Glenn asked YOUR 2024 candidates how they will avoid WORLD WAR III. Here's what they said.

How would YOU want your next President to deal with World War III? Be sure to watch this week's Glenn TV special to hear Glenn's take.

Between Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan, and other regional conflicts, the world is inching toward the precipice of a global war, and the outcome of the 2024 election may very well be the determining factor whether we are pushed over the edge into World War III. According to a recent glennbeck.com poll, most of the respondents said they believe World War III is unavoidable, and the overwhelming majority predicted World War III will erupt within six months AND that the U.S. is in poor shape to engage in a global conflict.

The world is inching toward the precipice of a global war.

The stakes of the 2024 election couldn't be higher, and heading into the third GOP Presidential Primary debate, Americans are seeking clear answers to these global issues that will likely determine the course of our nation. To obtain these answers, Glenn asked Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, Chris Christie, Tim Scott, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to respond to 10 national security questions with clear, written answers. Glenn goes over and ranks each of the candidates' responses on this week's Glenn TV special.

The stakes of the 2024 election couldn't be higher.

Below you will find written responses from Tim Scott, Vivek Ramaswamy, Nikki Haley, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s campaigns. Trump, DeSantis, and Christie were unable to send their responses within the deadline for publication. It is also important to note that Glenn told the candidates to prioritize the first two questions if they were pressed for time preparing for tonight's debate. Be sure to watch this week's Glenn TV special to hear Glenn's review.

Click the arrows in the slides below to read each candidate's response.


What is your strategy to avoid World War III?


Nikki Haley's response:

A strong America doesn’t start wars; a strong America prevents wars. The most urgent priority to avoid America getting dragged into conflict is getting President Joe Biden out of the White House. His weakness has emboldened our enemies and we’re seeing disastrous results around the world. I am the wife of a combat veteran. As we speak, my husband is deployed overseas to keep our country safe. I understand the sacrifice of our service men and women. Our number one goal should be peace, for the sake of our fellow Americans, our children, and our grandchildren. We need a president who understands that protecting our people requires standing with our allies and standing up to our enemies. I will be that president.

With over 10M illegal border crossings in America since Biden took office, hundreds on the terrorist watchlist stopped at our border (that we know of), how will your administration safeguard the country from current and future imported terrorism?

Nikki Haley's response:

Terrorists know that under Joe Biden, the easiest way to get into America is through the southern border. We can’t wait for another 9/11—we need to secure our border, and that’s what I’ll do as president.

I’ll reinstate Title 42 and Remain in Mexico. I’ll end catch-and-release and start catch-and-deport. Instead of the thousands of new IRS agents Biden plans to hire, I’ll hire 25,000 more Border Patrol and ICE agents. I’ll also make sure we stop giving handouts to illegal immigrants and defund sanctuary cities. Finally, I’ll introduce a mandatory national E-Verify program, like I did as governor, which will punish employers who hire illegals.

As president, I’ll also deal with terrorist groups before they get to our borders. Whether it’s Hamas and other Iranian proxies, or the cartels that operate in Mexico with the help of China, we need to choke off the funding these groups use to spread terror.

What is the order of importance for the U.S. right now: the war in Ukraine or the conflict in Israel?

Nikki Haley's response:

To achieve peace, the most important thing we can do right now is help Israel eliminate Hamas, as fast and as fully as possible. Swift and decisive victory in Gaza would stop a broader war in the Middle East. It would also send the best possible signal to Russia and China. The war in Gaza must not become mired down like the war in Ukraine. It is in America’s and the region’s best interest for Israel to win quickly and fully.

The war in Ukraine is another part of the China-Russia-Iran battlefield. A win for Russia is a win for China and Iran. And a win for Russia would not end with Ukraine. We should continue to provide Ukraine the weapons it needs to reclaim its territory. Biden has spent nearly two years delaying and denying Ukraine’s requests for help. That’s doubly wrong, considering Biden’s weakness invited Russia to invade Ukraine in the first place. The longer the war in Ukraine drags on, the more it encourages other wars, in Europe and across the world.

In the midst of the war on Israel, the United Nations made Iran the chair of their human rights forum. Why should the United States continue to support the U.N.?

