Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

EXCLUSIVE: Cruz Leaves the Door Open to Unsuspending His Campaign

May 10, 2016
Jon Boldt

Writer

So you're sayin' there's a chance!

Ted Cruz called in to the The Glenn Beck Program on Tuesday, giving Glenn and the crew a much-needed sliver of optimism for election coverage this evening. Co-host Pat Gray couldn't help but toss out a Hail Mary to the former presidential candidate.

"Ted, are you leaving the door open to . . . if Nebraska were to somehow, miraculously choose you tonight, is there . . . I mean, if that happened, would you consider getting back in the race?" Pat asked.

Cruz's response even caught both Pat and Glenn by surprise.

"Well, I am not holding my breath," Cruz said. "My assumption is that that will not happen. But, listen, let's be very clear: If there is a path to victory . . . we launched this campaign intending to win. The reason we suspended the race last week, it was Indiana's loss. I didn't see a viable path to victory. If that changes, we will certainly respond accordingly."

Pat's joy couldn't be contained as he gave Cruz supporters a call to action.

"Right. I don't know about you, Nebraska, but I take that as a, 'Yes!' Get to the polls and vote for Ted Cruz," Pat exclaimed.

"Yes! I take that as a big 'Yes,'" Glenn said. "That's interesting, Ted. That's interesting. That's very interesting."

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: Ted Cruz is on with us now. Hello, Ted, how are you? Are you there, Ted?

TED: I am. It's great to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: Good to be with you. How are you feeling?

TED: You know, I am feeling great. Obviously, the election results were not what we had hoped for.

GLENN: Yeah.

TED: But I'll tell you, Heidi and I feel incredibly privileged to have had the chance to make this run, to be part of what was just an incredible grassroots movement.

And, you know, not a day goes by that we are not thankful for the men and women all across this country that we had the opportunity to meet, and they're just patriots fighting for this country. And that was inspirational. We came up short in this election. I would have preferred it otherwise.

PAT: Me too.

TED: But the movement still continues. And that's what gives me encouragement.

GLENN: Let's talk about that in two ways: First of all, can a conservative win happen with the media the way it is today? Facebook -- we just found out a couple days ago, Facebook -- like, for instance, dropped my speech from CPAC, dropped your speech from CPAC. They were manipulating what was trending if you were a conservative, especially one that was for Ted Cruz.

TED: Sure.

GLENN: You know how Fox behaved. How can someone like you win when the media is the way it is? Can you?

TED: Well, you can. Now, this election will be studied for the role of the media, and in particular, network executives, that they made in terms of promoting the candidate that they had chosen they wanted to win. You know, it's now -- you know, for example, Trump has received now over $3 billion in free airtime.

GLENN: Yeah.

TED: Strikingly, over the last 30 days, he had $500 billion in free airtime, 90 percent of which was positive. To put that in perspective, in the entire 13 months of the campaign, the aggregate coverage of my campaign was about 500 billion dollars' worth.

GLENN: You mean million.

TED: He got that in 30 days, and 90 percent of his was positive.

And that has a dramatic impact on the polls, when every network becomes effectively the super PAC for the candidate they want to win the nomination. And we're about to see that same ferocious fury now turn against Donald in an effort to elect Hillary. And there's no doubt we need to think hard about, what is the role of a handful of executives in manipulating and trying to deceive the voters? Because I think it's a very dangerous dynamic that we have right now.

GLENN: So, Ted, we have only about eight minutes. I know you're on a tight schedule, and we're on the network schedule. So I want to get some pretty important questions out.

There are people now -- we are getting hammered by two -- by two fronts. One, people saying, "You've got to convince Ted to run third party." And I keep saying, "I don't think he would do that." The other is, "You've got to support Donald Trump." And we can't do that.

What do the people that were for you, what do you think that we should do? What is your recommendation? And can you support Donald Trump?

