performance raised question Biden could be too old for office

Are Biden's Apologies Killing His Electability Argument?

Liberal activists at Netroots Nation bet Joe Biden drops out of race

Joe and Jill Biden have made $15M since leaving White House

How Joe Biden, who called himself 'the poorest man in Congress,' became a multimillionaire

Penn Paid Joe Biden $775,000 to Expand Its "Global Outreach" … and Give Some Speeches

Biden: 'Occupation is a real problem'Joe Biden raised $21.5 million in second quarter, campaign announces

Joe Biden: I Promise To 'End The Forever Wars In Afghanistan And Middle East'

Joe Biden promises to 'cure cancer' if elected president

No, stealth Obamacare won’t fix the failed status-quo

Online Marketing/Unsplash

Another day, another proposed fix to a pressing national problem by a Democratic presidential hopeful. Former Vice President Joe Biden has positioned himself as the "moderate" leader of the Democratic Party, putting pressure on him to come up with a "sensible" alternative to Sen. Sanders' (I-Vt.) Medicare for All plan. But Biden's healthcare proposal, released July 15, doubles down on flawed, top-down solutions without offering any new ideas. Presidential hopefuls should instead pledge to unleash market innovation and lower healthcare prices for all.

Of course, a former vice president will inevitably find it difficult to make a clean policy break from the administration he has repeatedly hailed and defended. Biden's tenure as vice president made him into a second-tier political rockstar, and it makes sense that he's reluctant to separate himself from former President Obama's Affordable Care Act (aka "Obamacare"). It's also no surprise that "Bidencare" preserves Obamacare's disastrous expansion of Medicaid, the federal government's insurance program for low-income Americans. His plan even provides a public option for residents of states that have not expanded Medicaid. Perhaps more surprising, or just disappointing, is how thoroughly the Democratic orthodoxy has embraced government medical insurance even at gargantuan cost, despite little evidence that it'll work.

RELATED: Medicare for all: Obamacare was only the first step

Back when he was a heartbeat away from the presidency, Biden vigorously defended Obamacare, criticizing Republican governors for failing to expand Medicaid and predicting that all states would eventually see the light. That never quite happened (as of now, 17 states wisely refuse to expand health insurance targeted at low-income Americans). But the Obama administration tried to cajole red and purple states into expanding the Medicaid eligibility threshold "up to 138 percent of the poverty level." Nevertheless, states such as Texas, Florida, and North Carolina wisely considered the evidence that Medicaid was breaking the bank — without helping the poor get access to the care they needed.

This evidence isn't just based on one or two stray studies produced by the "right" think-tank. In June 2018, Health Affairs published a blockbuster analysis of 77 studies on Medicaid's effectiveness, and the results may be disappointing for fans of government-provided insurance. Around 60 percent of the studies included in the meta-analysis found that health status and quality of care failed to improve for low-income patients after Medicaid expansion. The analysis also finds that a majority (56 percent of studies) found no improvement in the financial performance of hospitals post-Medicaid expansion. This finding contradicts claims by Obama, Biden and co. that Medicaid expansion would shift patients from the emergency room to doctor's offices, lowering system-wide costs.

These findings are scandalous for an expansion program that costs federal taxpayers at least $70 billion per year. How could all of this money be failing to improve outcomes? Plausibly, the types of institutions that accept Medicaid are larger facilities that aren't as great at delivering quality health-care as smaller offices? The copious paperwork and documentation required by the program don't really allow smaller facilities the bandwidth to deal with Medicaid in an efficient manner. Yet this documentation is necessary to curb rampant fraud in the program that costs taxpayers tens of billions of dollars each year.

Greater Medicaid funding and corresponding anti-waste measures fail to address the cancer undermining the healthcare system: sky-high drug prices and expensive medical equipment.

Greater Medicaid funding and corresponding anti-waste measures fail to address the cancer undermining the healthcare system: sky-high drug prices and expensive medical equipment. Instead of pushing for ever-higher government spending, a President Biden could push for a streamlined Food and Drug Administration approval process for drugs and medical devices, which would keep medical costs down and give a green light to innovators everywhere. The cost to develop a single medication is now more than $2 billion, and an onerous FDA approval process costs lives by being too risk-averse.

Presidential hopefuls such as Biden should also pledge to work with states to roll-back "certificate of need" laws, which force medical institutions to jump through countless barriers to expand their facilities and invest in new services. It's not just hospitals and their patients that suffer from these needless laws; Harvard medical scholar David Grabowski sums up the evidence that these laws make nursing homes far worse and costlier than they need to be. Getting rid of these laws nationwide would give patients and consumers far more options when shopping around for the care and facilities they need.

The price problem gripping the American healthcare system simply won't go away while regulatory barriers and onerous approval processes continue to stifle the sector. Presidential hopefuls such as Biden can make a dent in this problem by supporting market reforms, instead of doubling-down on failed government healthcare.

Ross Marchand is a Young Voices contributor and the director of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams both fulfilled their goal of living to see the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Then, both died later that day — July 4, 1826. Adams was 90. Jefferson was 83.

