Extreme is the ONLY place Glenn, Stu and Pat will be on Election Night! Complete details... |
InsiderSTU: Well, Pat, you know, we basically seem to be taking for granted that the
House is going to be in Republican hands after this because what could possibly
go wrong? I can't think of anything. Republicans are always perfectly competent
and everything goes their way.
PAT: Sure.
STU: But the Senate is a little bit of a tougher road, as you know. So I thought
we'd look at what is the road to the Republican Senate? How do they do it?
PAT: How do they do it?
STU: How do they do it?
PAT: How easy is it?
STU: Okay. Well, we have a bunch of races that are heavily favored for
Republicans. South Dakota, Idaho, Oklahoma, Alabama, North Dakota, Kansas, South
Carolina, Utah, Iowa, Arizona, Arkansas, and Georgia, all 20 point leads or
more, okay? Next group you have Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio, North Carolina,
Florida, which as you know has that three person dynamic as well as Alaska. Now,
Miller is favored in Alaska, though his really only challenger there that has a
chance of winning is Murkowski. So that would likely stay in Republican hands
anyway.
PAT: And she's write in.
STU: And she's write in.
PAT: She's not going to win.
STU: That seems really tough. I don't know. How do you win a write in campaign?
PAT: We should look into that but I don't think it's ever been done. Not in a
long time anyway.
STU: Got to be very difficult.
PAT: Yep.
STU: So the polling there is very weird, although Miller still leads by 5
points, Rubio is up by double digits right now and it looks like he will win.
Even if he loses, though, you have Crist who is going to be, god only knows what
he is. I think he changes he changes his opinions approximately every nine
seconds. So if you get him at the right nine second chunk, you've got his vote.
Unfortunately the next nine seconds you're totally screwed.
PAT: He was great at the debate, though, the other night saying that's a good
thing. I'm fluid; I change with the times. He's rigid.
STU: He's rigid. I mean, he has beliefs that he's thought of for a long time and
PAT: He believes in something? I hate that in a candidate.
STU: Oh, he has an opinion that continues to remain consistent. It's oh, I hate
that.
PAT: I don't know about you. I like to vote for worms. I like a worm.
STU: Yeah.
PAT: Somebody who's malleable, somebody you can bend to their will or who bends
to the will of whomever they're talking to. That's what I like. Don't you want a
spineless worm in office?
STU: Right. Like, don't you want a candidate that's going to take the yes and no
vote and put them on the red and black parts of the roulette table?
PAT: Yeah.
STU: And then just spin the wheel.
PAT: Spin the wheel.
STU: Roll the ball.
PAT: Roll the ball.
STU: And if it's red or black, that's the way he votes.
PAT: There you go.
STU: Is that what you want in a candidate?
PAT: That is.
STU: Because I know he's particularly good at that. He's a roulette professional
and that's what's going to be happening potentially, although it looks like
Rubio's going to hold on there. Then you have the next it starts to get a little
more difficult after these races. You've got Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire
and Wisconsin. Rand Paul is up by 6 right now and it looks like he's polling
much better ever since the absolute debacle of the Aqua Buddha ad by Conway who
has actually taken the slimiest profession in the world and made it worse. He's
actually taken what seems to be the ugliest thing you can do in your life: Run
for office and made it even more despicable. And Kentucky has completely turned
on him in the last few polls and Rand Paul, one of the last polls had Rand Paul
up 13 points.
PAT: Wow.
STU: Which was very close before that. And then you have Missouri, New Hampshire
and Wisconsin. Those are all within ten points. Then you get into sort of the
toss up category here, which is Pennsylvania, Pat Toomy's up by 4. Colorado,
buck is up by 2. Nevada, Sharron Angle by 2. We don't know how many gift cards
she has in reserve to give away from union representatives, probably not enough
to overcome Harry Reid's gift card barrage and free food garage, but we'll talk
about that in a little bit. Illinois, Kirk is up by 2. West Virginia is an exact
dead heat right now. They're tied. And Patty Murray in Washington on the
Democrat side is up by 4. Now, all you have to do, if you're the Republicans and
you want to take the Senate back, is win every single race I just mentioned.
With absolutely no exceptions. And you have the Senate.
PAT: It's just that easy.
STU: That is so easy. All you have to do is go 100% on those races.
PAT: It's just that easy.
STU: Now, you could switch out if you want to win against Barbara Boxer, you
could switch one of those out.
PAT: Oh, okay.
STU: But that's pretty much your only one that you have a shot at other than the
ones I mentioned.
PAT: Really?
STU: So all you have to do is do everything and you can take back the Senate as
well as the House.
PAT: So the guy in Washington, because I don't think you mentioned him. He's
down now?
STU: He's down 4.
PAT: Down 4?
STU: Yeah. The New York Times rates it as a 15% chance that he's going to win
that race. And
PAT: 15%?
STU: Yeah, 15%. And but I mean, it's one of these things where you just feel
like one of these races is going to go the wrong way. There's going to be huge
pickups here and there's no doubt about that, but can you win all of those?
PAT: I don't know.
STU: Only in a huge wave.
PAT: Maybe.
STU: Only in a huge wave.
PAT: Maybe. It's possible. We could get one. Could get one.
STU: Just the possibility that that could happen.
PAT: I know.
STU: Is enough for me to have a little smile on my face.
PAT: Yeah, it is.
STU: And the possibility that Harry Reid might not be there anymore gives me
even a bigger smile.
PAT: Well, and people have gone from talking about, oh, conservatively I'd say
35 to 39, maybe you get the 39 necessary to take the house, maybe you get to 52
48 in the Senate. So we've come a long way since then.
