BLOG

Politicizing Harvey: MSNBC Host Pushes This Issue While the Water Levels Rise

Hurricane Harvey, which has been downgraded to the level of a tropical storm, has devastated the Texas coast. Homes in some towns along the coast have been filled with waist-high water, and emergency personnel have been using boats to rescue people.

Amid this humanitarian crisis, a TV news host thought it would be a good time to get political. MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle asked both MSNBC correspondent Kerry Sanders and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott if illegal immigrants were running the risk of being deported if they found refuge at storm shelters.

On radio Monday, Pat and Stu discussed the politicization of Harvey and compared it to how Hurricane Katrina coverage was used against President George W. Bush.

“You’re talking to people who are right in the middle of this flooding and trying to save lives,” Pat said, asserting that the main issue right now is simply saving people regardless of color or creed.

Stu noted that people are also turning Harvey into a political cudgel by making apples-to-oranges comparisons about funding. People are blaming President Donald Trump for cutting back on funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

“So if they had the extra hundred million dollars, they would have what – pushed the hurricane back out to sea?” Stu asked.

Kind of interesting over the weekend, as we have this major catastrophic human tragedy going on, MSNBC host Stephanie Rule still trying to make it something political. Still trying to get up in people's faces about --

STU: Oh, yeah. Heavy doses.

PAT: -- illegal immigration. Listen to her talking to one of the reporters who is in Houston, in the flooding, talking about what's going on, and where does she take it?

VOICE: So if you're in your car and you're listening to us right now on satellite radio and you're not sure where you're going, you're just evacuating, get out the Airbnb app. They're opening up places for people to stay for free.

VOICE: Can I ask, you might not know the answer, but Texas, especially southern Texas, has quite a few undocumented immigrants. Are they able to go to any of these centers that you're being directed to by city officials?

VOICE: Not only -- not only is it wide open. Nobody checks on any of that.

PAT: Thank you. Thank you.

STU: Excuse me. We're just going to let you drown outside.

PAT: I mean, that is so ridiculous.

Let me ask you a question, Stephanie, are illegal aliens human? Then, yes, they get to go to the fallout centers. And even the pets can. Jeez.

STU: The pets. That's one of the big things they're showing on social media are all the pets being rescued. No, we're not monsters. I know this is stunning. People in Houston are not monsters that wants everybody else to die.

PAT: But that wasn't enough for her. Because she was talking to Governor Greg Abbott just a few minutes later.

VOICE: -- pathway out of the storm.

VOICE: How about risk of deportation? For those undocumented immigrants that could be in the way of the storm's path.

PAT: Okay. So now she's heard they can come to the shelter, but I'm sure you mean, mean Texans are going to deport them once you find out that they're not legal citizens.

GLENN: Stay in the clear to go to some of these evacuation centers. Do they have to show ID?

VOICE: It's my understanding from what I saw the border patrol instructions yesterday, that will not be an issue. What everyone is focused on right now is ensuring all we can to protect life. We all have a high regard for life. We want to ensure the safety of all lives. And we're prepared to take all measures to do so.

PAT: Greg Abbott is great. I mean, he handled that question a lot better than I would.

STU: Yours would have had many swears in the middle of it. Maybe --

PAT: Potentially yes.

STU: -- throwing something at the camera. There could have been some incidents there.

PAT: Uh-huh. There could have been.

STU: Understandable in that spot.

PAT: Oh, man. Can we not take it political, when we're right in the middle of the catastrophe? How about that MSNBC?

PAT: Pat, Stu, Jeffy, in for Glenn on the Glenn Beck Program. He's under the weather today. Should be back tomorrow. Mercury One is working with six disaster partners. They've been preparing to deploy on this since last week. So they've been ready and they're already there on the scene. Operation barbecue is there.

STU: It's interesting, obviously they're at the point now where they haven't fully deployed. They're all staging around the state, all these organizations. I mean, if Operation Barbecue needs a place to stage, we are only a few hours away from the disaster area, and they could come stage their barbecue facilities right here in the parking lot.

PAT: Very true. Good point, yeah.

JEFFY: You are a genius.

STU: I'm just -- look, we are all about helping, as everyone knows. And I think that's a good way to help.

PAT: No question. So they're scouting locations where they can set up because obviously they don't want to be underwater in a few minutes. They'll have the capacity to feed 15 to 20,000 meals a day. That is -- that's awesome.