TED: Well, listen, this is a choice every voter is going to have to make. And I would note, it's not a choice that we as the voters have to make today. The Republican convention isn't for another two and a half months. The election isn't for another six months.

You and I both want to support a conservative. We want to support someone who will get the burden of Washington off of small businesses and bring back jobs and economic growth. We want to support someone who will defend the Constitution, defend the Bill of Rights, religious liberty, the Second Amendment. We want to defend someone who will stand by our friends and allies, including especially the nation of Israel, and we want to defend someone who will be a strong, serious commander-in-chief.

More broadly than that, Glenn, you and I both want a president we can trust, a president we can trust with power, who demonstrates a temperament not to abuse that power. That's what elections are about.

The voters in the primary have seemed to have made a choice. And we'll see what happens as the months go forward. But I think we need to watch and see what the candidates say and do.

PAT: Now, you say we need to watch and see. Ted, are you leaving the door open to -- if Nebraska were to somehow --

GLENN: It's not going to happen.

PAT: -- miraculously choose you tonight.

GLENN: Pat's going for the hail Mary.

PAT: Is there -- I mean, if that happened, would you consider getting back in the race?

(chuckling)

TED: Well, I am not holding my breath. My assumption is that that will not happen.

But, listen, let's be very clear: If there is a path to victory -- we launched this campaign intending to win. The reason we suspended the race last week, it was Indiana's loss. I didn't see a viable path to victory. If that changes, we will certainly respond accordingly.

PAT: Right. I don't know about you, Nebraska, but I take that as a yes!

GLENN: Yes! I take that as a big yes.

PAT: Get to the polls and vote for Ted Cruz.

GLENN: Now, I want you to know, the minute you would unsuspend your campaign, John Kasich would do the exact same thing.

PAT: I bet he would. I bet he would.

JEFFY: I bet he would too.

GLENN: I bet he would.

That's interesting, Ted. That's interesting. That's very interesting.

(laughter)

PAT: That's very, very interesting.

GLENN: Yeah, very interesting.

PAT: I like that.

GLENN: Can I ask you --

TED: You know, I will say, Glenn, a lot of folks in the media are trying to spin this election results as the death of the conservative movement. And that's a media narrative that the media loves. But also, a lot of the Washington establishment loves.

GLENN: Yeah.

TED: And I got to tell you, I think it's complete nonsense. I think the conservative movement remains strong and vibrant. I think the conservative movement unfortunately was divided. That doesn't mean it is -- it lacks its potency, but it is true that when conservatives are divided, we are far less effective. And there are a lot of reasons for that.

GLENN: So that brings us to what the G.O.P. is saying.

Two weeks ago, Ted, Reince Priebus had -- wanted to spend the day with us. And spend the day, do television, do radio, and then have some conversations off air because he was courting our listeners. Since you dropped out, the guy won't even return our phone calls. This is the week it was supposed to happen. He was going to do Hannity, us, and Rush Limbaugh. Yesterday was Hannity. Now he's saying, "We never planned on coming down." I mean, it's incredible what happened.

And so how do we get behind a group of people who don't have any interest in asking conservatives for their vote?

TED: Well, I -- I hope that proves not the case. And, you know, from my perspective, this fight was about a lot more than one campaign or one candidate. This fight is about principles that are eternal, the free market principles that built America that allowed millions of small businesses to lift hundreds of millions out of poverty and into prosperity. Those principles are as true today as they were every day of our country's history. The constitutional liberties and the Bill of Rights that protect our God-given rights from being violated by the federal government, those rights are true and as valid today as they have been throughout history.

And so the movement continues -- what my energy is directed at, what my focus is directed at is to continue to strengthen and speak for that movement, to all of the grassroots activists, the over 7 million people across the country who voted for me, allowing us to win 12 states across the country. This fight will continue because the country is worth it.

And, you know, whether those in Washington will listen in the short-term, that will be their choice. But I think the answer, the only force strong enough to change the path we're on is the grassroots. And so my energy and focus is going to remain where it always has been, working to listen to the people and to fight for the people, each and every day.

