>> campaign 2020. watch our live coverage of the presidential candidates on the campaign trail and makeup to run mind, c-span's campaign 2020, your unfiltered view of politics. >> next, political reporters and former presidential campaign advisers preview the february 11 new hampshire primary. they also compared the upcoming primaries to those in previous presidential races. the university of southern california's center for the political future hosted this event in los angeles. >> tonight's event will be broadcast on c-span and facebook live.

i am delighted to have this conversation with seema mehta, covering the 2020 election for "the l.a. times." she previously covered the 2012 and 2008 and 2016 presidential elections. james pindell is covering 2020 for "the boston globe." he is an on-air political analyst for new hampshire's wmur tv and a commentator for outlets such as cnn and politico. patrick griffin is also a cnn commentator, longtime new hampshire political strategist, a visiting fellow at the center for the political future, and a fabulous teacher. he advised president george w. bush and recently served as a senior advisor to new hampshire governor chris sununu. my friend mike murphy, veteran -- the codirector of the center, veteran of five presidential campaigns, and numerous campaigns for senators and governors, including arnold schwarzenegger and mitt romney.

patrick, i will begin with a question. at least, we are going to start with you. a lot of critics think new hampshire, with its lack of diversity, should never be the first primary state. what is your response to that? will this ever change? show less -- ever change? patrick: my response is it will never change. we can talk about that for a second. there is a great amount of hostage taking, malfeasance, holdups, everything but cash changing hands, in order to keep new hampshire first. i say that with great respect. i think there is an important part of the new hampshire primary, but more than anything, why is there a new hampshire? because new hampshire says so at this point. they simply will not give this primary up. they have enacted legislation to keep it. they have fought with iowa. now they and iowa are in a cabal

together to keep new hampshire first and iowa second. "there shall be no light contest within the seven days before and after the contest." bill gardner who is secretary of the state runs things in new hampshire with an iron fist. he is good about making sure he was prepared to hold the election christmas eve, new year's eve, or valentine's day to make sure new hampshire goes first. the other answer to that question is new hampshire is extremely homogenized. it does not look like america. it is largely white. it is, frankly, not as conservative on the republican side as it could be representing other states, and it is not as liberal on the democratic side. the largest group of voters in new hampshire are independent voters. that means on election day, you can poll a ballot from either -- call a ballot from either party. the basis of both parties have

-- bases of both parties have an opportunity to vote after being organized, as one woman said in a focus group said, i never voted for a candidate i haven't danced with at least twice. it is a small state. 1.3 million people. you can drive the length and width of the state easily. it makes for great television, because there are high snowbanks and everyone gets to have a bean jacket and everyone from new york and washington looks like they are on a camping trip. the optics are great from a television standpoint, but at the end of the day, new hampshire does not look like america. it is there because it is plucky. it will not let go, and it forces people like joe biden to trudge through and put up with what he is going through. the front runner in a new poll today is having a tough time. what does that mean? it means members of congress, u.s. senators, governors who are famous have to do a bit having a

tough time of scraping with the locals and practice retail politics. somehow, we believe that makes them a better candidate. at least that is the argument. the short answer to your question after all that, i don't think it changes. i think the press is in love with covering new hampshire. part of it is tradition. the other piece of it is the humiliation factor that even the strongest candidates are put through in a place where you have to stand on a snow bank and answer the 15th question about the international monetary fund patiently. it is not easy. >> [laughs] james, i was going to ask you. james: the criticisms of new hampshire are completely legit. i am about as bought in to the system as possible. i am someone who went to college in des moines because of the iowa caucuses. i am about as biased as you can be on new hampshire. i say that as a journalist.

the criticisms are real and they are completely legit. they are not diverse states. they are largely rural states in a time where america is becoming increasingly urban. it frames the conversation around issues that may not be as relevant to most americans. yes, we were expecting record high turnout in the democratic primary in february, officially the date hasn't been set, and that would be about a quarter of a million people, maybe 275. california has 40 million people. in terms of perspective, it has an outside influence. the criticisms are real. but when we have this conversation, what bothered me about it -- you will hear me say this a lot tonight -- as opposed to what? that is what we should be talking about. we can talk about the endless criticisms, but a couple dates matter. 1960 matters. -- 1916 matters.

