Did Dick Morris really deliberately mislead voters on the potential Romney victory?

November 14, 2012

Writer

I was wrong about the election big‑time, big‑time wrong about the election. I'm always wrong on politics. You shouldn't listen to me on politics. I don't get it. Quite honestly that's Rush's bag, that's Sean's bag. I can't tell you what to do on politics. I don't know why. I always feel good about my predictions and they're always wrong. And as I said last hour, I know about as much on politics as I do on salads. Not a lot. However, revolutionaries and things that are over the horizon I'm pretty darn good on. Knowing dirtbags, pretty good. I'm a trusting guy, believe it or not. I generally look for the good in people and that's what I generally see first, the good in people. And then I'm disappointed.

I want to talk to you about the truth and if it even matters in America anymore. For a lot of people it doesn't matter. They will say it matters but they don't want to look into it. They've lost their ability to think critically and to weigh things themselves. They will just be spoon‑fed something. That's the thing that anybody who's ‑‑ you know, I would like to invite members of the media to go ahead and do my job for a day. You do talk radio. I don't ‑‑ television, please. Television you sit in a big empty box by yourself surrounded by people who are producers who may agree or disagree with you but that's pretty much it. Talk radio, you have to face the music. Talk radio you're one on one: I'm talking to you, you're talking to me. You call me, write me, and I have to face the music. And I have to do it for three hours a day and I have to defend myself for three hours a day. I have to talk off the top of my head. I'm not reading a TelePrompTer. I'm telling you what I think. It's, this is the hardest job in all of media. Bar none. Quite honestly if I wanted to make my life a lot easier, I would quit radio. Because this is the hardest job. And I believe this is the hardest job not just that I do but in all of media. It's very difficult.

And the reason why it's difficult is because you cannot lie for three hours a day. You are who you are. And people see it. People see it. But you can lie in sound bites. But do people care about the truth? Or are we just spoon‑fed things?

For instance, do I just spoon‑feed you your opinions? If I do, please don't ever call yourself a fan of mine. I want you to think for yourself. I want you to see what I see and then say, "Well, I agree with that or I "I disagree with that" or "I don't know if that's even true. That can't be true." And you go and you research it yourself.

When I miss, I miss honestly. Now, I want you to listen to this whole monologue because I want you to understand what I'm saying about Dick Morris. Dick Morris as you probably know, he predicted pretty much the same thing that I predicted, but he was wrong. I was wrong. But I was wrong, and I believed it.

Last night I read a story on Politico that when Morris was asked about this, he told, he told the truth about why he predicted a Romney landslide. And I read it yesterday afternoon on the way home and I was ‑‑ it was disturbing. Stu and I were on the phone immediately, look at this. Look at this. And I gave him a long list of things that I said, I have to ‑‑ we have to talk to the American people about this. Moore said according to Politico that he only predicted a landslide because he wanted to help Romney.

There was a period of time when the Romney campaign was falling apart, people were not optimistic, nobody thought there was a chance of victory, and I felt that it was my duty at that point to go out and say what I said... - Dick Morris

Got it? That's shocking. He thought it was his duty to go out and say what he said because people didn't believe that Romney could win. I'm reading the story from Politico and I cannot believe it. He just wanted to help Romney? It's one thing to be wrong. It's another thing to knowingly lie to your audience. It's another thing ‑‑ that is the opposite of TheBlaze. The truth has no agenda. I thought it was my duty to say these things. Stay with me to the end of this monologue.

Now this is not the first time that I've seen major media figures admit that they will not tell the truth to their own audiences. I was told by a very well known and respected financial expert that he would not talk to me about financial collapse because, quote, it would make it more likely, even though he believed much of the stuff that I said was going to happen, he said we had a responsibility to never have that conversation on the air. I said, well, what happens if it does? You're telling people that it's okay, that everything's going to be all right, they won't be prepared. "Yes, but if we have that conversation, because we have credibility, then it's more likely that it will happen." Well, what are you talking about? Are you preparing? Are you bat nipping down the hatches? Are you being more cautious? Well, of course. Oh, but you want to go on the air and tell everybody, don't worry. We've seen this before.

I had another executive tell me that despite the fact that we all knew that what I was saying was true, quote: We have a responsibility to not tell the American people the truth. A responsibility to not tell the truth? Man, I'm ‑‑ I'm sorry. I seem to recall, I was told by somebody else that I have a responsibility to not lie. How was that worded to me? I think it was ‑‑ oh, yeah. Quote: Thou shalt not bear false witness. Thou shalt not lie. I don't care how big of an executive you are. I can guarantee the guy who wrote those ten safety tips has a bigger title than you do. Another big media mogul said to me, "Glenn, please. Let's stop playing this game. We both love the Constitution but we both know that sometimes you have to do what you have to do, end quote. No. What you have to do at all times is tell the truth. Trust your audience. Trust the American people to have some intelligence. Stop treating them like imbiciles because you're creating imbiciles. And loving the Constitution means always working to strengthen and honor the Constitution. Look, we all honor our marriage certificate, but sometimes guys do what they have to do. It strengthens the marriage." No, it doesn't.