STU: Ted, looking back at Barack Obama in 2008, he comes along. He has this big victory. Everyone predicts the end of the Republican Party, the end of the conservative movement. It's just going to be a regional party from now on.

Two years later, you have the Tea Party wave election. So that's proved wrong. And it wasn't that Americans seemingly turned towards progressivism, they just really seemed to like Barack Obama. He was this guy who hit -- who hit the right tones at the right time somehow. I didn't see it. But obviously America did at some level. Do you see that the same way with Donald Trump, in that it's not necessarily that the Republican Party is turning away from conservatism. They just see this guy as the right personality for this time.

TED: Well, listen, there's no doubt about the power of celebrity. And by any measure, Donald Trump is a phenomenon. And it has been a phenomenon heavily fueled by media executives who have run him 24/7.

GLENN: So --

TED: And that's -- that is one of a kind.

GLENN: So wait, wait, wait, Ted. Is it? Or has the Democratic Party that has the whole stable of celebrities looked at that and said, "Well then, why don't we go for a Will Smith/Angelina Jolie ticket?"

TED: Look, there is -- that is entirely possible. You know, one of the disturbing things about this election -- and there are many -- is that it opens the door potentially for what comes next. And what comes next is not likely to be sound, stable leaders with good judgment and the understanding of the problems facing this country, our economy, and the challenges and threats facing us across the world.

You know, that's -- you know, I'm still a little bit old-fashioned in that I think we ought to be able to look up to our president. We ought to be able to be proud if our kids want to be like the president. And that's -- that's a test that, you know, many presidents from JFK to FDR to Ronald Reagan, there were millions of kids who wanted to be like those presidents. And their presidents were proud that that was the model that they were emulating. I sure hope that we don't move away from that to a system where you would be less than proud if your kids said they wanted to be like the president.

GLENN: So, Ted, I only have two minutes left. When Marco Rubio left, he said he had a regret.

A, do you have any regret? And, B, where are you going next?

TED: Well, look, my biggest regret is that we weren't able to accomplish the task and that we let down the millions of grassroots activists across the country who fought so hard.

Heidi and I and the girls, we poured everything into it we've got. But we weren't able to get it done. And, you know, I wish we hadn't disappointed so many incredible people across the country. But, you know, where do I go next? I'm actually driving to the airport right now, flying to Washington to go back to the Senate and the very same principles that I was fighting for to execute from the White House: Jobs, freedom, security.

PAT: They're going to be happy to see you.

GLENN: Yeah, they're going to love to see you.

TED: Those are my priorities in the Senate.

GLENN: Is there a possibility of a third party in the future of people that think like you?

TED: You know, I don't think that's very likely, but it's always talked about. I don't know that it's something that's likely to happen.

What I do think is imperative is that we actually get the job done: And the job is getting the burden of Washington off of small businesses so that we have wages going up again, we have jobs coming back to America, we have people having a chance again at the American dream. I mean, we are trapped in a stagnation, and people are hurting.

And, you know, I'm very dismayed that the odds are increasing that we simply keep going down the same road, we don't fix those problems, and people end up hurting even more.

And that's where my focus is going to be, is fighting for small businesses, fighting for the American worker, to get Washington off your back. And I believe we're going to accomplish that. But it just may take more time.

GLENN: Ted, great to talk to you. We'll talk to you again, I'm sure, when you're in Washington. And what you're saying is, if Nebraska goes the right way, there's still a chance.

STU: There's a chance!

GLENN: He's just saying there's a chance.

All right. Thanks a lot, Ted. I appreciate it.

TED: Thank you, gentlemen.

Featured Image: Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) speaks during a campaign rally at the Indiana State Fairgrounds on May 2, 2016 in Indianapolis, Indiana. Cruz continues to campaign leading up to the state of Indiana's primary day on Tuesday. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Top THREE reasons we NEED the Panama Canal

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Is Trump seriously planning a military conquest of the Panama Canal?