Team Rubicon is going to be there staging all around Texas, to send in recon teams to assess the situation and to deploy search-and-rescue boats.

City Impact is staging supplies for deployment. They've already released an initial $100,000 to fund initial field operations. And 2 million worth of gifts in kind, in anticipation of shipments.

Somebody Cares, it's a cooking team. They've already arrived on the scene. Gleaning for the World, dispatched four tractor-trailor loads of water and 16 loads of blankets. So -- and the Provisions Project, providing monetary and volunteer support for search-and-rescue operations.

So if you'd like to help out, if you'd like to donate, 100 percent of the proceeds go to the -- the Houston Relief Fund. And you can go to mercuryone.org in order to donate. Okay?

Because -- because we do the operational costs with other events during the course of the year, all of your money goes where you intend it to be. So it's a great cause.

888-727-BECK. 888-727-BECK is our phone number.

This is a really catastrophic event. And as we were just playing a few minutes ago for you, some people already trying to turn it political. I mean, how do you -- how do you try to make this about deportation and illegal aliens when you're talking to people who are right in the middle of this flooding and trying to save lives, not caring whether they're black, white, red, or brown. Nobody cares.

STU: Yeah, certainly not. I've seen multiple examples of this already, not just with illegal immigrants. First of all, I saw someone talking about how, well, did you know Donald Trump's budget cut funding by 10 million or $20 million for the NOAA?

Which, of course, deals with hurricanes all the time. And it's like -- and now this could cost billions of dollars in damage.

So if they had the extra $100 million, they would be -- they would have, what? Pushed the hurricane back out to sea? What would have exactly happened? They all knew the hurricane was coming.

It had nothing to do with -- they didn't like, see it? We all know the hurricane was coming. We just don't know how it was going to react. And if they had an extra little bit of cash, which probably hasn't been implemented, these cuts, I don't think there would have been a difference there.

Another one was people saying like, here's the list of the, whatever. Fifteen, 20 Republicans in Texas, who voted against Hurricane Sandy relief.

PAT: Right. Because they wanted people to die.

STU: Because they wanted people to die. And now we're going to punish those people in Texas because their representatives voted against the funding package. Which, of course, there was never a vote against funding the relief. There were votes against the way it was done, how much money was going to different areas. I mean, we are a country that has turned the corner on this. And I don't know that it's necessarily a positive in every circumstance.

But there was a time in which we did not have the federal government to come in for local disaster relief. That was not part of their job.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: And I would say for most of our history.

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: And that changed. And now we just assume FEMA is going to cover it every time. So that's kind of where we are now. And even most Republicans don't fight that.

PAT: Yeah, accept it. They just accept it now. And really, that started under Bush, I think. With Katrina. Maybe a little before that. But it didn't used to be that everybody was saying, like you mentioned, where's FEMA? The minute something happened. Because that's not what they did. They weren't the first responders.

STU: There were stories in our history where they turned people away. The federal government to try to show up. And they'd be like, get out of here. This is our problem. Get out. That is not the way we are anymore.

JEFFY: No, it's tough to get those days back.

STU: And Bush is -- I think, you're right, Pat, in that there were certainly aspects of it that that happened before Bush. But Bush really put the -- it made it into a caricature.

Because it really, arguably, ruined his presidency. When you -- just again, we're doing a break here about the way people are talking about politics, the disaster. So I -- I recognize that that's kind of a bizarre thing to talk about today. But that was really -- when it became politicized was that, because the left and the media used Katrina, not as a tragedy where we all come together, but a way to say George Bush was incompetent. It really became that, instead of a tragedy, a large human tragedy, it was just, this guy we don't like, he's really bad at what he's doing. And so they used that as a bludgeon on him. And it's now become to the point where I think every person who is a politician now seems like I can't do enough -- I can't throw enough money -- I can't throw enough resources at everything that happens because if one of these things happen, it's going to be my butt. And, of course, this is how politicians think. It's pathetic. But it's how they think, many of them. And so it -- at this point, this is a legitimate. I mean, it's shaping up to be a Katrina-sized disaster. It's that bad.

JEFFY: If not worse. Yeah.

PAT: It was Katrina and Puffy Combs. Right? Or Sean P. Diddy, or whatever he is. Wasn't it him that said --

STU: No, I believe it was Kanye.