i'll be very quick. 1916 matters. out of the progressive era, we decided these private clubs that are political parties, we should open that up more. we started having primary elections. they didn't really matter that much. the three states that start of -- started off the process -- new hampshire was not first. minnesota and indiana were the first, but then you elected delegates. you did not elect presidents. you didn't elect a candidate, you elected delegates. that changed in 1952 in the modern era of the primary, when you did elect presidents. some candidates, not all, did campaign. another important date is 1968, particularly the democratic primary. you may know your history, the famous chicago convention. let's remember what happened. in new hampshire, lbj was reduced to 60% of the vote. he won, but mccarthy got close to 40%.

as a result, two weeks later, lbj said he would accept the nomination. he wouldn't pursue or accept the nomination. what happens in 1968. only 14 states hold primaries that year. think about that. only 14 states. they would trudge through. eventually, bobby kennedy got in the race. later on, humphrey got in the race, but the idea is these candidates in these two primaries, worked not the person to be nominated. it was humphrey, and they said it could never happen again. as opposed to what? the party insiders still decided. they still decided vice president humphrey was going to take over. they changed it again. they said ok, here is what we are going to do. basically in 1972, into 1976, we will create iowa and new hampshire. we will let the people decide.

now, we have more states -- every state gets involved. as opposed to what? party insiders who are not represented at all? then the mythology of 1976. jimmy carter, the one person who created this mythology that you can be this random person, the peanut farmer from georgia, and be elected president. now we have today. i'll shut up in just a bit. here is where we are today, that new hampshire is still iowa is first. still first. their clout has significantly diminished. they may remain first, but we are witnessing the most nationalized presidential primary season i think we have seen in the modern creation of the last 40 years of this latest iteration. consider the dnc qualifying rules for how you qualify in a debate. in the last debate, there were 20 qualifying polls. 12 were national polls, which were completely irrelevant. they decided they wanted to have these polls count.

obviously, the campaign does not take place in kansas. lling people in kansas? it does not take place in texas. new hampshire may persist. the clout is diminishing. >> two little things. i share the skepticism of having two really white states pick our presidents. as i started this process am i said that. i think there are two things that buffer it. after iowa and new hampshire, you have south carolina and nevada. south carolina has a large population of african-american voters. nevada has a growing population of latino voters. i think there is -- that helps address the diversity issue, and beyond that, i grew up in the east coast in pennsylvania and lived in california for more than 20 years. large states where campaigns are run on tv. going to iowa and new hampshire and seeing barack obama or mitt romney or jeb bush or whoever, 20 feet away from you talking to real people, you would never see that in california.

or a lot of these other large states. it makes the candidates -- even if they have the most money -- the most name id in the world, it makes them talk to voters. the voters are smart and relish their duty of asking tough questions of these candidates. they throw a softball here and there, but it also gives a chance to candidates that don't have money. i wonder if the 2008 campaign with the hillary-obama competition in iowa, if that was in california, with that result be possible? i don't think so, because hillary was so well known and obama was able to meet voters and generate excitement and pulling off a surprise win that gave other people in the country fate that, we have this nearly all-white state is willing to vote for an african-american man for president. i don't know you could have that outcome in a large state with a huge tv presence. >> do you have something quick before we move on?

michael: i've got about an hour on this. [laughter] michael: it is an arms race here. i agree with seema. if you take the first four, iowa caucus, new hampshire, south carolina and nevada -- that four is the lever on the process. it does become pretty diverse. you get rural, new england, christian conservatives and evangelicals representing iowa, you get a huge african-american vote in the south carolina primary. if you clump them together, both regionally and diversity, pretty balanced. the other point would be is the other way to do it is totally nationalize it. the problem is, the more famous you are, the better you do. this lets a smaller candidate have a shot with less resources on an entrepreneurial basis to crack the thing and get momentum. i disagree with james a little bit. i think they will be influential. i agree with him on is

