tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News March 16, 2016 1:00pm-2:01pm PDT
credited with helping nashville earn its music city nickname after country music found its new home 42 years ago today. when news breaks out, we'll break in because breaking news changes everyone. time for "your world with neil cavuto." all right, here is the news we know. the federal reserve has met and from janet yellen we got the word. don't expect a lot of rate hikes this year. don't expect many at all. the stock guys loved that. the dow racing ahead nearly 80 points. so we kind of know what's going on there. now about the things we don't know. donald trump. he is not going to win this or risk this without a fight. listen up. >> if they play games, if they say, well, he's 50 votes short and therefore he's not getting
it and we're going to give it to somebody that got thrown out of the primary in the second week, you're going to have a problem. there's going to be a tremendous problem, i think. i think you would have riots. i'm representing a tremendous -- many, many millions of people. if you disenfranchise those people and you say, well, i'm sorry, but you're 100 votes short, even though the next one is 500 votes short, i think you would have problems like you've never seen before. i think bad things would happen, i believe that. >> all right. so that's where we stand right now. the latest tally of delegates is donald trump is well on his way, it would seem to the republican nomination. he's right now in need of 564 more delegates. there are 1,079 delegates remaining. so he is in the driver's seat, but what he seems to be intimating there, what if he is
just short, is someone going to take that from him? and if they do, is that going to be greeted favorably? john roberts in miami with the latest. hey, john. >> reporter: neil, good afternoon to you. you wanted this, neil. you've been talking about this for how long, a contested convention? there's a growing likelihood that you may get it and donald trump saying, you know, doesn't matter what the rules are. the rules are you've got to get 1237 delegates to be the nominee outright. if you don't, it goes to the vote then many of the delegates become unbound after the first vote. donald trump saying hey, if i got 1150 or 1200 delegates and the next person is 500 behind me, are you going to deny me that opportunity? that's what the rules state at this point. now, neil, you have john boehner coming forward to say, hey, you know, i know that i endorsed john kasich, but if nobody wins on the first ballot, it should
be open to anybody, and my guy could be paul ryan. speaking against that, at least at present, is this thing called rule 40-b, which means you have to have a majority of delegates in eight states to be considered for the nomination. but the rules committee can write whatever rule it wants heading into the convention. that rule was written in 2012 to limit ron paul's visibility at the republican convention. if nobody has 1237 going into the convention, the rules committee says it doesn't matter if you have any delegates at all, that would open the door for anybody to have their name put into nomination. if that happens, neil, i can expect that -- remember at the end of the first "star wars" movie where the death star went -- i'm not going to compare the republican party to the death star, but that's the type of explosion you're likely to see. >> that culture reference is what makes you such a favorite
out here. so could we be -- in cleveland, again, donald trump is saying this is chicago last week. does it get to that kind of thing? these are his supporters. i don't know. but it raises serious questions, that donald trump is not instigating it himself, he's talking about supporters who would be very angry if it amounted to them getting close with no cigar. larry, the argument is, you've got to get half those available delegates, plus one. it would be 1,237 in the case of the republicans. aren't the rules the rules? if he's short, he is short. or, or, does he have a point to say, hey, if i have a big enough lead and i'm way ahead of the other guy, it is mine to lose. >> both things you just said, neil, are incredibly correct. both of them are correct. that's the dilemma for the
republican party. they're going to have to try, to the extent that they can plan for this, to allow for the possibility that somebody who doesn't have 1237 but is close, meaning donald trump, does get the nomination, one way or the other. look, donald trump is saying that there will be, you know, riots in the streets. there could be a riot in the convention hall, i don't know. he's probably right, given what we've seen so far. i don't think the trump voters would take this lying down. i don't think he ought to be the one saying it. >> here's the math as i see it right now. he's got 673 delegates, so he is at this juncture 564 shy of what he'll need. there are 1,079 delegates remaining, so he would have to get a little over half of that to close that gap and getclevels to, i assume make this a moot
point. how likely is that? >> well, he's likely to get close. and it's possible that he actually gets to the magic number. but i would say the probability is he gets close but doesn't go over. that's the way it looks today. look, neil, a lot of interesting things can happen with these delegates, and john just mentioned to us, the rules committee. what the rules committee can do, the new rules they could pass. all kinds of things can be done. but to the extent this looks like a shenanigan under way by the elites, by the powers that be in the party, then i think the republicans are looking at a heads you lose, tails you lose situation. whether they nominate trump or not, they're setting themselves up for an awful fall. >> let me ask you about the role marco rubio might play, not so much now as a candidate, but his
