Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal Charlie Cook  CSPAN  November 24, 2019 6:56pm-7:52pm EST

6:56 pm
nation." and we will discuss gop tax cuts with americans for tax reform president grover norquist. watch washington journal monday morning. join the discussion. ♪ >> for 40 years, c-span has provided america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events from washington dc and around the country. so you can make up your own mind, created by cable in 1979. c-span is brought to you by your local cable and satellite provider. c-span, your altered -- unfiltered view of government. >> for the past 35 years we have turned to this gentleman, charlie cook, editor and publisher of the cook political report, to talk politics.
6:57 pm
your first appearance was 1984? >> i started it in 1984. i did election night 1986 with you. housed: i want to focus on the senate. in an interview with michael bennet, he said it was imperative to win the senate. for democrats to do that, what has to happen? had morest year you democratic seats than republicans. there was more democratic exposure. this way -- this year it is the other way around. i think democrats could pick up one or two seats. they need three and the white house or four without. i think they could pick up one or two having a good night. to have a net gain of three seats, i think they need a way, democrats have good chances in maine, but onado, the other hand democrats have a incumbent, doug jones
6:58 pm
in alabama. they would need a way to get over to a tom tillerson in north carolina or joni ernst in iowa or john cornyn in texas. they would need a way to start getting up into that. >> what about senator peter's? he is listed as someone who may be vulnerable. guest: that is one the you -- that we are watching. john james is a republican, is a good candidate. a real good candidate. peters is not terribly, he is not disliked, but not terribly well defined. that is one we are keeping an ion. guest: -- host: democrats elected andy beshear in kentucky. some say this means mitch mcconnell is vulnerable. kentucky is a pretty red
6:59 pm
state. every republican on the ballot statewide except for governor bevin's, he was something of a sure,y person and i'm not there are things you could interpret out of kentucky where democrats got a good vote out of some of the suburbs, like ,incinnati, but that was a lot i would caution people about reading too much, whether it is and the democratic wing in louisiana -- win in louisiana where john bel edwards was unusually strong for a democrat, inins was unusually weak kentucky. i would look at the virginia legislature, some of the county elections in pennsylvania, eastern
7:00 pm
elections in pennsylvania that suggested something was going on. there are always extenuating circumstances. host: john bel edwards is pro-life, pro n.r.a., so he is a different kind of democrat. guest: he is a little bit of a unicorn. west point, army ranger, pro-life, pro-gun, conservative, white, democrat. there is still a little bit of a hangover where bobby jindal was the republican governor for eight years and the state was not in good shape when he left. they do not really have their a-two in louisiana. closer you look, the fewer
7:01 pm
messages you want to take out of these cases. host: the thanksgiving meal will include discussions over impeachment and politics. i want to share what he wrote recently. "why don't democrats drop impeachment and just censure trump? it will be a way to publicly censure the president with regard to ukraine." the house could easily pass a censure resolution and might even do so with a bipartisan majority. right now, house republicans feel no pressure to vote for impeachment. most americans agree trump's conduct is not impeachable. by censoring, democrats could easily turn the political calculus against the g.o.p. will they do it? easily turn the political calculus against the g.o.p. will they do it? probably not. impeachment will be nothing more than an active censure anyway, why not censure trump and pressure some republicans to vote against the president and leave the decision whether to remove trump from office where
7:02 pm
it belongs, in the hands of the american people. guest: i think there's a lot of truth in that. you could have said the same thing to republicans with president clinton. i am not a lawyer. it is not my job to find whether this president did anything illegal or not tra. i look at things politically. i think it is problematic whenever a party tries to remove a president without broad support. you are looking at 48% in favor , 45%peaching or removing opposed. that is not broad public support. that is what happens when you have redistricting with heavily democratic and republican districts. they become ideological silos. republicans had to deal with that in the 1990's against clinton. democrats have it now against
7:03 pm
trump. host: if you could speculate today, what do you think speaker pelosi will proceed with based on what you said a moment ago? guest: i think speaker pelosi has long had a dim view of impeachment. she has said there is a 0% chance of conviction, so why do this and jeopardize some of her freshmen? my guess is she still thinks it is a bad idea. but when the ukraine stories started coming out, there was no stopping congress. at that point, i think she had to go along with them. i don't think she is enthusiastic about this. there is a 0% chance of conviction. the election is only a year away. there is not broad support for this. there are a lot of reasons why.