it has become nationalized, but the states upon which the national contest is mostly played is the last 60 days in the iowa caucus, which we are about to begin, and then the turbulent eight days later in new hampshire through the nevada caucus into south carolina. it is a little more of a hybrid. they are not as isolated as before, but they are still the voters that count 100 times more than any of us. james: let me be clear -- when we get to the voting, they could be hugely important. i am talking about the process with which we get there. >> and the qualifying. especially the dnc -- james: if you don't win in these early states, you are done. >> i want to turn from whether new hampshire is ideal or not, because i don't think it is ever going to change. new hampshire and iowa are both arguably battleground states. the party that tries to take away their first caucus or their first primary is going to do very badly in the general election. i just don't think it is going to move. i want to handicap the nature

primary as of today, first about how much trouble biden is in. he just fell into third place in the new cnn-unh poll at 15%. beyond that, is warren's momentum likely going to be sustained, and is sanders likely to repeat his success in 2020? >> sanders won with 22% of the margin. he got 50%. it was the largest margin of victory since jfk. it is huge. he started with such a head start. he has an enormous steering committee that was actively meeting every month beginning in 2017. i mean, he started with such a head start, but a lot of that energy is now going to other people. clearly, it was either hillary or bernie. he is still very much in the game.

there is no question about it. i feel this is a state, despite the ups and downs, is framed as a state that either warren or bernie sanders is going to win. if you look at history, the new england candidate has won every single time, except for once. ted kennedy challenging the president in 1980, but that was the only time they have lost. that said, iowa could likely have someone who is elevated if that person is not warren or sanders. that person is going to be a major contender coming into the state. that is where things on the top level stand and i think it gets more interesting. >> what happened to biden? mike: biden started out by hacking conventional wisdom by being famous enough to have a national lead in early polls. they are like a noise meter on last week's media coverage.

because biden was famous, that was his initial advantage. if i was head of the prc, i would bribe media pollsters. those set the tempo for press coverage and everything else. back to the first question, once you get to the small arena, the iowa caucus and new hampshire primary, the buttigiegs, the warrens can show up and start to sell tickets. biden, for all his strengths -- and he still has some -- has had the burden of being front runner in the competitive markets where people slowly know about candidates, he is not faring as well. buttigieg has emerged as kind of the biden understudy, should biden finish third in iowa, which i think is a possibility. remember, he is supposed to be superman, but if you can't lift warrenotive, not only is him of the real biden slayer in iowa, there is someone else --

room for someone else to come racing into new hampshire. in new hampshire, you have a big independent vote. i ran mccain's campaign in 2000. we didn't carry republicans with george bush. we were competitive. it was not that close. we destroyed with independents who crossed over. i look at events in iowa where i see a lot of volvos in the parking lot. >> i want you to talk about this because you've suggested buttigieg is not only surging in iowa, but has real potential in new hampshire. why is that? >> i think this is a game of expectations. this narrative takes a while to play out. the media starts covering places like iowa and new hampshire very, very early. our attention spans today are very different because of this. back in the days before we could instantaneously receive not only the news we wanted to hear, we

-- and be told when the news has sort which could news we choose to believe. we filter a lot of this stuff. the expectation game gets dragged out over a long period of time. the race starts after the election, immediately. who makes the first visit to iowa and new hampshire? that expectation game continues for a long period of time. 17 people, that is a big crowd for someone who has never been famous before. that is a lot of people. compare it to what happened three years ago. i don't want to play that game. because new hampshire is a bit of an enigma. we all like to think about someone who talks like the person i just spoke about. that is not really what new hampshire is anymore. most of those in southern new hampshire are people who work and live in massachusetts. many of them commute to boston, they come to new hampshire

because they want to income tax and they read "the globe," the largest selling newspaper in new hampshire. the fact is, it is a very different place. new hampshire was always a place that cherished its independence. a newspaper called "the new hampshire leader" called the shots. they hated democrats. they loved republicans, except the republicans they hated. and they really hated them, but that has changed. the influence of newspapers as a medium has changed. the influence of local newspapers has changed, but more importantly, the influence of expectations doesn't, which is why murphy and i talk about this a lot. iowa begets new hampshire. i won't use your exact language, murphy -- new hampshire has one job, to basically screw iowa after the iowa caucuses. they tend to set things right. first thing, iowa picks corn,

new hampshire takes precedents. you have to wrestle with somebody to get to join your team. the expectation is, coming out of iowa, there used to be three tickets. you tried to get three tickets out of iowa. new hampshire weaned it down to two. that has changed. the conventional wisdom is very different now. does anybody think bernie sanders is going anywhere in this race if he doesn't win iowa or new hampshire, which he very well could? bernie is making $1 million a week in small dollar traditions. -- donor donations. that is keeping bernie in a good lifestyle. it is a bookstore going first class. it is a comfortable way to go. bernie is a conscience of the democratic party. bernie is watching elizabeth warren and joe biden like a hawk. he'll do so right through the convention. it doesn't matter what happens there.