PAT: It was Kanye. Kanye West that announced -- and it was because of Katrina: George Bush doesn't like black people.

STU: Mike Myers. Poor guy was standing next to him. Do you remember that?

PAT: What was that event?

STU: I think it was the big Katrina fundraiser afterwards. It was one of those where they put them on every network. And they had all the celebrities come out. And then George Bush doesn't care about black people.

PAT: Yeah, that's not in the prompter, Kanye.

STU: And Austin Powers is standing next to him with this face, I don't know what to do.

That was such a weird moment. But, you know, it's actually where -- one of the -- one of the -- that was one of the starts for Van Jones in the public eye.

PAT: Oh, yeah.

STU: Operated an organization at the time that started selling Bush hates black people T-shirts. I think it was -- it was some phrase that meant that. Or Bush doesn't care about black people. And he started selling the T-shirts. And that's what funded a good chunk of the early part of his organization. Later on, obviously to rise to the heights of the White House, just a few years later. Which is really incredible.

You know, this is going to be ugly. And it's going to be ugly not only in the fact of it being a natural disaster, but what people will say, what people will do. I mean, the Keith Olbermann thing. Did you guys see the Keith Olbermann thing?

PAT: No.

STU: Why would you? It's Keith Olbermann.

PAT: Right. I don't even know where to find Keith either, if I wanted to.

STU: And I don't either. I know he's on Twitter. He's on Twitter.

PAT: Okay.

STU: And so Betsy DeVos, the education secretary tweeted something like, hey, we're in the middle of helping. All these local schools. Generic message of, like, just so you know, here's what we're doing to help schools. And he tweeted back like, you will do more damage than this hurricane -- than the hurricane could ever do to these schools, mother Fer.

PAT: What?

STU: What has she done?

PAT: Wow.

STU: She believes education should be better and more controlled by the individual. And that means in the middle of a hurricane, you start calling her a mother Fer publicly? This guy is completely insane at this point. He's given up attempting to appear sane.

PAT: Wow.

JEFFY: Yeah, he has.

STU: He's just abandoned the process. Like every day, we wake up and we have crazy thoughts. Everybody has a crazy thought in their head every once in a while. You know what, I should order 14 20-piece McNuggets today. And you just stop yourself because we live in a society, we're supposed to all have standards. And Keith Olbermann has given up on the process.

PAT: That's for sure.

STU: He is the mental equivalent of ordering 20 piece McNuggets over and over again and going through the drive through. That's where he's landed. I mean, in some ways, it's sad. He was never smart before. Man, it has gone downhill. He has given up on society.

PAT: That makes him the perfect match though again for ESPN.

STU: He should probably go back. He should probably go back.

JEFFY: Yes, it does.

PAT: They're kind of on the same wavelength now.

STU: They can't put him on TV. I think he'd just show up in an open robe. I don't think anyone -- like I just got -- find him a nice quiet place, America. Find Keith Olbermann a nice quiet place where he can relax. He can live his life. Maybe some birds fly by occasionally. He gets a nice tray of cafeteria food.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: I mean, it's time. The poor man needs a quiet place.

PAT: And this is what we can't have. We have to come together as Americans and take care of a catastrophe like this. Right? Without worrying about who is on the left, who is on the right, what is your political stance. I don't care. Let's save you. Try to make life a little bit better for you right now.

JEFFY: We are seeing some of that, at least with people on the ground. Right? The everyday people are doing that.

PAT: Yes. Yes.

JEFFY: Are coming together and helping people. We saw footage of people bringing out their boats all day yesterday, rescuing people. That wasn't FEMA.

STU: No.

JEFFY: That wasn't the mayor. That wasn't the governor.

PAT: That's right.

JEFFY: That was everyday people saying, these people need help. I'm helping.

STU: We still have three to four days of rain and we're already jumping to the politics. I mean, that is disturbing. That's not the way this is supposed to work.

RADIO

The Glenn Beck Program Honors Charlie Kirk

Join Glenn as he goes live to honor the memory of Charlie Kirk. A time of prayer, grieving, and remembrance for a husband, father, and patriot.

RADIO

Glenn joins Megyn Kelly live to discuss Charlie Kirk shooting

Covering the breaking news of Charlie Kirk at shot at Turning Point USA event.