Nikki Haley's response:

I know what it’s like to fight the UN because I did it every day as ambassador. I successfully pushed for the United States to get out of the falsely-named UN Human Rights Council. I successfully pushed to cut the UN budget, and we saved a billion dollars as a result. I fought the DC establishment and won in pushing to stop American funding for UNRWA, a corrupt UN agency that spreads hate against Israel.

Would you commit to defunding the U.N.?

Nikki Haley's response:

N/A

Is there a strategic reason for the U.S. to continue in NATO?

Nikki Haley's response:

NATO is a 75-year success story. In the half century before NATO existed, Germany twice went to war with its European neighbors, pulling America into two world wars. In the 75 years since, no NATO member has gone to war with another, and the Soviet Union (now Russia) has never attacked a NATO member country. Putin and his proxies have attacked three non-NATO countries in the region. So NATO has been a success. However, America has borne a disproportionate funding burden for NATO. We must make sure every NATO country pays its appropriate share, and we have to stiffen their spines when it comes to confronting our adversaries.

If not, would you support the U.S. withdrawing from it?

Nikki Haley's response:

See above answer.

Given Erdogan’s supportive rhetoric for Hamas, should Turkey still be allowed in NATO?

Nikki Haley's response:

Turkey continues to show why it is not a true partner. It criticizes Israel in outrageous ways. It cozies up to Russia. And it gives comfort to Islamic extremism. America’s and NATO’s relationship with Turkey under its current leadership must be reexamined.

First Russia moved on Ukraine, and now Iran is moving on Israel through its proxies. Do you believe China will soon move on Taiwan, and if so how would you deal with it?

Nikki Haley's response:

Iran, Russia, and China are working together. They don’t just want to conquer our friends. They ultimately want to destroy America. We can’t let that happen.

We should bolster Taiwan’s defense. Communist China needs to know it would pay a very steep price by invading Taiwan. America must rally both our Asian and European allies to the cause of containing China’s military and technological expansion.

How does America avoid being spread too thin on its involvement in global conflicts so that we don’t give strategic advantage to our adversaries?

Nikki Haley's response:

When it comes to spreading ourselves too thin, we should start by looking at how Joe Biden is spending America into bankruptcy, building a political-subsidy economy and gutting our future by swapping economic freedom for government control. If he isn’t stopped, Biden will leave America unable to lead in this time of crisis.

I will bring back a free and flourishing America. We can get our fiscal house in order while modernizing and strengthening our military. We can rev our economy by ditching corporate welfare and regular welfare gone wild. And, yes, we can leave China in the dust by embracing America’s principles and promoting economic freedom.

Can fear win the vote? Democrats have a dangerous strategy to demonize Trump.

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

The Democratic Party’s nominee is deliberately spreading false, fear-driven narratives to turn her base against Donald Trump, regardless of the consequences.

Have you noticed how Kamala Harris and her allies in the corporate left-wing media have become bolder in labeling Trump a “fascist”? A recent New York Times article revealed that Democrats have shed their reluctance to use the term. In fact, it has become their rallying cry as Election Day approaches.

What’s the real goal here? According to John Daniel Davidson at the Federalist, Harris and her supporters are using this rhetoric to energize their base — and more disturbingly, to prepare them for violence if Trump wins. The fearmongering isn’t just about driving people to the polls; it’s about creating an atmosphere of rage and chaos.

Let’s show the Democrats that our republic doesn’t bend to fear and certainly doesn’t bend to those who twist the truth for political gain.

Harris is deliberately spreading false, fear-driven narratives to turn her base against Trump, regardless of the consequences. This is the same Kamala Harris who, during the George Floyd riots in 2020, encouraged bailing out rioters and urged the violence to continue both before and after the election.

For example, Harris has claimed that Trump will use the Department of Justice as a weapon against his political enemies if he returns to office. But let’s pause for a second: Who is using the Justice Department as a political tool right now? Harris’ own administration, led by Joe Biden, has weaponized federal agencies against Trump and conservatives for years.

Harris also recently entertained the idea that Trump would round up people who “don’t look white” and throw them into camps. During an interview with Charlamagne tha God, a caller suggested this scenario. Instead of refuting the caller’s paranoia, Harris nodded and said, “You have hit on a really important point.

This kind of divisive rhetoric fuels fear and division in our country. Let’s not forget: Trump was president for four years, and there were no camps, roundups, or authoritarian crackdowns on dissenters. Leftists claim Trump and his supporters spread conspiracy theories, but they are the ones pushing baseless and dangerous claims.