joe biden has a different problem, expectations. he's famous. he's got to do well. or is he so wounded coming out of iowa and new hampshire -- some conventional wisdom, he finishes second or third, does pete buttigieg become famous enough after iowa that that period after iowa and new hampshire, he is the next new iteration for the republican party -- >> democratic. >> democratic. i've got republicans on my mind. sorry about that. democrats tend to like someone who is about tomorrow. they have always been that. president kennedy -- we will go to the moon because we can. the new frontier, passing the torch to a new generation. what happened to that? the last time the democratic party nominated someone older than the monument in washington. that is not usually the way it goes and they may do it again with jill biden if he manages to be dragged across the finish line. the expectation between iowa and new hampshire is very important.

one last problem, whoever wins in mostly white iowa and new hampshire is going to run into a very interesting cultural demographic buzz saw in south carolina. african-american voters are a problem for elizabeth warren. they are a problem for elizabeth warren. they are not a problem for joe biden. >> the question about pete. >> no, because we can talk about pete. i want to talk about mayor pete, but elizabeth warren only got a sentence here, yet she seems to be emerging. >> yeah, if you see her on the trail, there is a lot of momentum at her events. there are more and more people showing up at her event, people showing up for four hours to get selfies. her organizations are strong. they are large organizations with seasoned operatives that know what they are doing. there is a sense of excitement around her campaign in both iowa and new hampshire. the poll today -- i thought one

of the interesting things was, it is said only 23% of people were truly committed to who they were choosing. that is a low number. it shows there is a lot of time, and a lot of people still need to make up their minds. buttigieg is an obvious factor. i was in iowa last week. he wasn't there, but i was hanging out with his campaign team. there was so much energy. all of these people getting together and plotting their week. if you talk to other campaigns, the one they hear coming behind them is buttigieg. it is not biden. >> james comey you wanted to say something? >> -- james, you wanted to say something? >> i just wanted to say the factor here is buttigieg was able to raise the money. he was able to raise in the second quarter, again in the third quarter. he is spending that money. he has the largest team -- the most amount of offices in iowa, the largest amount of offices in new hampshire. he has hundreds and hundreds of staff.

that matters. because of this. in the last debate, we would argue buttigieg had a really good debate. so did amy klobuchar. one candidate had the infrastructure to capitalize on that, buttigieg. she does not. >> she tried to, and she got $1.5 million in fundraising in a few hours. that is not a lot for buttigieg, but for her, it is. she is doing a little bit better than she was a couple weeks ago. >> in terms of capitalizing buttigieg made 16,000 phone , calls in new hampshire the next day. >> the challenge of organization is it is money plus time. if you get money late, you cannot build an organization. organization generally in politics is far overrated, but in an iowa caucus, which is why you've got to be careful about these caucus polls, you've got a complicated process where people show up on a cold night and speeches are given. it is an interesting way to do it, and then there are multiple bouts of people dropping out. the social relationships between

the people in the smaller counties becoming important. organizational stuff, like i was for kamala harris. she did not make it in clinton county passed the first ballot. i kind of liked mayor pete, but the coordinators, my nephew, a good kid. i have to see him. all this stuff you can't poll comes into effect. >> the first time someone told me how the iowa caucuses were run, i thought someone was pulling my leg. the other thing we did mention in terms of money we didn't mention was biden and the fact he has such little money. it is amazing how little money he has. his campaign says he is so well known. that number -- >> but they've got that super pack. >> we are going to get to that in a minute. i want to do something you alluded to, the relationship between iowa and new hampshire. my own experience in 2004 was

that after john kerry won iowa, we agreed he would mention iowa -- on the plane that once we landed, he would mention iowa exactly once. say we came from iowa, we had a great victory there, but new hampshire is the state that decides. he never mentioned iowa again the whole rest of the time until the primary. by contrast, in 2008, barack obama landed in new hampshire and he talked about iowa endlessly. we won iowa and if we win new hampshire, we will win the nomination. i suppose hillary's tears when she asked about how hard campaigning was contributed to it, suddenly obama lost the primary he had a pretty big lead in. you have to do well in iowa, but don't you have to be careful when you get to new hampshire? >> i think everybody loves a winner.