So when I'm ‑‑ I'm thinking about all these things when I'm first reading the Politico. The latest example from Dick Morris, I read that quote and I thought to myself, "We're all wrong sometimes," and I can handle him being wrong. But what he's telling me here is that he knowingly lied to make me feel better and to help Romney. Thank God this guy's not an oncologist. We'd all be dead of cancer. We cannot tolerate this anymore. We must be able to trust the news, which brings me to my last point. Where I really stand on Dick Morris.

Again, here's the clip from Politico that we played a minute ago.

There was a period of time when the Romney campaign was falling apart, people were not optimistic, nobody thought there was a chance of victory. And I felt that it was my duty at that point to go out and say what I said.

That's what the Politico ran. But listen to what the Politico didn't run immediately before and immediately after when we started to do our homework, we didn't take it from the Politico, just like you shouldn't take it just from me. You should go back and look because apparently you can't trust anybody. Listen to what Dick Morris actually said.

I called it as I saw it from the polling, and I did the best I could - and I also worked very hard for Romney. ... I spoke about what I believed, and I think that there was a period of time when the Romney campaign was falling apart, people were not optimistic, nobody thought there was a chance of victory. And I felt that it was my duty at that point to go out and say what I said. And at the time that I said it, I believe I was right. - Dick Morris, full quote

And at the time I said it, I believed I was right. There is no scandal here. Dick Morris is not lying to you. Dick Morris does not need, nor probably does he want me depending him. But what Politico did is absolutely inexcusable. You didn't have to take homework, you didn't have to stitch three speeches together. He said it before and he said it immediately after. You had to intentionally go in and try to - you literally razor blade everything else out. You had to go in and tightly edit to be able to make him sound like he was saying something he wasn't saying.

Yesterday I called my business partner Chris Balfe who works for me and he runs ‑‑ he's my Roy Disney. He's the guy who is building the company. Walt had the ideas, but it was Roy that knew how to build the company. And I called him up and I said, how are you doing? He's up in New York. And he said, Glenn, I'm pushing the biggest damn rock up a hill I've ever tried to pull ‑‑ push. I said, we'll make it. He said, I know. What you've given me a task to do is you've said take a five‑year plan and collapse it to a one‑year plan. I don't know how to do that, Glenn. I know we could make it in five years and we're going to get to the end of this next year and we're going to say, damn it, we did it again. He said, but right now it's a heavy rock. I know. I know.

The reason why I've asked him to push that rock up, the reason why I've been asking you for your help and your tolerance and quite honestly the tolerance of talk radio stations is I believe this country is in real trouble and we're in trouble because the truth is not being reported. It's important. What you do every day is important. Your word is important. What you look into yourself is important.

You know there's a lot of ‑‑ there's a lot of program directors and a lot of people in the media and all over that think, "Oh, well, you know what? It's entertainment and we're here for ratings, we're here for money." The hell we are. The hell we are. If there isn't a reason for us to live at this time right now, if you don't understand what's happening to freedom right now, if you don't know what's happening in our country, "Oh, well, it's always been this way," I'm sorry. It hasn't been. I'm sorry. It hasn't been. Tonight I'm going to show you how it all ends. Tonight at 5:00 on TheBlaze I'll show you how it all ends and I'll show it to you with history in an episode you won't soon forget. 5:00 tonight.

We do these things because we believe in them. If you don't, that's fine. You can listen to us for the laughs or entertainment or whatever. That's fine. But we believe in it. And there are too many people in this industry that don't believe in it. They don't care. They're lazy, they're jaded. I don't know what it is. I'll just tell you this: TheBlaze wouldn't have half the success it's had so far if the media didn't hand‑deliver so many opportunities to show how easy it is to win when the truth is told. It's not that hard. The media is destroying itself and they are destroying our country and our children's future at the same time. You cannot exist as a free people if you cannot reason for yourself. You cannot exist as a free people if you don't know how to critically think. You cannot exist as a free people if you have a corrupt press. You cannot. It doesn't work.

The media is destroying itself on all fronts. It's on fire. But that's why this is called TheBlaze. It's a purifying fire. Stand in the flames of the truth. It will purify. And what is real will stand. What is not will burn itself out. We're happy to pick up the smoldering pieces and dust them off, after they've been purified and put them all back together. I know I'm wrong on politics. I'm not wrong on the direction of many things.

The Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Glenn's Show Prep