169 or so delegates, what are the rules with those delegates? what if he teamed up with ted cruz and said all right, i want you to go to him. what are the rules with a candidate who has already taken himself out of the race? >> i've asked that question to several people and gotten three different answers. but as i understand it, neil, he's not allowed to direct them to vote for someone else. he can suggest it. he can say i'm personally going to support x. and then it's up to those delegates to decide what to do as of the second ballot. assuming they keep the rule about being pledged on the first ballot. there are members of the republican national committee opposed to the idea of pledging at all, even on the first ballot. i mean, this is going to be fascinating. i think you're going to get your wish in more ways than one. you may live to regret it. >> that was pre-trump coming into the race when so many were in the race. he just iced it when he joined,
that the math would be no one getting that magic number. but if it came to that, you could have people ticked off him getting the nomination, his people ticked off at someone else getting the nomination. it's like the hatfields and mccoys here. >> that's correct. we now know to blame you because you admitted this publicly. >> do i get ice cream on that or did i miss my opportunity? >> you probably did, but i have forgotten it. >> i know ben and jerry personally. professor, always good having you, my friend. all right. the president announced a replacement when he said it would be a fine replacement for antonin scalia. but republicans are saying it's dead on arrival. but when it came to this particular pick, that is not what one senator orrin hatch said about him some years back.
>> i believe mr. garland is a fine nominee. i know him personally. i know of his legal ability and integrity. i know of his honesty and accumen and he belongs on the court. >> so that was then. what has changed now? we talk to orrin hatch and democrat senator mark warner. you can use whipped topping made with hydrogenated oil... ...but real joyful moments are shared over the real cream in reddi-wip. ♪ reddi-wip. (flourish spray noise) share the joy. share the joy.
to capture investing ideas that instantly gives you stock prices, earnings, and dividends... an equity summary score that consolidates the stock ratings of top analysts into a single score... and $7.95 online u.s. equity trades, lower than td ameritrade, schwab, and e-trade, you realize the smartest investing idea isn't just what you invest in, but who you invest with. ♪
weinto a new american century. born with a hunger to fly and a passion to build something better. and what an amazing time it's been, decade after decade of innovation, inspiration and wonder. so, we say thank you america for a century of trust, for the privilege of flying higher and higher, together. ♪ all right. we've got a supreme court fight, even though both sides are not lo looking at until after the election. but first, to shannon bream in washington with the latest. shannon? >> reporter: neil, we finally have a name, but does judge
merrick garland have a chance? the 63-year-old is highly regarded, but with the gop vowing not to move forward on any nominee, some are questioning have garland would be willing to run this gauntlet. while introducing his pick today, a judge with two decades of experience, president obama said lawmakers should "play it straight with this nomination." >> it is tempting to make this confirmation process simply an extension of our divided politics. the squabbling that's going on in the news every day. but to go down that path would be wrong. it would be a betrayal of our best traditions. and a betrayal of the vision of our founding documents. >> reporter: but from the campaign trail to the senate floor, gop senators stood firm in their opposition to moving forward, saying it's not about the nominee but the will of the
people and pointing the finger of blame back at the president. >> it seems clear that president obama made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed, but in order to politicize it for purposes of the election. >> reporter: by the way, mcconnell's office said he did speak with judge garland this afternoon, saying he's not meeting with him person but that he wished him well. a growing number of gop senators say they are open to having a conversation with garland. some insisting it would be simply to explain why they cannot support moving forward with his nomination. neil? >> shannon, thank you very much. senator orrin hatch was meeting with me earlier today on fox business network. he had some thoughts on some rather sensitive issues that came up. >> this is a serious thing. it ought to be put off out of
this toxic arena right now and put off until after the election. and then whoef is president can make that determination. and that's fair to both sides. >> what if it is hillary clinton or bernie sanders who become president, do you think republicans would rue the day that they missed a chance at a moderate pick for the court? because either one of those folks would probably pick someone a little bit more to the left. >> this is the most important issue in this presidential campaign, and a big reason why people should vote for the republican nominee, whoever that may be. because the next president that's going to probably have somewhere between three and four judicial picks on the supreme court and they could -- that could turn the whole constitution around in accordance with these activist democrat judges that just don't seem to worry about too much what the constitution says. >> senator, i understand what you're saying, sir, and i appreciate it's a crazy election