there is that sense, too. there is an awful lot of people in iowa and new hampshire who end up with jobs in the white house. they were there early and helped propel campaigns. i think, though, the key more than anything else is in this current race to look at the expectation thing. i think elizabeth warren will be the nominee of the democratic party. i believe that. i'm not sure that's the right thing for the democratic party because one of the things you look at all the polling and democrats want to beat trump. that is one of the single biggest things. in a poll today, health care was number one. it is tied with foreign policy for what democrats are concerned about. let's talk about expectations. elizabeth warren is from massachusetts, a neighboring state. she is expected to win the new hampshire primary. what is a win? lyndon johnson won the primary, but not by enough.

eugene mccarthy, who was not supposed to do well, did it. it candidatebout coming off the plane in 2000, with george bush, he mentioned he came from iowa a few times. that is because murphy was waiting for us in new hampshire. with john mccain and made my life miserable for seven weeks. >> we never went to iowa. we didn't compete there because we knew we could take bush in one place in time and chose the battlefield. it was going to be new hampshire. new hampshire doesn't hate iowa, but they do want to assert a certain supremacy. i think you have to do well enough in iowa to make it to the majors, and then new hampshire, if you do everything else right there, there is a special sauce. you know what, let's get noticed here. i like the idea coming out of iowa second, then having the right fit and infrastructure waiting in new hampshire. i think if things go right for him, big if. we are still early in this iowa thing, barely under 100 days to go. a lot can happen.

but if buttigieg or somebody else can be the third interesting not biden, and not war and, can be the third thing and play the new hampshire card, that can be the surprise dynamic, there. >> i think it is best to win both iowa and new hampshire, which has seldom happened in the democratic party. >> if anyone has ever done that, when gore and kerry did it, they went on to the nomination. they are unstoppable. >> because people say fine, we are perfectly content. the other thing, and james has a great theory about this, is maybe it isn't buttigieg. maybe lightning really strikes. that has happened in new hampshire before. someone gets quite elevated from the second tier, which could happen. there's always room. >> we talked about biden being short of money. i'm going to get to the somebody elses in a few minutes. he's just okay. as you mentioned, mike, a superpac to make up the

distance. what is the reaction of new hampshire voters, new hampshire independents to that? can it hurt him or not going to matter? >> that is an inside pitch. so inside. money in politics in places like new hampshire -- i have run races in new hampshire for years. i have run races in other places -- i was of the notion it is better to have money than to be the candidate without it. although when i've been the one without it, i always attacked the guy who had it. i think money, message, and media are the mother's milk of politics. the money line, but more than anything else, what we have to keep an eye on is joe biden's ability to connect new hampshire and iowa voters in the small crowds. that is where you really test famous people. in a room with no more people than this in it sometimes, and if joe biden had this many people in a room, it would be a

bad story the next day. we are seeing in real-time a comedian flop at the comedy club. right? heard of someone start the national anthem an octave too high? they will never -- what will happen when they make it to the bridge? they will never make it. it is hard to watch. the press is good at this, because they smell flop sweat miles away. what did you think of joe biden? eh. the super pac thing, i don't think they get much into that. i think they know that. he sucked tonight. that is worse than where the money comes from and who is funding it. the real question is does the premise live up to the promise? does he retail well? >> there is so much talk about billionaires, the 1%, taxing people, loopholes, and people who fund the superpac, it seems

like it writes itself. those are always issues the democrats talk about, but this year it seems so heightened, particularly with warren and sanders. >> it is interesting because he has no choice so he's got to take the beating. we've been talking about iowa and new hampshire, another early primary that counts is cash on hand after labor day because that pays for your voter contact, television benefiting else. beat up, ito get draws some blood but it is a narrative of you are an old traditional politician. he already wears that suit so how much worse could that be for him? he desperately needs dough to compete. i am the idiot who blew $100 million in a superpac, trying to elect jeb bush in the republican primary in 2016, and all the super pack money in the world cannot save you if you are not what they are looking for, which was our problem with jeb, and