7:04 pm
the suggestion of censure would make a lot of sense, but that is not what democrats are going to do. host: six senators are running for president. they would have to be in senate chambers for a trial that could last five weeks. it is hard to see how this would be good for eddie money -- anybody in the senate. they have a lot of suburban voters where the president is not terribly popular. i think you could make a case the democrats have more to lose in the house from impeachment but republicans have more to lose in the senate in terms of where they have vulnerable members. there are 30 or 31 house democrats in districts donald trump won. guest: 31. there are three republicans in districts hillary clinton carried.
7:05 pm
they picked up a lot of republican seats outside of atlanta, dallas, houston, oklahoma city, richmond. that is where democrats picked up seats last year. they have to be careful. these are not liberal places. democrats have to be very careful there. host: you are listening on c-span radio. his programs carried live every sunday morning on sirius xm, the bbc parliament channel. bob is next from tennessee. good morning. caller: yes. getting back to how we allow our presidents to perform foreign policy, when barack obama was president, he did all that money to iran. they asked him after he gave the think that do you
7:06 pm
money would be used to fight against our soldiers? said i believe some of it would be used. if that is not treason because you have some technicality where it makes it right? that is why we vote for donald j. trump. guest: i'm not here to debate you. do you know where the money came from? that was not taxpayer money. that was iranian money that had been in reserve here. we had frozen their money. part of the iran nuclear deal was freeing up their money that we had frozen here. caller: you gave it to them to kill our soldiers --he give it to them to kill our soldiers! guest: it appeared to be working for a while.
7:07 pm
now, we got rid of the deal and it is not working. you are looking at this from a very one-sided view. on a lot of things, there are two sides. host: you look at the democratic polling with bernie sanders and elizabeth warren and joe biden losing support. guest: you can look it every single one of the major democratic candidates and make a good case why that person can't win the nomination. biden, he is too old. he shoots himself in the foot. pete buttigieg, he is too young. he is the mayor of a small city. amy klobuchar is not charismatic. democrats are not looking for a billionaire like michael bloomberg. one of these sets of objections is going to be less compelling
7:08 pm
than the other because one of these people will get the democratic nomination. we could make a good case against every single one. that is what is so perplexing about where we are now. host: has the biden brand been damaged? guest: vice president biden has more experience than the rest of the field combined and goodwill from being president obama's wing man. 77 years old. he is not as quick as he used to be. he does tend to go on longer than he should, as i do as well. there are drawbacks. i think it was the electability holding it together. while i don't think vice president biden did anything , it is sort ofe guilt by association. waiting one more straw
7:09 pm
down vice president biden and is thatthe electability he was seen as ideologically electable. the case against his ghertability is building hir and making the race more open. host: the first add the biden campaign put out is he is the most electable. isn't that a danger because then they can go after you and say you are no longer the leader? have tested my aid, by the way, i am the most electable. i understand expense is not as valued as it used to be because people hate government so much that they have devalued expertise and experience.
7:10 pm
audience, youic could make a case experience more than itnow might normally. we will go to henry on the independent line from new york. good morning. caller: i look at this campaign inconsistencyof and some consistency. consistency from the republican party because they support the president 100%. , wedemocratic candidates thejust beginning to see issues they want to campaign on. the president has said things not wantexicans, did
7:11 pm
to do the muslim ban, said derogatory things about women, .is comments on charlottesville and on twitter all the time. i think it is interesting senator mcconnell would not say anything. i think it is really interesting that despite all of this that nobody in the senate, republican members of the senate, have not stepped back and said the white house is one thing. us in the senate have to take a step back from this because this is toxic hader from the president of the united states who is not only the -- buter-in-chief also also supposed to be a statesman.
7:12 pm
host: your point? caller: i think it is time for an ready to do what i said. think about what the president has done and listen to the candidates. if you do go to a campaign rally and get the chance to ask questions, ask them questions about that. host: henry, thank you for the call. guest: there is a long history of members of congress of one party not being particularly critical of the president of their party. it was the same with democrats under president obama and president clinton. that comes with the territory. little tolerance right now within the republican party for their elected officials criticizing president trump. you saw what happened to senator bob corker and senator blake. they got pushed to the point where they could not run for reelection.