year and all. but by that reasoning, nothing would ever get done in an election year, because it's a toxic environment. and true to form, nothing ever really does get done on budget matters, on legislative matters. why should republicans play that game that is played out in election years and say we're going to be different? we're going to weigh the president's choices, come up with budgets, come up with legislation, do the find of stuff that cynics don't think we can. and if you don't like this nominee, vote it down. >> well, it isn't quite that simple. joe biden made it clear when he talked a year and a half before the election that we should not be picking nominees during a election year. >> why? >> because it's a toxic year, then it becomes a politicized institution -- >> it's always politicized,
senator. by that math, we just rule out the last year of any congress, of any senator, of any president of getting stuff done. you could send a signal, we're going to hold the hearings, we're going the vote him down. >> we're sending a powerful signal that once voting has started in a presidential election campaign, especially the toxic environment that we have today, we should not be bringing up the supreme court nomination. >> but you know, senator, how early these campaign years start. earlier and earlier. by that math, you could argue a year ago that you shouldn't have started that. it gets out of control. >> i'm talking about a presidential year. we all know the president is a lame duck president. there's a question whether a lame duck president, during a toxic year like this -- >> when does he become a lame
duck, senator? is it the last year? because that's a long time. >> when it comes to the supreme court, yes. because let me tell you something, especially this year, i've never seen such a toxic year as we have right now. these supreme court nominations shouldn't be great big battles every time a president picks somebody. and the president ought to be very careful to pick -- whoever the president is, that will do the job and not allow politics to take over. >> so you would subscribe to that if it's republican president that gets in, the last year he's in office, e submits a name, you as a republican, and a prominent at one at that, would tell him no, he can't consider it? >> i think we would. i've advised presidents not to do that. unfortunately, we haven't had any late situations where somebody has been put up other than justice kennedy.
that was after they had smeared -- >> nevertheless, it was in the final year of ronald reagan's presidency. >> but everybody just gave up. >> i understand that but there is precedent. >> but it wasn't a toxic year like this, nor was it a year where the people are all up in arms about everything. and frankly, that's what bothers me. i'm tired of the court being politicized. this is politicizing the court during -- >> in all fairness, senator, you played a part in politicizing it. maybe that wasn't your goal -- >> i don't think so. >> both parties do this, and i think it would be interesting to see a guy like you, who is widely respected, to say i've had enough of this nonsense. let's do this. >> i've had enough of the nonsense that's occurred in the past processes, and they occurred not in a presidential year where voting had already
started and half the voting is over. look, this is not the way to do supreme court nominations. frankly, it isn't the person. it isn't the person that we're against. it's the system that really doesn't work well. and it diminishes the court, it reduces the respect of the court. frankly, i don't want anything -- >> let me ask you this, senator. i know you're tight for time. but i want to get your sense that if hillary clinton is elected, if she were the nominee and elected in november, would republicans hurry back after the election for a vote on this guy, fearing that if it were her choice, it would be a much worse guy, politically in your eyes? >> well, i can't speak to that, because i don't know. but she would probably keep merrick garland right there.
but yeah, she's likely to put much more liberal people and much more activist people on the court. >> if that were the case and she's inclined to find someone even little bit more progressive than he, you would have to scramble to vote on him then, right? >> this is a good reason we should not elect hillary clinton or any other democrat. we need to elect a republican, whoever that republican may be. and if it's donald trump, i'm all for it. >> back and forth, back and forth. we have said on these supreme court matters, you know, this whole issue is nowhere in the top ten for american voters. do you know what is? do you know what the number one issue is? it's not the courts. guess what it is? i'll tell you after this. you owned your car for four years,
you named it brad. you loved brad. and then you totaled him. you two had been through everything together. two boyfriends, three jobs... you're like nothing can replace brad. then liberty mutual calls, and you break into your happy dance. if you sign up for better car replacement™, we'll pay for a car that's a model year newer with 15,000 fewer miles than your old one. see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.