biden may not be what they are looking for and he has strengths, but without a super pac, he will concede the race before he there is a technical limit to what they can do, but what one thing a biden super pac can do -- he can take the issue of medicare for all, which democratic primary voters are highly divided on, and he can shove that issue in the middle and cut the thing in half, which is a problem for warren. i don't think he has a choice. he will get beat up for it. >> i think there will be ads that come from -- or at least challenges and debate stages like, hillary, release your speeches to wall street. you took money from so and so, those are the people creating problems in america today is what you will hear from his opponents.

>> you could hear it from warren and sanders, but i don't think you will hear it from pete. he vowed he will not take a super pac. >> there is a hypocrisy argument with warren. she is technically running a great campaign, saying i don't take all that rich money. in the senate, she took 6.5 million of that rich money and transferred it into her presidential committee. it is her campaign right now. now. i don't know if we get the new biden, you can put her back on her heels. >> elizabeth warren will have to make a very hard pivot on this to compete, if she is the nominee. my sense is, against donald trump, there is only thing democrats hate more than

billionaires, donald trump. to run the way democrats have to run to just a few states -- i love how california and new york has these we hate trump rallies. our politics changed in the last primary, the way the media covers it, the way a president behaves, the way campaigns respond. the bushes -- i have been with them for a long time -- generations of them. jeb bush is a tough politician. smart, tough, good on his feet. that was his problem. that was not a smart election. this was a mean election. it was all about calling somebody a loser. that is not what jeb bush was ready for. it has changed so much, my question is, when you call

somebody a millionaire or billionaire, does it matter that much? what democrats are saying is kill the orange menace. i don't care how you do it, find someone who can get through a general election and take this guy out. ideology -- electability rarely beats ideology in primaries, but there is some of that going on in the democratic party right now. >> i did not know you worked for tom steyer. [laughter] >> he creeped up the 3%. >> the caution i would have about biden is there is this tendency in the november before to decide what is going to happen. the new york times had a front page story, which was not kind to me, saying there was no chance john kerry was going to get beyond iowa. he went on to win all two of the

contests. we have to see whether or not the biden that was on 60 minutes shows up at the debate. >> why is it not called the guilt dinner? >> before i turn this over to the audience, what about kamala harris? what about cory booker? what about andrew yang? >> andrew yang has totally surprised me. when i first heard about him, i was like, this is insane. the voters you meet as his -- at his events, they love him. is this a bernie sanders situation or ron paul situation? ron paul had all these kids who loved him, they didn't come out to vote. bernie sanders, he had all these kids who loved him and they came out to vote. some bernie backers, former trump backers.

he is in the second tier, but he has been interesting to watch. kamala started off great. she had a high point when she announced and a high point when she challenged biden on segregation. it totally was a sugar high. nothing she seems has done since then has stuck. some of her supporters think she can clean up in south carolina. as our polling has shown, she is not the favorite. >> you think yang might take off in new hampshire. >> i think he could. those are the three options. we are waiting for booker you have a moment. maybe he will never have a moment. the moments are running out. i have a buddy who talks about the cone of probability like a hurricane. booker has invested well in the early states.

he has the structure to take it vantage of it, but it has not happened. yang has been very much on fire. he has a significant amount of cash on hand. they announced six figures, sanders firm they hired this week. if any of those three who continue to surprise -- this is a guy who never ran for office before. the best description of him was in a magazine profile, saying, you know that guy at the party saying "if i were in charge," that is andrew yang. is he bernie or ron paul? ron paul got second in 2012. i do think there is a future for andrew yang. i think his strategic question is whether he screws iowa.