STU: Yeah.
PAT: Because people are talking about 65 now in the House or, you know, 55.
STU: 50 to 60, yeah.
PAT: And you've got people like Dick Morris who are saying we should shoot for
100.
STU: Seems a little unlikely but it's possible. It's not impossible.
PAT: Seems very unlikely, but then you on the other hand you have Nancy Pelosi
who says they are not going to, they are not even going to lose control of the
House. They are not even going to lose control.
STU: But Nancy Pelosi has to say that. She has absolutely no other option. I
mean, she's like a football coach. She's out there saying, like, you can't come
out if you're, you know, the Buffalo Bills coach and say, look, we're going to
beat Indianapolis, we're going to beat we're going to beat the Giants, we're
going to beat all the good teams. You just can't do it. You have to be what was
it? Louisiana Tech/Boise State last night? If you're Louisiana, you have to say
you're going to win that game. We know how we're going to we're going to go you
have to have all the sports cliches, we're going to work all the way to the end.
PAT: I suppose.
STU: We're not going to take no for an answer.
PAT: But she says part of the problem is they just, they haven't gotten credit
for all the good they've done. They just haven't
STU: It's a big problem.
PELOSI: All those forces at work are pouring millions and millions of dollars
into the media and now into the campaigns to mischaracterize everything that we
did. So that's that. It's up to us to go out there under confident our members,
they know why they voted for what they did, they believe in it.
PAT: Really?
PELOSI: They'll convey that to their constituents. But you're right, we haven't
really gotten the credit for what we have done, but we will take it to the
voters and our Democratic majority to follow through on all of that.
PAT: Okay. You know, they want
STU: Huh.
PAT: They want all the credit, for what I don't know, but they want all the
credit and none of the blame or responsibility. None. They will accept no blame
whatsoever, but they want credit for what lavished on them?
STU: For what?
PAT: For
STU: You, your own estimate said unemployment wouldn't go over 8%.
PAT: Oh, but now, now listen to what she's saying. You know, that was that's
what they said then.
STU: Sure.
PAT: If we don't do this, unemployment could, you know, could hit 9%.
STU: Could hit 9%, uh huh.
PAT: But if we do do it, it won't go above 8.
PELOSI: And I think the results are what people should be looked toward. Fact is
there's 9% unemployment in our country.
PAT: Yes.
PELOSI: And we were in a very deep ditch. If we hadn't taken actions that we did
with the Recovery Act, well, that saved 3.6 million, created or saved 3.6
million jobs.
PAT: Created, okay, created or saved.
STU: I thought we had abandoned the created or saved thing. Wasn't that
PAT: Created or saved 3.6 million jobs.
STU: Why not just go with billion?
PAT: I know, why not.
STU: Saved 3.6 billion jobs.
PAT: It's just as dumb a figure.
STU: It's just as accurate. It's just as you might as well make up a number and
make it quabillion. Save 3.9 quabillion jobs because it means as much as what
you're saying in this speech.
PELOSI: Economists tell us that that plus other actions if we hadn't taken them,
we would have 8 1/2 million more people unemployed.
PAT: Oh.
PELOSI: We would have a 14 1/2% unemployment rate.
PAT: 14 1/2.
PELOSI: And a huge deficit. So we've got to advertise that. We've been busy
legislating
PAT: You do. You do.
PELOSI: working.
PAT: Oh, gosh. Oh, you've been busy.
PELOSI: We have to educate the public as to what the choice is as we go forward.
PAT: And again they haven't educated us. We're stupid. And look, if we'll buy
this hogwash that, had they not taken the actions they do, there would be 8 1/2
million unemployed.
STU: Yeah.
PAT: We are stupid, if we buy that.
STU: That's true. And you have to love her add on there which is if we didn't
take the actions we did plus other actions, well, if it was maybe, I don't know,
closing down 50,000 companies, I don't know what action that they didn't take
that made this happen, but it seems like they are just lumping stuff on top of
each other.
PAT: I don't know how they get away with this. You know, if you took this
action, unemployment wouldn't rise past 8%, now it's, well, if we hadn't have
taken this action, 8 1/2 million more people would be out of work.
STU: These numbers are
PAT: Well, you can't have that. You can't have it both ways. You can't say what
might have been, what could have been. You have no idea.
STU: Right. You had an idea before it happened. We have you on record before it
happened, and you said it wasn't going to go any higher than 8%. You said even
if we didn't pass the stimulus, it wouldn't go any higher than 9%. We have the
graphs. We have your lead economic advisor laying this out, a point by point on
a graph. And look at what they're talking about now. You know, the average
unemployment rate of the entire Bush administration was 5.3%.
PAT: Yeah, yeah. 5.3.
STU: The average projected by Obama, the average unemployment of the Obama
administration, if it lasts two terms, I always let's not even entertain that
possibility, but if it lasts two terms, you're talking about even if all the
stuff goes right, they are talking about an average of 9. It's almost double
what Bush was. Remember what they were saying about Bush. They were saying he
was the worst president since Herbert Hoover.
PAT: Well, he's the one that drove us in the ditch.
STU: He's the one that drove us into the ditch. And they have all their policies
that they say are going to get us back in recovery, can't even get an average of
what they said the worst was going to be if they passed their plans.
PAT: And we'll tell you more about the ditch analogy coming up, too.
STU: Oh, the ditch.
PAT: Pat Gray and Stu Burguiere. Glenn's on his way here on the Glenn Beck
program.