you know, on "your world," we spare no expense in the latest technology to tell you what was the dominant theme in all the primary states yesterday. and as you can see, well, what do you think? economy and jobs, right? my point is, court or terror was nowhere near. economy, jobs, economy, jobs, that was the issue. that's what donald trummade don and hillary clinton a big winner last night. danielle, what do you make of that? because it was remarkable how consistent in state after state, and by the way in prior states as well, this has become the issue of the race. who is better prepared to look after me, my finances, my
economy, my very prospects for work? >> neil, i can't tell you which of the candidates would best look after the economy. i've heard a lot of promises being made, but i haven't heard a lot of how they might be able to pull some of these policies out of their hat. hillary clinton says everybody should have a middle wage working job in this country. but she has yet to be explicit about how she can make that happen. we've learned that the minimum wage implementation hasn't worked. look what happened to walmart. >> so i'm looking at donald trump, ohio not with standing and touche to government kasich for winning that state. you know, trade deals that trump was pounding that supposedly hurt, so there might be only so far that governor kasich can go after that. but having said that, the theme
again was economically how viable are we? how well are we doing? >> look, if you look at median incomes in this country, they haven't budged for nearly ten years, neil. the average voter knows this. they know that their situation hasn't gotten any better while the cost to rent an apartment or buy a home or go to the doctor or take a vacation, all those costs have continued to rise. >> you're right. one thing that trump said, i talked to a lot of people on and off the air last night, by the way, if you don't get fbn, danielle, you should demand it. but to a man or woman, the one issue is, the reason i like donald trump is, he's going to do something. he's going to make america great. when i point out, okay, what about the other more established government figures? they got us into this mess. maybe we need someone from outside to get us out of it. it's a good argument to make,
trying someone, something different. >> absolutely. it's not that the voters have the wrong ideas, that there needs to be drastic change. i worked at the federal reserve for nearly a decade. and most of the people in congress have left the heavy lifting to monetary policymakers who respect even elected officials. so the voters have every right to feel they've been abandoned in washington. i'm just not sure donald trump can be the next ronald reagan and get policies pushed through. >> danielle, thank you very much. in the meantime, you've heard all the republican leaders battling over the president's supreme court nominee, to a man they say the same thing, it's not the judge, it's not the guy the president picked. he seems like a fine-abled guy. it is the process and the timing of this, and that it's not a good time. the democratic senator who has a message for them. get over it. this little guy is about to make his first deposit. we'd like to open a savings account for him. yes yes. great
thanks to mom and dad and their safe driving bonus check from allstate. oh. look at this. safe driving bonus. are you a safe driver? lucky little fella. only allstate gives you two safe driving bonus checks a year for driving safe. see how much more an allstate agent can do for you. call 877-644-3100. like in most families, dad's always the last to know. that's why accident forgiveness was the first thing he asked for when he switched to allstate. michael james! middle name. not good. get accident forgiveness from allstate and keep your rates from going up just because of an accident. find out how a local allstate agent can help better protect your family. call one right now. and if you're a safe driver, you can save up to 45%. just a few more ways the good hands are doing more than ever before. see what the personal service of an allstate agent can do for you. call 877-644-3100.
when they thought they should westart saving for retirement.le then we asked some older people when they actually did start saving. this gap between when we should start saving and when we actually do is one of the reasons why too many of us aren't prepared for retirement. just start as early as you can. it's going to pay off in the future. if we all start saving a little more today, we'll all be better prepared tomorrow. prudential. bring your challenges. all right. it seems republicans and democrats are in agreement when it comes to certainly qualified potential supreme court justices, merrick garland is that, and then some.