While Democrats claim to defend democracy, they are increasingly aligning with authoritarianism. For example, the EPA funneled billions of dollars to left-wing organizations, including one tied to Stacey Abrams, for “voter mobilization” efforts. This funding came through the Inflation Reduction Act — a taxpayer-funded omnibus bill. Imagine the outrage if Republicans in Congress gave billions of taxpayer dollars to right-wing groups. The media would be in an uproar, and there would be protests at the White House gates. But because it’s Democrats doing it, the mainstream media turns a blind eye. These are the warning signs of an authoritarian regime.

This is why it’s more critical than ever for Americans to see through the left’s manipulation. Trump’s not the fascist here — he’s a threat to the left's power. The real danger lies in the left’s escalating rhetoric, which is designed to incite chaos if things don’t go its way. And let me be clear: That’s exactly what leftists are preparing for.

Don’t let them succeed.

The best way to counter their lies is by getting out to vote and encouraging others to do the same. If every single one of us does this, we won’t let the fearmongering and lies being peddled by Harris and the Democrats succeed. Let’s show them that our republic doesn’t bend to fear and certainly doesn’t bend to those who twist the truth for political gain.

America is currently standing at a fork in the road. Which path we take will determine our fate as a nation.

One path is “we try something entirely new,” as in “not the Constitution,” and the other path is “we go back towards the Constitution,” says Glenn Beck.

The stakes for this decision are higher than they’ve ever been.

“We're deciding this year whether or not our kids are going to grow up in a country that gives them the opportunity to be themselves and to move forward and chart their own course, or we're going to continue to live in a place where we're not sure if our kids are going to have a better life than we did,” Glenn warns.

Regardless of who you vote for, Glenn says that one thing applies to everyone: “You’ve got to get involved this year,” which includes voting.

Election Day is rapidly approaching, and it will undoubtedly be a night that goes down in history, which is why BlazeTV will be broadcasting it live.

“We’d love to share it with you,” says Glenn.

Go to BlazeElection.com for exclusive access to our election night broadcasting. Your BlazeTV+ subscription also gives you access to all BlazeTV content as well as Blaze News.

“Sign up and be a part of the family as we go through this together,” invites Glenn.

Get $40 off your first year of BlazeTV+ with code ELECTION.

TOP THREE craziest leftist reactions to Trump's McDonald's visit

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Over the weekend, President Trump visited a McDonald's in Bucks County, Pennsylvania to serve up some french fries to hungry supporters.

MAGA fans from across the country came to celebrate and support Trump, quickly swamping the small town with a tide of Trump merch. With a roaring crowd outside, Trump cooked up some crispy fries and served them to a small selection of supporters through the drive-thru window, creating a light-hearted, fun momenta pleasant break from the turbulent election cycle.

Naturally, the Left quickly swooped in to rain on Trump's parade. From unsubstantiated fact-checks to overused insults, here are the craziest reactions to Trump's McDonald's trip:

Fact check on Donald Trump's claims about Kamala Harris

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

While working his brief 15-minute shift, Donald Trump quipped that he's now worked at McDonald's longer than Kamala Harris, referencing the Vice President's unsubstantiated claim that she worked at McDonald's one summer during college. McDonald's further substantiated Trump's claim by indicating that there are no existing records of Harris's employment, though they admit that records from the pre-digital age may not have survived to the present day.

Despite the lack of evidence, left-wing media outlets, such as the Washington Post, were quick to defend the Vice President. Their argument essentially put Trump's word against Harris's, suggesting that Trump was deliberately lying to defame the Vice President, while simultaneously treating Harris as a more credible source.

Pointing out the obvious fact that this was a political stunt

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

In what is likely the least informative journalistic piece of the century, MSNBC made the "shocking discovery" that Donald Trump didn't actually work at McDonald's and that the entire event was for his campaign. It's unclear what detail gave this away to the "ever-vigilant" reporters at MSNBC. Maybe it was the fact that McDonald's was closed for the event, or the lack of employees within the restaurant, or possibly it was the crowd of cheering fans outside. Thank you captain obvious, the event was a carefully coordinated and secure political event. The former President who has had several assassination attempts on his life did notwork in an unsecured restaurant, dealing with countless unknown people.