he is still at 0%. >> which is what i would do, sell the moment. i have a hat. i am getting 100 emails. i feel like the yang thing is over a month ago, nationally. if you want to punish politics, your choice is him or bernie. bernie has downsides. he has a little jolt of energy after getting through his health problem. yang -- if you want to blow everything up, yang is it. i have not seen him perform in a meaningful way. i think he is interesting. iowa, it is booker. kamala is on her way out quickly. amy klobuchar finally woke up

and decided to be a candidate after being passive. probably too late. she could get a lightning bolt, but not have the dollars to amplify what is going on in the electorate. i don't write off either cory or amy. if they become the understudy, they could run the poll in new hampshire. that said, if the election was held today, i bet elizabeth warren would be the democratic nominee. >> and win new hampshire. yang, the ad firm he just tired was run by my former partner, tad devine. they made the brilliant america ad for bernie sanders in 2016. it will be interesting to see what they do with this multimillion dollar ad buy,

which i suspect will be concentrated in new hampshire more than in iowa. i want to turn this over and give people in the audience a chance to ask questions. we have a mic. anybody for steyer, you can go first. [laughter] i should have asked about steyer, sorry. >> anybody have a question? >> insult, comment? >> anyone from new hampshire? new hampshire right here. you get 10 questions. >> where are you from? exeter, great. no question? >> you must be, like, shaking. [laughter] there is a lot of dynamism in the new hampshire and iowa votes, of course. i have been looking at south carolina. a lot of african-american voters there support joe biden because

they think he is the most electable to go after donald trump. if, say, elizabeth warren were to defeat him in iowa and new hampshire and win the nevada caucus, do you think there would be a pretty large section of african-american voters in south carolina who would view her as more electable? >> i do. >> there is a precedent which is not perfect, which was 2008, when african-american voters thought hillary was the person. it is not a perfect analogy, but yes, i agree with mike. >> much of the way we talk about new hampshire trying to correct iowa -- there is a tendency to correct some of this stuff. i think elizabeth warren will have to go a long way to prove

she can connect with african-american voters. while you are winning iowa and new hampshire and raising millions of dollars every day, you have to think about the sequencing of these contests. it's 12 dimensional chess every day. my question is whether or not she still is the genuine article to african-americans. my suspicion is we have talked a lot in the seminar about institutions. americans have lots of doubts about institutions, which is how we got trump. african-american voters are interested in how they process this. if we renumber the obama coalition not showing up for hillary -- i think a mistrust of the institutions -- last time it was democrats. inside the democratic party, does elizabeth warren rings true with all of her plans? and the fighting. does she rings true with that?

she is good at it. the question is, do they believe someone from harvard, who made the money she made teaching a course or two, who is a northeast elitist, is someone that can speak to and hear their concerns? i think she plays well in the northeast and california. south carolina is a potential problem for her. a bunch of swing states are problems for her later. >> this has been under the radar. she has been trying to make inroads among african-americans, particularly women. african-american voters are still sticking with biden in the polls. if biden does stumble, she has done some of the early work that could pay dividends.

bernie has an equal problem in that particular voting segment, i think. >> if you are winning and you are counting trump on tv, democrats will be for democrats in the end. i do this podcast with my friend david axelrod. a shameless plug. it is interesting -- if biden is damaged by iowa, second or third, but not dead yet, will barack obama send a subtle signal his way? the obama connection is such an gold for biden with african-americans. that is part of the foundation, and beating trump. or will the absence of an endorsement become a signal in

itself? that eight days in february will be high-stakes politics for joe biden. it will affect how much blue remains. >> the example -- is warren going to run into problems in south carolina? john edwards won the south carolina primary and john kerry won three of the first four. >> john edwards won that primary and one other contest because he had two home states, north and south carolina. >> my point is it did not stop john kerry on his way to the nomination. you are right, the obama thing -- >> warren will have the resources, as will bernie and pete, to be competitive in the nevada caucus, which is driven heavily by culinary unions and is also heavily latino. there is a beat before south carolina that could immediately

be part of the equation if you come out of new hampshire with steam. >> do you think biden could survive doing a mediocre job in iowa and new hampshire, then hold onto his vote in south carolina and come back? ronald reagan did this in 1976 when he was challenging gerald ford. he lost the early contest. he revived himself in north carolina and almost won the nomination. he had to pick a moderate liberal senator from pennsylvania for vice president, he would have won it. >> it is an argument many people are viewing skeptically. you have these candidates with all of this money. if he does not do well in the first two states, the money will dry up further. the super pac donors also might

get skeptical if things are not going well. if he doesn't win the first two states -- never say never, but the path becomes exponentially harder. >> no one has ever done it. >> there is an armageddon strategy for democrats that it's hard to ignore, even against a damaged trump, who has almost certainly faced impeachment from the house. probably not convicted, but very likely impeached. i think the problem is democrats have these lanes. elizabeth and joe biden have been splitting the lane. pete buttigieg as money. he is progressive enough. my question is, who bows out? kamala harris bows out. should have been yesterday.