number one, harvard, harvard law, very instrumental in getting behind the whole timothy mcveigh thing. everyone seems to say he has impeccable credentials. so it's not about the guy as much as the picking of the guy. you've already heard republicans say we don't even consider this until after the november election. they are sticking to that. senator mark warner from virginia says that is not the right way to do it. all right. so you know what they said, senator. that is hey, democrats play these kind of shenanigans with us. what do you say? >> neil, i mean, what part of the constitution says a president shouldn't appoint a supreme court justice in the last year of their term? i mean, this is pretty simple stuff. i'm generally pretty bipartisan. i acknowledge that both sides
make mistakes. but this one is pretty clear, do your job. the president nominated somebody. he's qualified. there's never been a nominee who hasn't at least received a hearing. if some of my republican colleagues want to vote against them, that's their constitutional obligation. but to not even hold a hearing, i mean, this is -- >> they're using, senator, something called a joe biden rule. that in the last year you don't even consider it. and i'm just telling you what they're saying. they're saying remember senator barack obama when he played these games. what i see is both sides playing games and i understand politics. but what happens now? >> let's look at the facts for a second, neil. on this one, i've seen the comment biden made and my understanding that was about somebody that might resign. it was much later in the year. >> do you honestly think that joe biden would have changed his
mind on that? >> i know that the constitution is clear. the presidential nominate, the senate shall advise and consent. there's none of this in terms of last year. >> i hear what you're saying, but they say the constitution provides for what they're doing here. they're advising and consenting saying we advised we're not going to take this up until after the election. >> hold a hearing. if they choose to vote against mr. garland, who seems to me to be pretty darn qualified, i'm looking forward to meeting him, then vote their conscience. but the idea that this is idea for what's going on in washington, you understand why people in both political parties are voting for outliers -- >> you know what i've noticed here, senator? there's something about the last year of a president's term, the last year of a congressional term.
i guess it's just accepted nothing will get done. nothing gets done on the budget, the republicans argue we can't take up a serious issue like that. i've heard democrats argue that. nothing gets done! >> you've been in business, i spent my career in business. do you know any other place where every fourth or eighth year you say okay, we're not going to do anything this year? >> i know, but both sides sort of cease and desist bridging a gap. reaching across the aisle is almost poison to talk that way. it is ridiculous. >> it is dysfunction on top of dysfunction and people are angry. i think you couldn't see the kind of vote for trump that you've seen if there wasn't that level of anger. so let's do what the constitution says.
the president nominated somebody. let's review them. if you want to vote against him, that's your constitutional right. >> senator, i agree with you on that. here's what worries me. i have two teenage boys, senator, and they go at each other, not all the time -- most of the time -- and i have to separate them. and it sounds like, well, they did that to us, and biden and senator obama. and i can remember back then, you should see what the republicans did to us when we were in the same situation, and i'm going nuts. let's say both parties were guilty of playing small politics. someone is going to have to rise above this and say this is stupid. while we move on this, and yea or nay on this, let's talk about the budget. but everything freezes. >> saying we've got to deal with
this encryption apple fbi issue, let's get experts to solve it. this is not a problem that will go away. it's why i've been series of issues -- >> but everything freezes. >> let's prove it wrong on this case at least as far as following the constitution. i understand why people are mad. i'm mad, too. and we've got to do better. >> yeah. are you going to be hillary clinton's vice president? >> i am supporting hillary clinton, but i think my value is to get some of these folks on both sides to sit down and work out these issues, particularly the budget. >> they like you a lot on the other side of the aisle. you would be a good bridge. would you entertain that? >> i'm going to entertain making the senate work in a better and more functional way.
>> i've never, in all the years have i done this, people handle that question just as deftly as you did. >> not my first rodeo. >> got you, senator. i appreciate it. all of a sudden now, we have donald trump revving up crowds. a lot of people are saying, is he the guy revving them up or is everyone targeting him? after this. ♪ ♪ he has a sharp wit. a winning smile. and no chance of getting an athletic scholarship. and that is why you invest. the best returns aren't just measured in dollars. td ameritrade. go, go, touchdown!, go...