RADIO

Please pray for my friend Charlie.

Please pray for Charlie Kirk.

Please pray for our Republic.

RADIO

Exclusive new poll reveals why Gen Z wants to BURN the system down

A shocking number of young Americans support BOTH President Trump and democratic socialism, a new poll has found, and they're willing to make major changes to the American system to get what they feel they deserve. Justin Haskins, who conducted the poll with Rasmussen, joins Glenn Beck to break down the unexpected findings…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Justin Haskins. He's the president of our republic. StoppingSocialism.com. He's editor-in-chief. And also the coauthor of several books, with me. Welcome to the program, Justin.

How are you?

JUSTIN: I'm doing well, Glenn. How are you?

STU: Well, I was well, until you contacted me on vacation, and sent me this disturbing poll.

I am in bed at night.

And I'm reading this. I'm like, oh, dear.

What? My wife is like, I told you to not check this email. I'm like, I didn't know Justin was going to write to me.

Justin, tell me, first of all, before we get into it, how secure is the sample size on this poll?

JUSTIN: It's a very good sample size. 1200 people nationally.

Only 18 to 39-year-olds. And we did that deliberately, so that we could get a sample size large enough so we could pull out valid responses, just from younger people.

So the whole purpose of this poll was to find out what younger people, 18 to 39 think, voters only. And people who say that they're likely to vote. So we're not talking about just people out in the public. We're not talking about registered voters.

We're talking about people who are registered to vote. And say they're likely to vote.

GLENN: So let's go over some of the things that you have already released to the press.

And that is, in the survey, 18 to 39-year-olds, likely voters.

The Trump approval rating is a lot higher than you thought it would be. Right?

JUSTIN: Yeah. Yeah. Forty-eight percent positive approval rating of Donald Trump, which for young people, is very high.

So that's -- that's the good news.

That's the only good news we're going to talk about.

GLENN: We might have to come back to that first question several times.

Do you believe the United States is a fundamentally good, evil, or morally mixed country?

JUSTIN: Yep. This one is not too bad.

It's not great. But fundamentally good was 28 percent.

Which is low. But mixed was 50 percent.

And fundamentally evil was 17 percent.

And I think mixed at 50 percent is not an unreasonable, crazy response.

I -- I can see why all sorts of people might choose that.

So I don't think there's anything terrible here. It depends on what you mean by mixed. Fundamentally good at 28 percent. It's a little low. Fundamentally evil at 17 percent, it's a little disturbing. But it's not -- it's not insane. The insane stuff comes a little bit later.

GLENN: Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Major industries talk about the crazy stuff coming later, here it is.

Major industries like health care, energy, and big tech should be nationalized and give more control and equity to the people.

JUSTIN: Yeah. This was -- this was -- this one floored me. If I look at strongly agree. Somewhat agree for that statement you just read. It's over 70 percent of young people, including -- including the vast majority of Republicans. Young Republicans. And people who identify as conservatives.

It was pretty similar, in fact, how young people responded compared to liberals and independents.

And Democrats.

They all pretty much agreed that, yes. The government. The federal government should be nationalizing whole industries to make things more equitable for people.

GLENN: As the guy who is the chief -- editor-in-chief of stopping socialism. What's the problem with nationalizing energy, and health care?

JUSTIN: Well --

GLENN: What happens, typically.

JUSTIN: Well, usually, there's blood in the streets, when you do too much of that.

You know, socialism, communism have been spectacularly horrible, throughout the course of human history. Across every society, culture, religion.

It doesn't matter when or what kind of technological advancements you have. The more you collect vies a society. The more authoritarian that society gets. The less you have individual freedom. And the worst the economy usually is for regular people. So it's been a catastrophe across-the-board. Everyone listening to this audience, probably knows that.

And so the idea that you would have three-quarters of young voters. So remember, these people will be the primary voters in ten to 20 years.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

JUSTIN: Saying, yeah. We should be nationalizing whole industries. Whole industries, is so disturbing.

And I don't think that conservatives are -- understand how deeply rooted some of these ideas are with younger people.

GLENN: No. No.

And I will tell you, I think some conservatives are walking a very dangerous line. And, you know, coming up with a little mix of everything.

And -- and I think we have to be very careful on -- on what is being said. And who are WHO our friends and allies are.