amy klobuchar, two senators, they have a life ahead of them. cory booker has been a good politician. how long does he hang in? i don't know. who do they get to keep them from the supernova place? >> they will be stuck in washington in an impeachment trial. they will be jumping out of the chair, setting their hair on fire, desperately trying to get attention. >> someone else? >> i heard recently, although i haven't heard it lately, that because of the way the 2016 campaign was run, with hillary supposedly already getting the nomination, bernie's staff campaign supporters feel like

now he should get it, because he felt he was robbed in 2016, therefore a lot of people chose to vote differently. i was wondering how you guys feel about that. is it significant, insignificant? they voted differently, or they didn't vote at all, but they were so pissed, frankly, that they did a lot of rogue voting, protest voting. they were so mad, they felt we got screwed. i am talking about the general election. they feel like they are entitled. i'm sure if he is not nominated, there could be a similar impact and who voters vote for. >> i have a question following

up on that, who won the popular vote in the 2016 primaries, and who won the most contests in the 2016 primaries? >> you are the one to add a fifth quarter to the football game. it doesn't work that way. >> in 2016 -- bernie people think the nomination was stolen. who won the most popular votes in 2016 in the primary? i'm not relitigating the general. who won the most contests? hillary clinton did. and superdelegates. >> she would have one without them. >> hillary did underperform in western cities with african-americans. it cost her wisconsin, cost her michigan. not as clear in pennsylvania. there is not a big data argument that a lot of bernie people stayed home. the pouting voter theory is highly overrated.

>> jill stein didn't get more votes in a margin of victory. >> we are not hearing it the way we did in 2016 from donors. i don't feel -- from voters. the problem bernie is having his he has other people that share his ideological view. some voters who supported him in 2016 believe elizabeth warren is the fresher version of it. >> he won the new hampshire primary with 62% of the vote. in today's poll, he is getting 21% of the vote. that tells you it is a fragmented field. maybe it was a binary choice between him and hillary clinton. all of those votes were not entirely for him, they were against her. >> in the poll that came out today, bernie is the most likable democratic candidate.

in new hampshire. >> within the margin of error. >> bernie sanders is the most likable. i am reminded of a comic who wrote a great set and another comedian stole his material and performed it. you get the sense that bernie is the guy who came up with it -- i wrote the damn bill! he is the angry muppet guy. and you feel for him, because bernie did write this set. he said, this is what i am going to be for. i will take the democratic party to a different place. i get the feeling that even though there is a strong for bernie thing, elizabeth is this shiny new object. she is splitting him down the middle. he clearly is starting to resent it. he is a happy warrior. he has become larry david, literally.

the question is, how long does this wear with democrats? i don't think he can win. democrats fall in love usually. they want to beat trump. >> this poll, we look at these polls because they don't have an election day to report. it is harder and harder to poll anybody, because no one takes the call anymore, especially new hampshire. the noise meter in a state bernie won big, the guy they once voted for had a heart attack, then he came back and showed a little light. >> after that, he had one of the better weeks of his campaign with aoc. >> thanks to a stent made by an evil pharmaceutical company. we will bring this to an end, i

think. i want to thank seema, james, patrick, mike, and those of you who came out on a night where the decisive game of the world series is being played. maldonado, when i said this could be the same night as the world series, she said no, never going to happen, the dodgers will win in four. thanks to our panel. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> campaign 2020, watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail and make up

your own mind. campaign 2020. your unfiltered view of politics. newsmakers, on congressman john yarmuth of kentucky. he discusses expectations of a houseboat on a short-term resolution to avoid a shutdown. he also talks about the risk of a potential recession, the fed independence, and impeachment proceedings. sunday at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. chairman ajit pai set down for a conversation about 5g technology and competition in washington, d.c. theiscussed the need for united states to lead in the development of 5g technology and how the implementation of 5g will impact the way we view the world. this