♪ choir and harp music. this place, it's the best-kept secret in football since... hey, how did he get in here?! and with toe nail fungus! fight it! with jublia. jublia is a prescription medicine used to treat toenail fungus. use jublia as instructed by your doctor. now that's prime time. most common side effects include ingrown toenail, application site redness, itching, swelling, burning or stinging, blisters, and pain. you ready to fight it? ask your doctor if jublia is right for you. visit our website for savings on larger size. . this clean was like, pow!
it added this other level of clean to it. it just kinda like wiped everything clean. my teeth are glowing. they are so white. i actually really like the two steps. everytime i use this together it felt like leaving the dentist's office. crest hd, 6x cleaning, 6x whitening. i would switch to crest hd over what i was using before.
my lineage was the vecchios and zuccolis. through ancestry, through dna i found out that i was only 16% italian. he was 34% eastern european. so i went onto ancestry, soon learned that one of our ancestors we thought was italian was eastern european. this is my ancestor who i didn't know about. he looks a little bit like me, yes. ancestry has many paths to discovering your story. get started for free at ancestry.com all right. i don't have time, folks, to play the many, many bites to say we namay have a contested convention. but if the folks who love donald trump and say that any effort to remove him is not going to be
greeted favorably, and those who hate donald trump won't be greeted favorably, i thought i would get somebody in that never trump category, that would be katie pavlik and those who support donald trump, gina loudoun. gina, begin with you. he doesn't have the 1237, the delegates you need. he can crow about having a big lead, but he doesn't have a done deal. so what's wrong with make thing a multiple ballot deal? >> well, the problem is, first of all, the people are not going to sit down for this, neil. if it were any other candidate in any other year, and i would submit to those who are in the never trump camp, if it was their candidate, would they not be calling him the hands down winner? >> not unless he or she has the delegates to be the nominee, right? >> well, he's not there yet, but
he's closer than anyone else. he's far closer than anyone else. >> doesn't matter. >> katie, she makes a good point. he is close. 564, closer than any other candidate. >> al gore was also very close to winning the presidential election in 2000, and the rules don't apply there. so the fact is -- >> you're talking he didn't have all the electoral votes. it's normally a lot of candidates get to the convention without the majority of delegates in hand, but such a big lead that it's without argument. do you think -- go ahead. >> donald trump's obligation and the obligation of any other candidate who is still in this race, john kasich or ted cruz, if they want to be crowned the nominee, they have to reach the 1237 threshold. none of the candidates have done that. therefore, if none of them do it until we get to convention, that's where we're going do it.
there's a reason we set up a contested convention, to make sure this is done properly. donald trump doesn't want to go to a contested convention, because he understands there's a majority opposition to him rather than majority support. >> well, i don't know. [ overlapping speakers ] >> i could see the argument that gina makes, if he has a big enough lead. here is where i question it. it's not anyone's until someone crosses that threshold. but what is it really close and after the first ballot it hasn't happened, after the second ballot, it hasn't happened. then we know from multiple ballots, they pick an outside guy. but close is not enough. >> i'm okay with the process as long as it is the process by law, neil. where i have a problem with what the never trump people are saying, they're willing to go third party at this point.
and i don't know about you, but i can do that math. the never trump plus third party equals hillary, plain and simple. i would ask the never-trump people to remind themselves that they're calling trump and his supporters the crazy ones. but they are the ones at this point that they should consider they have aligned themselves with george soros, the lame stream media, the gop establishment, and even hillary at this point. >> gina, let me ask you real quickly -- one second, katie. if it looks like ted cruz starts running away with it, starts picking up all these other states, gets to a prohibitive lead and is on the cusp of getting to 1237 and it's donald trump who is trailing by a couple hundred delegates, would you feel that it's ted cruz's nomination? >> are you talking to me? >> yeah! >> absolutely. absolutely. i think as long as it goes by
the process. i just don't want what the voters want to be undermined. >> that was the point i made in the first segment is every n nominee has an obligation to get to 1237. if not, we go to convention. george soros invested in trump tower. i mean, he has actually done business with donald trump. you want to talk about donald trump not being in bed with the establishment? >> you're going far afield. [ overlapping speakers ] >> both of you -- i can't believe it. you're off the issue. and i'm done with you. i was just looking at the math, ladies, and you both argued very well for your point. and by talking over each other, we saved a considerable amount of time. now there's another trend
going on here that people are forgetting. we're running out of available delegates. just so you know, on the republican side, there are 1,079 to go. donald trump has to pick up 564 of those. but do you know who is even faster on her way, about 30% of being there? hillary clinton. you didn't know that, didn't you? i just found out myself. after this. trugreen presents the yardley's. ♪ ♪ sfx: leaf blower dad! sorry. this is more than a lawn. this is a trugreen lawn. live life outside with trugreen, america's #1 lawn care company. spring is on. start your trugreen lawn plan today. trugreen. live life outside.