In the weeks leading up to the inauguration, Donald Trump launched the Panama Canal into the national spotlight. The canal is one of the most important passages in the world, and its continued operation has been critical for both the U.S. military and economy since its construction.

Since America relinquished sovereignty of the canal, China has asserted its authority in the region. The Chinese Communist Party has been growing its influence in Panama and neighboring Latin American countries, convincing them to join their "Belt and Road Initiative," an effort to poise China as the main economic power in developing nations across the world. Panama in particular is quickly becoming a Chinese puppet state. There are currently over 200,000 Chinese living in Panama, a Chinese company runs two of the canal's five major ports, and another Chinese company provides telecommunication service for a large portion of the canal. The government of Panama has even gone as far as cutting diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

It's clear that the Panama Canal is under serious threat of falling into Chinese hands, but President Trump doesn't intend to let them move in. Here are the top three reasons we need the Panama Canal:

1. The canal was built by the U.S.

Hulton Archive / Stringer | Getty Images

Without the United States, neither Panama nor the Panama Canal would exist. In 1903, after Colombia refused to allow the U.S. to build a canal across the isthmus of Panama, President Teddy Roosevelt devised a controversial plan. He supported a Panamanian independence movement, which swiftly overthrew the local Colombian government. Meanwhile, he stationed a U.S. warship off the coast, preventing Colombia from sending military forces to retake Panama.

The moment Panama declared its independence, the U.S. recognized it and struck a deal with the new government: the U.S. would control the Canal Zone, while Panama would receive $10 million and an annual payment of $250,000. Construction of the canal took over a decade, cost $375 million, and resulted in thousands of American casualties, making it the most expensive U.S. construction project of its time.

Fast forward to 1964 when tensions between the U.S. and Panama over the canal erupted into a riot. President Lyndon B. Johnson decided it was time to transfer control of the canal to Panama. However, this proved more complicated than expected. In 1968, General Omar Torrijos, a known ally of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, seized control of Panama in a coup. Negotiations over the Canal stalled, as many Americans opposed giving such an important asset to a controversial figure. It wasn’t until 1999, following the deployment of 27,000 U.S. troops to facilitate yet another change in power, that the Canal was officially handed over to Panama.

2. The canal is vital for the U.S. economy

IVAN PISARENKO / Contributor | Getty Images

The U.S. relies heavily on the Panama Canal for commercial shipping. Between 13 and 14 thousand ships use the Panama Canal every year, which is roughly 40 percent of the global cargo ship traffic. Additionally, 72 percent of ships traversing the canal are either heading toward or leaving a U.S. port.

The time ships save using the Panama Canal reduces shipping costs massively. For example, when the canal first opened in 1922, it was estimated that a ship’s journey from Oregon to the UK, was shortened by 42 percent, reducing costs by 31 percent. If the Panama Canal was blocked or destroyed, or if American merchant vessels were denied passage, the effects on the U.S. economy would be tremendous.

3. The canal is a key defense point for the U.S. military

Historical / Contributor | Getty Images

Similarly, the canal is key to the U.S. military and national security. The canal shaves off approximately 8,000 miles of the voyage between the Pacific and the Atlantic. If U.S. Navy ships were denied access in a time of crisis, the extra time required to bypass the canal would be disastrous. Conversely, if the U.S. can keep the Panama Canal from being used by foreign aggressors, it would provide a massive advantage in future conflicts.

A foreign enemy could easily exploit the canal's current vulnerability. This was proven in 2021 when a cargo ship accidentally blocked the Suez Canal for a week, paralyzing global trade. Imagine China intentionally sabotaging the Panama Canal, considering it controls ports on both ends, owns a bridge that spans the Canal, provides its telecom services, and has the second-largest fleet of ships using the route.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.