By the way, that number again is 39 percent strongly agree.

37 percent somewhat agree.

Somewhat disagree, 12 percent. Strongly disagree, 5 percent.

That is disastrous. Now, try this one on. These are the ones that have been -- we have new ones.

These are just a few of the ones that were released late last week. The next presidential election is in 2028. Would you like to see a democratic socialist candidate win the 2028 presidential election?

JUSTIN: Yep, 53 percent said yes.

Fifty-three percent of all voters said yes. And the most shocking thing, was that 35 percent of those who we poll, who said they voted for Donald Trump, in 2024, said that that they want to see a socialist win in 2028. And so about a third of Republicans, 35 percent of Trump voters, 43 percent of people who call themselves conservatives, so even on the right, among younger people. There is a large group that want a socialist president, in 2028.

GLENN: And the reason -- the reason is, it -- it tied into the next few questions. Okay.

So here's question five. Among the following options, which best describes your biggest reason, you would like to see a democratic socialist candidate. Thirty-one percent said housing costs are too high. Twelve percent, taxes are too low for corporations. Eleven percent, taxes are too low for wealthy have I seen.

Eight percent want single payer health care systems. Seventeen say the economy unfairly benefits older, wealthier Americans.

Fifteen percent say the economy unfairly benefits larger corporations. 5 percent, some other reason.

And 2 percent, unsure. Now, let's get into the new polls that were breaking today.

Question six.

How would you describe your current financial situation?

JUSTIN: Yeah. Only 24 percent said that they're doing well. Thirty-four -- 38 percent said getting by. Struggling 29 percent. Seven percent said in crisis. So if you add up just getting by, struggling, and in crisis, that's 74 percent said that they're just barely getting by, at best.

And I think that explains a lot of the other negative responses we've seen so far.

GLENN: That's not good.

JUSTIN: In this poll. And the ones that are going to come pretty soon here.

GLENN: Seven. Which best describes your personal life situation?

You are thriving, you're doing well with a few ups and downs. You feel stuck and uncertain. You feel lonely, disconnected, or emotionally drained. You're in a crisis and feel most negative about your personal life.

JUSTIN: Yeah. Yeah. About a third said that they feel stuck or uncertain. Lonely. Or that they're in a crisis.

That's a third of young people. Say that.

I mean, that's -- that's not great. Only 19 percent said thriving.

46 percent said, they have ups and downs. Which I think is not. Too shocking.

But the idea that there's a third of American voters out there, who feel like, they can't buy a home. And they feel like they are lonely. And that they're in crisis. And that life is not just going well at all for them.

Again, I think that's -- that's driving a lot of the support for socialism. When you have 53 percent of these people saying, yeah. I want a socialist president in 2028.

GLENN: So socialism is not the answer. It is the symptom. It is the symptom of what people are feeling right now.

And they -- they don't know any other -- they don't -- nobody is presenting them with anything other than, you know, Republican/Democrat bullcrap. And socialists are coming at it from a completely nigh angle. Or so the youth think it's the oldest and most failed system of all time.

But they're seeing this as a solution that is different than what the party -- the Republican/Democrats are offering. Even though the Democrats are offering the socialism thing.

Number eight, do you think the American economy is unfair to young people?

Sixty-two percent say yes.

JUSTIN: Yeah, and 27 percent said no.
And I think that this really gets at the heart of what the issue is here.

When you look at the reasons. When you look at the detailed things of the poll.

What -- to try to find out if there's an association between some kind of demographic or response question about people's lives and their support for socialism, to see if there's a correlation there between something that is happening. And whether someone is a socialist or not.

One of the top correlations, connections, is, if people think the economy is unfair.

And if they're having trouble buying a home. Or they don't think they can buy a home. Or that's one of their reasons for supporting socialism.

So, in other words, there's this fairness issue. And it's not even about inequality.

It's not about, well, they have too much -- well, if they feel like the -- to use a Trump term. Rigged.

And throughout the data. That's what we see over and over and over again. Is lots of people say, the economy is rigged. For older people. For wealthier people, for corporations. It's rigged. And if they say, yeah. I think it's rigged, you know, then they're more likely to say, yeah. I want a socialist.

And I also think the same group has a relatively high approval rating of Donald Trump.

It's because the reason that a lot of young people like Trump in the poll, is that he's not part of the establishment.