♪ (cell phone rings) where are you? well the squirrels are back in the attic. mom? your dad won't call an exterminator... can i call you back, mom? he says it's personal this time... if you're a mom, you call at the worst time. it's what you do. if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. where are you? it's very loud there. are you taking a zumba class?
generally nationwide. it's been the same scene. about 60% for republicans. down about 29% in the democratic race. so big comparisons. the fact is, there is more passion on the right. am i right? ed henry among democrats who are fearful that i am right. >> good to see you. hillary clinton was certainly celebrating her sweep of the democratic primaries, including florida, but also the midwest where she seemed to stop bernie sanders's momentum. and you're absolutely right that there has been a lot more turnout on the republican side. in fact, david plouffe, the architect of the victories, said the democrats shouldn't celebrate too hard. that donald trump is bringing in new people and that democrats will have to raise their game in the general election to make sure they get their people to the polls and really get the same kind of turn out to win this general election. and frankly, hillary clinton now at about 65% of the delegates
she needs to clinch the nomination, is talking like she already has that nomination. while bernie sanders is trying to hang on. >> we are moving closer to secure the democratic party nomination and winning this election in november! >> because of all of you, and our supporters across the country, our campaign has earned more votes than any other candidate, democrat or republican. >> sanders hopeful that next week she can do well in arizona, the caucus states after that where he might also as well. right now, clinton's math is putting him ahead in the defensive crouch. >> florida was yesterday. i still notice you're reporting from there today. >> reporter: i'm staying as long as i can. i'm going to be here a couple more days. we need to analyze the votes.
but through good times and bad... ...at t. rowe price... ...we've helped our investors stay confident for over 75 years. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. we're getting words that south carolina governor nicky haley is putting her support behind ted cruz. very impressed with the financing camps. that's interesting because it might seem like a natural fit for you. i know you're not quite thick about donald trump. what about ted cruz? >> i think ted cruz is a good man. i would love to see ted cruz as justice of the supreme court. i'm a little concerned. i'm greatly concerned of his abilities to rally others to his
cause. he is certainly a viable candidate. i think he is an honest man, i think as he good man. he's been so contentious in the senate that i think it will be hard for him to win a general election. >> do you like kasich? >> i like, governor kasich is a good man also. it's a tough deal. >> what about the 169 delegates? if you had to advise marco rubio now, and i know, those delegates are committed to vote for him on the first ballot. he can not only flatly stop his campaign and nowhere to go, but that could be a bargaining chip for him, couldn't it? >> well, i don't think legally he can direct them where to go. i think they're going to make their own decisions what if he stood up and. i want you to all go to ted cruz. >> well, i suppose he could do that. i don't know what effect it would have. i don't think anybody does.
you're hearing the same debates i am. i don't think anybody knows for sure. people are trying to sort that out. what happens if? this is a bizarre situation. can you believe it? this would make a great comedy if it wasn't so absolutely serious. >> i'm thinking like a new "house of cards" 2.0. i will ask you this. you were telling me, you're not sure about trump. you're not sure you can rally around him. do you still feel same way? yes, i do. can you believe what happened today? he basically calls on his supporters to riot if he doesn't get nomination. >> he didn't say that. >> i know he didn't say that. >> but he fears that would happen among his voters. >> why do you think he would say that? >> you think he would be endorsing violence? >> he is making the play calls. of course he is. >> do you think the other side would get violent? >> oh, i hope not. our nation is coming to this. we have a president, what is he going to do, if he were
president, what is he going to do if he doesn't get what he wants from the congress? is he going to call for the people to riot? this is nonsense. utterly nonsense. >> we shall see. thank you. with all the breaking news, we appreciate it. hello. i'm greg gutfeld with kimberly guilfoyle, juan williams, dana perino, "the five." this morning on another network i will not mention,cnn, donald trump said that a contested convention would be super awesome. >> i think we'll win before getting to the convention but i can tell you, if we didn't and if we're 20 votes short or if we're 100 short, and we're at 1,100 and somebody else is at 500 or 400, because we're way ahead of everybody, i don't think you can say that we don't ge