Truly "top-notch" reporting by MSNBC.

Calling Trump supporters "weird"... Again.

LOGAN CYRUS / Contributor | Getty Images

The New York Times had to really scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with something to paint Trump's fast food fiesta in a negative light. Instead of attacking Trump, they went after his supporters who lined the street to cheer on their favorite presidential nominee. They went so far as to describe the event as a violent riot full of unhinged and uneducated fanatics. The New York Times even quoted a pro-Harris protester who showed up to the event and suggested that "Jan. 6 was maybe a trial run ... and now they’re a lot more organized — and a lot angrier.” The insults didn't stop there. They dredged up the archaic and cringeworthy Tim Walz original calling the Trump supporters "weird." This "zinger" doesn't have the punch the New York Times wanted it to have, and came across as a sad attempt to bring Trump down in one of his high points in his campaign.

RIGGED: Kamala Harris attempts to sway Fox interview in her favor, STILL falls short

Paul Morigi / Contributor | Getty Images

The election is mere weeks away and Kamala Harris just had her first adversarial interview since she began campaigning.

Last week, Harris sat down with Fox News journalist Bret Baier for an interview plagued with difficulties from the beginning. As Glenn recently pointed out, it seemed like Harris had done her best to ensure the interview was intentionally rigged against Baier. Despite being in front of Baier's diverse audience, she did not seem too interested in taking the opportunity to sell herself to a new demographic. Instead, Glenn hypothesized she was just after a quick soundbite to pander to her faltering core supporters.

However, the interview blew up in Kamala's face, and the American people took notice. Here's a rundown of Kamala's first Fox interview:

Rigged Interview

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Harris and her team did everything possible to throw Bret Baier off his game and derail the interview in her favor. It started when Harris's team informed Fox that the interview, which was originally supposed to be an hour, would be cut in half. This left Baier scrambling to reformat his interview to better fit the new time requirement. Then Harris arrived at the interview ten minutes late, further shorting the interview.

The purpose behind Harris's tardiness became apparent during the interview. Every time Baier asked a question, Harris would launch into a lengthy word salad. Baier was forced to interject just so he was able to ask more than a couple of questions. Harris even pushed back, calling out Baier's interruptions, which of course, just wasted more time. Clearly, Harris or her staff realized that she could not sustain a hostile interview for any extended period, which is why Harris tried to filibuster away as much of the interview as possible.

When the brief interview was nearing the end of its allotted time, Harris's staff began signaling to Baier to end the interview. Despite the change in plans and late arrival, her staff was determined to end the interview as quickly as possible.

Harris's Agenda

CHRISTIAN MONTERROSA / Contributor | Getty Images

From the beginning of the interview, Harris was hostile. She was immediately adversarial and would spin every question into a criticism of Trump, no matter how pointed Baier's question was. Several times Harris had emotional outbursts, spewing classic anti-Trump rhetoric, regardless of its relevance to the question asked. Glenn pointed out that this was the reason Harris took this interview. Recently, many of her core supporters have been faltering as her sudden burst of televised appearances has revealed her paper-thin platform. She took this interview to get a good clip of her passionately bashing Trump on Fox News. This would bolster her core demographic, which she desperately needs.

Harris's Fumbles

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite her best efforts to sway the interview in her favor, Baier still managed to pin Harris several times. Harris kept dodging tough questions Baier threw her way with the same tactic: she would promise to "follow the law" then deflect the question back on Trump. One of the more memorable instances of Harris's evasion strategy was when she was questioned if she supported prison inmates having access to taxpayer-funded transgender surgery. Harris insisted she would "follow the law" and then explained that Trump had followed the same law while he was in office. This response was, in essence, a non-answer. Harris was ignoring the obvious fact that as President, she would influence what the law would be and how it is enforced.

Harris's other major blunder occurred after Baier asked her how her presidency would differ from Biden's and how she would "turn the page" on our current situation. In classic Harris fashion, she immediately deflects on Trump, framing our current situation as somehow a byproduct of Trump simply existing within the political sphere. This convoluted web she spun was so twisted that Harris herself lost track of what she was saying gave up, telling Baier, "You know what I'm talking about." Baier admitted he was just as lost as she was, and she simply went back to attacking Trump.