And I think -- I don't think they -- I think a lot of young people who voted for Trump and who liked Trump, they didn't do it, because they liked free market, pro-liberty policies. And that's not a good thing.

But I don't think that's why they did it. I think a lot of them voted for Trump and supported him, because he's not the establishment. And that's what they don't like. They want to blow the establishment up.

JUSTIN: So my -- Justin, my sample size is my two young adults. My two children.

And they're like, talking to me, and saying, Dad. I will never be able to own a home, looking at the prices, looking at interest rates. They're like, I can't even afford to pay rent at an apartment. And they don't know what to do.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

JASON: And so they're looking at -- on, like, TikTok. And they're like, who is this Mamdani guy? This sounds interesting. They bring this to me. They grew up listening to me indoctrinating them their entire lives. They're looking at other voices like on TikTok. Are we just not being loud enough?

GLENN: No. We're not -- we're not connecting with them. We're not -- I feel like they don't feel they're being heard.

And we are speaking to them in red, white and be blue.

And that means nothing. The Statue of Liberty means nothing to them. Ellis Island means nothing to them. The flag means nothing to them.

It's all partisan politics.

They're all symbols of really, the two parties.

You know, and an America, they don't relate to at all.

I think that's -- that's our biggest problem, and not being able to break through. To your point, question nine. How confident are you that you will own a home at some point, in the next ten years?

29 percent say, they already own a home. Which I found interesting. That's -- I think a pretty high number for somebody who is 18 to 34 years old.

JUSTIN: Thirty-nine.

GLENN: Thirty-nine.

JUSTIN: Yeah.

GLENN: There's a lot of 18 to 30. That I didn't own home when I was, you know, 30. Just got a home when I was 30. But go ahead. Go ahead with the rest of that poll.

JUSTIN: Yeah. So then 21 percent said discouraged, but somewhat hopeful. 12 percent said, not confident. 10 percent said, you are convinced you will never own a home. 3 percent not sure.

So if you add up the negative responses, it's around 43 percent that gave that response.

GLENN: Right. But, again, 29 percent, you already own a home. And 25 percent you are confident you will own a home, is still good. It just -- these -- these other numbers, have, you know, discouraged, but hopefully you will own a home. Who is discouraging that? And how is that being discouraged?

You know, only 12 -- let's see 12. Twenty-two. 25 percent are not sure they will ever own a home. That's too high of a number.

But I -- I don't think that's completely dismal. Now, a completely dismal answer, to the question, would you support a law that would confiscate America's excess wealth?

Including things like second homes. Luxury cars, and private boats, in order to help young people buy a home for the first time?

Are you for or against that? We'll give you that number here in just a second.

GLENN: There are some disturbing results, that get very disturbing, going from here on.

We've got two of these today, and then more tomorrow.

We'll spend more time with you tomorrow, Justin.

But would you support a law that would confiscate American's excess wealth, including things like second home, luxury cars, and private boats in order to help young people buy a home for the first time? Get the results.

JUSTIN: Yeah, 25 percent strongly support that, 30 percent somewhat support it, 55 percent in total for support. Only 38 percent strongly or somewhat oppose, with just 20 percent saying strongly oppose. So the vast majority now is -- is supporting this Communistic policy to confiscate people's wealth in order to help people. Younger people buy homes, which is in line with that question, we talked about earlier. Where it said, you know, three-quarters of these respondents wanted to nationalize whole industries to make things fairer. So it's all about -- it's all about this sense of unfairness that exists.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

JUSTIN: And they feel like. Young people feel like the system is rigged. They feel like neither party is on their side, and they want to blow the whole thing up, by just taking wealth away from people, nationalizing whole industries, and redistributing it all.

And guess what, that's basically the democratic socialist platform. So it's not a surprise that that's -- that's becoming increasingly more popular with these young people.

And I don't think that free market, pro-liberty people are dealing with -- with this.

GLENN: No.

JUSTIN: In a real way.

In fact, I think a lot of us have believed recently that the wind is at our backs, and we're actually winning more and more young people over.
And that isn't what's happening according to the poll results.

GLENN: It explains why the Democrats have not moved their position off of the socialism stuff.

Doesn't it?

We keep saying, why? It's not working with anybody.

It is working. It is working with people under 39.

18 to 39-year-olds are hearing this message, and are embracing this message.