Because of their failing health, Jefferson and Adams each declined many invitations to attend July 4th celebrations. Adams sent a letter to be read aloud at the 50th Independence Day celebration in his local town of Quincy, Massachusetts. He wrote that the Declaration is:

... a memorable epoch in the annals of the human race, destined in future history to form the brightest or the blackest page, according to the use or the abuse of those political institutions by which they shall, in time to come, be shaped by the human mind.

It's remarkable how well the Founders understood human nature and what could happen to the United States. It's the postmodern mindset that increasingly rules the U.S. now. It has infected our institutions and untethered us from the bedrock principles of the Declaration. In its place? Hypocritical and vitriolic partisan righteous indignation.

Less than a century after Adams' and Jefferson's deaths, the most serious attempt to undermine the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution came from America's 28th president — Woodrow Wilson. He wrote:

Some citizens of this country have never got beyond the Declaration of Independence.

As if that's a bad thing.

During Wilson's career as a college professor, he thought deeply and wrote extensively of his contempt for our founding documents. His issue with them formed the core beliefs of Progressivism that are still alive today.

In 1911, before he was elected President, Wilson said in a speech:

I do not find the problems of 1911 solved in the Declaration of Independence ... It is the object of Government to make those adjustments of life which will put every man in a position to claim his normal rights as a living human being.

See what he does there? He completely inverts the Declaration — he's saying, you don't have inherent rights until government puts you in a position to claim them. That's the heart of Progressivism.

In a later speech, Wilson said:

If you want to understand the real Declaration of Independence, do not repeat the preface.

Wilson did not think the equality, natural rights, and consent-of-the-governed parts of the Declaration defined the proper role of government. He preferred the Declaration's list of grievances because they addressed specific problems. That's what he thought government existed to do — solve problems for people. And since people's problems change over time, so should the Constitution and government to keep up with the times.

Wilson said:

No doubt we are meant to have liberty; but each generation must form its own conception of what liberty is.

We hear this sentiment echoed all the time today: follow your heart, find your truth, etc.

Another key to Wilson's Progressive theory of government was human evolution. He thought that because humans were now more enlightened, they could be trusted not to abuse government power. The Declaration's committee of five (Adams, Sherman, Franklin, Livingston and Jefferson) would've laughed Wilson out of the room.

It's hard to believe that less than 150 years after the signing of the Declaration, the U.S. president — Wilson — was saying this:

We are not bound to adhere to the doctrines held by the signers of the Declaration of Independence: we are as free as they were to make and unmake governments. We are not here to worship men or a document. Every Fourth of July should be a time for examining our standards, our purposes, for determining afresh what principles, what forms of power we think most likely to effect our safety and happiness. That and that alone is the obligation the Declaration lays upon us.

Wilson was so effective at imposing his philosophy on government that he forever diverted the U.S. presidency away from the Constitution. Progressives have kept Wilson's torch alive ever since.

Progressives are still hostile to the Declaration of Independence because of this idea of “historical contingency" which holds that truths change over time. Progressives think the “self-evident" truths of the Declaration are outdated and may no longer apply. And that means the Constitution based on those truths may no longer apply either. Wilson and Progressives especially don't like the whole separation of powers thing, because it hinders the fast action they want out of government. They want a justice warrior president who will bring swift change by fiat.

The current trend in attacking the Declaration and Constitution is to tear down the men who wrote them. In late 2015, students at the University of Missouri and the College of William & Mary, placed notes all over the statues of Thomas Jefferson on their respective campuses. The handwritten notes labeled Jefferson things like, “racist," “rapist," “pedophile" (not sure what that one's supposed to mean), “How dare you glorify him," “I wouldn't be here if it was up to him," and “Black Lives Matter."

That is the handiwork of students who are blinded by self-righteous victimhood and can't see the value and merit that the Declaration still holds for us today. After these incidents, Annette Gordon-Reed offered a reasoned defense of Jefferson. Reed is a respected history professor at Harvard Law School, who also happens to be a black woman. She wrote:

I understand why some people think his statues should be removed, but not all controversial figures of the past are created equal. I think Jefferson's contributions to the history of the United States outweigh the problems people have with aspects of his life. He is just too much a part of the American story to pretend that he was not there ... The best of his ideals continue to influence and move people. The statues should be a stimulus for considering all these matters at William & Mary and the University of Missouri.

At the opposite end of the spectrum from Woodrow Wilson's disdain for the Declaration of Independence, Abraham Lincoln loved it. If there is one overarching theme in Lincoln's speeches, it is the Declaration. Lincoln pointed the nation back to the Declaration as a mission statement, which ended slavery and preserved the Union.

Unlike Wilson, who recommended leaving out the Preamble, Lincoln considered it the most vital part. To Lincoln, the self-evident truths were universal, timeless, and more important than the list of grievances. Lincoln wrote that these truths were:

... applicable to all men and all times ... that today, and in all coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling block to the very harbingers of reappearing tyranny and oppression.

