Rush Limbaugh Mocks Daily Caller Columnist Who Proposed 'Negotiated Republican Surrender' to Clinton

Conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh mocked the Daily Caller's Jamie Weinstein during his show Wednesday for an op-ed in which the writer proposed a "negotiated Republican surrender" to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

In his piece, "The Case for a Negotiated Republican Surrender to Hillary," which was posted Monday, Weinstein proposed giving up the election to Clinton in exchange for Republicans getting to choose Antonin Scalia's replacement on the Supreme Court.

“No, no, no, I’m not joking!" Limbaugh said as he read Weinstein's headline to his listeners. "'It’s time for Republican leaders to consider a negotiated endorsement of Hillary Clinton.’ That’s the lead. And his point is Trump’s going to lose, and even if Trump wins, Hillary’s better."

Rush Limbaugh (Image source: YouTube)

"Hillary would be less damaging to conservatism then Trump is going to be. And maybe — he actually says this," Limbaugh added in apparent disbelief. "He actually says we might be able, if the right Republicans ... went up to Hillary and her campaign and actually surrendered, cancel the campaign and concede that she’s a winner and make her president in waiting, maybe she would give us Antonin Scalia’s replacement."

"Let us pick. I’m not kidding you," the radio host added.

Weinstein, who, as Limbaugh pointed out, is the boyfriend of Michelle Fields, the former Breitbart reporter who said she was assaulted by Donald Trump's former campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, took to Twitter Wednesday to respond to Limbaugh's criticism, claiming that "deep down, he [Limbaugh] knows I'm right."

"The day after the election, everyone is going to wish they at least attempted to get this deal," Weinstein later tweeted.

The #NeverTrump columnist then challenged the on-air personality to debate him, saying, "I'll convince you to come around to my position."

Limbaugh isn't the only conservative who doesn't like the idea. The popular blog Hot Air posted a piece from "Allahpundit" Tuesday that essentially called the proposed deal impractical:

One obvious objection to this ... is that there’s no way to force Clinton to uphold her end of the bargain. That’s why contracts exist. Without the prospect of legal consequences for nonperformance, two parties who don’t trust each other would never be able to make a deal in cases where one has to perform their side of it before the other does.

Listen to Rush's remarks (relevant portion begins around the 1:17:14 mark):

(H/T: Breitbart)

—

Follow the author of this story on Twitter and Facebook:

Follow @jonstreet