In a speech Lincoln gave in 1861, shortly after he was first elected president, he said:

I have never had a feeling politically that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the Declaration of Independence… I have often inquired of myself what great principle or idea it was that kept this Confederacy so long together. It was not the mere matter of the separation of the Colonies from the mother-land, but that sentiment in the Declaration which gave liberty, not alone to the people of this country, but, I hope, to the world, for all future time.

Lincoln went on to say that he would rather be assassinated than see the nation forfeit the principles of the Declaration. His Gettysburg Address is a brilliant, concise renewal of the Declaration:

... that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

We cannot assume that this radical idea of freedom will always be embraced by Americans. It has found hostility on our shores every step of the way. The Declaration's principles must be continually defended. Because while humans do have certain unalienable rights that are endowed by our Creator, there is darkness in the world, and for some strange reason humans, while valuing freedom, also seem to have a natural bent toward tyranny. That's why we must understand and discuss the Declaration. It's not alarmist. It's not a quaint history lesson. It's a reality, right now, that the fundamental principles of the Declaration are under attack. The Founders would have undoubtedly shuddered at most of the rhetoric from last week's Democratic presidential debates. Left to its own mob devices, even America would turn its back on freedom.

Shortly before his death in 1826, 90-year-old John Adams was asked to recommend a toast that could be given in his honor on July 4th. Adams didn't hesitate. He suggested, “Independence Forever." The small group of visitors silently glanced at each other for a moment, before someone asked Adams if he'd like to add anything else. Adams shifted forward in his chair, leaned on his cane, stared intently at the men, and replied, “Not a word."

China is having its Boston Tea Party moment

Unknown Wong / Unsplash

Freedom. It usually begins as a whisper. A secret passed on between patrons at a secluded bar or private meeting. And no matter how hard the tyrants may try and stop it, no matter how many dams they throw up to try and contain it, the whispers eventually become a flood. Sometimes it takes longer to break through, but it's the same EVERY TIME. Liberty and freedom always wins. It's an unstoppable force that knows no immovable object.

For us it was exactly 243 years ago to this month that those whispers became a flood. A group of ragtag colonists took on the world's only superpower —and won. Our forefathers proved it — freedom refuses to recognize tyranny as an immovable object. The world was forever changed.

And I can't help but see the poetic justice as more whispers became a flood, defying their own immovable object, just three days before all of us were buying fireworks to celebrate our Independence Day. But this time it was just off the coast of mainland China.

Last week over a MILLION protesters filled the streets in Hong Kong. Literally a FLOOD of humans looking for one thing — freedom. They stormed the government building that is the equivalent of their Congress. They smashed windows, broke down doors, and a photo was taken that I think just might be the picture of the year.

A British colonial flag, a symbol thrown out when Hong Kong was given back to China, was draped — BY THE PROTESTORS — over the chair of their head of government. I can't restate how historic this actually is. The people of Hong Kong, with a population that is over 90 percent ethnic Han Chinese, are saying to the mainland that they prefer colonial rule over the tyranny of the Chinese government. Leftists would tell you that communism is the remedy for colonialism, but for those living in the dark shadow of communism, they actually prefer colonial rule over what they now face.

The local Hong Kong government is caught between the immovable object of the Chinese communist government, and the unstoppable force of liberty.

When Hong Kong was given back to the mainland, China agreed to allow them a few freedoms that the rest of the Chinese don't enjoy. They're free to engage in protest against the government and they maintain a legislative body — both of which are outlawed on the mainland. But, as every tyrannical oppressor always does, China has been looking to reel that in. Most recently, China attempted to make it possible to extradite dissenters back to Beijing. The result? The quiet whispers of freedom, the secrets told in private at clandestine meetings, became a flood of millions in the streets.

On July 3rd, police began a crackdown. More than 13 people have been arrested so far. If China eventually gets their way, those 13 people will no doubt be the first of many to be extradited over to the mainland. Their crime? The dream of freedom. As of right now, the extradition law has been temporarily delayed. The local Hong Kong government is caught between the immovable object of the Chinese communist government, and the unstoppable force of liberty.

History has shown who will win in the end. Yesterday, over 200,000 protestors gathered at the high speed train station that links mainland China to Hong Kong. The message was just as clear as the British colonial flag hung inside their legislative building. For our forefathers it was symbolized with the Gadsden Flag and the phrase “Death To Tyranny." The message is simple: “we will not be ruled. Freedom knows no immovable object."

News of the protest movement has been censored in mainland China, but how long will they be able to contain THEIR OWN whispers with over two hundred thousand freedom lovers camped out at the bridge between Hong Kong and mainland China? How long before those whispers spread to secret meeting locations in Beijing or Shanghai? How long before that cascades to the Christian and Muslim minorities that are tired of being rounded up and thrown into camps?

We might have just witnessed the Chinese version of the Boston Tea Party. July 4th is still a long way away for them, but — as it does time and time again — freedom and liberty always win in the end.