7:13 pm
mark sanford president -- criticized the president and lost his primary. raised the possibility of supporting an inquiry and had to announce his retirement the next day. there is not a lot of tolerance forhe republican party members being critical of the president. it is what it is. what do you want them to do? the last edition of "profiles encourage" has already gone to the printer. host: our viewers are showing their love for charlie cook. we approve that message. this is from "the new york times." mistakes from 2016 could play out in 2020. you are working with the kaiser foundation in key battleground states. bringing out the notebook. guest: i brought the whole thing
7:14 pm
right here. the kaiser family foundation is nonpartisan. they generally focus on health care. we did a project with them where we did polling in four key battleground states, the three that effectively elected president trump as well as the larger state that was the closest for hillary clinton, minnesota, to look at the issues that drive these voters and who are the swing voters. it is a fascinating study. it is all public domain. g or the cookr political report. it was fascinating data. host: what was the biggest issue? anger and frustration with hillary clinton? trade and the economy? flipdrove these voters to
7:15 pm
and vote for republicans? a total of 77,000 votes in those three states elected donald trump. guest: i don't think it was any one thing. with secretary clinton, you had 25 years of accumulated baggage. it wasmetoo came along, like president clinton had a teflon coating. things did not stick to him much. for secretary clinton, it was more like she had velcro and stuff stuck to her. baggage intoore the race. mistakes. my guess is the word "deplorable" cost her a half-million votes. i think the campaign did make mistakes along the way. when you have 137 million people voting and it comes down to fewer than 78,000 in three to .0% that works out
7:16 pm
six -- .06%. you can find a million things that would have made a difference in a race that close. gone remarkable we had from 1888 to 2000 without having the electrical -- electoral college go one way and the popular vote go the other. then we have had it happened twice. believes a guy democrat could win the national popular vote by his many as 5 million votes, three or four percentage points, i could still lose the electoral college because the republican vote is more efficiently allocated around the country. democrats waste a lot of votes in california and illinois. i think the odds are pretty good president trump will lose the
7:17 pm
popular vote, but the electoral college is what matters. we will be watching those. i won't say one thing in a race that close. it was probably a dozen things. host: let me put a hypothetical on the table. pete buttigieg wins the iowa caucuses. vice president biden wins in south carolina. where would that put the democratic race in late february? guest: we can see this race go really deep in a process without anyone getting anywhere close to a majority of the delegates. host: might there be a contested convention? guest: you will never hear me say brokered convention because there are no brokers in american politics anymore.
7:18 pm
contested, that could happen because you could see -- and you could look at the father left and say one/sanders -- warr en/sanders. anyone who thinks bernie sanders and his supporters will go away quickly and quietly, they are really wrong. and bernie has a decent amount of money. it will take elizabeth warren a while to consolidate that side. booker so far not catching on. pete buttigieg and amy klobuchar. each one could be winning just enough. i don't think i will live to see a convention go to 100 ballots like they have in history. but this one could get
7:19 pm
interesting. remember, super delegates did not kick in until the second ballot. host: we are the only network that will carry gavel-to-gavel coverage of the convention. that to your phone calls -- back to your phone calls, from maryland, you are next. are you with us? caller: good morning. comments by some mr. cook. i want to ask about accountability because it seems there is a watering down of what is happening and an attempt to make a comparison to democrats that covered for obama or even president clinton when he was impeached. they are not the same issues. whenever there was talk about
7:20 pm
impeachment with bill clinton, it was over something totally different. with this president, you are talking about being a puppet to russia. i want to make sure that is understood. sure.not quite caller: the kind of explain why he things there is a similarity between what this president is doing and what presidents of the past have done on the democratic side and how they were held accountable or not held accountable by folks in congress of the same party. host: thanks for the question. guest: to anybody that comes from a very ideological bent, anybody trying to be in the middle will sound water down. i accept that. what president trump did were allegedly did and what president clinton did were allegedly did,
7:21 pm
i'm not saying they're the same thing. i'm talking about trying to impeach or remove without strong public support. if you don't have more people wanting to impeach and remove, so that when a party tries to do it without broad public support, they are treading on thin political ice. that is all i am saying. republicans did not have great public support then. democrats do not have strong public support here. take a look at the disapproval levels for president trump, and then look at support for impeach and remove. there is generally about a four to eight-point gap between disapproval and support for impeachment and removal. there are people who do not like but they don't support impeach and remove a year from the election when the
7:22 pm
campaign is underway. that is sort of the critical group. it got a little bigger for a while and it has frozen. the president's approval rating right now is not any lower than it was when the ukraine story broke. not sure how much you watched, but in your mind, did the hearings moved the needle? guest: i have not watched 10 consecutive seconds of the hearing. life is too short. it has not changed a thing. the thing is, normal people don't watch these types of hearings. normal people meaning registered voters who are not addicted to politics. you have to have an addiction to be glued to the tv set for these things. no, i don't think it has changed. it is like the brett kavanaugh nomination. they make the blues bluer and
7:23 pm
the reds redder. it just pushes partisans more into their corners. they were already pretty much in those corners anyway, so that is what has happened. we are becoming partisan and ideological silos with incredible intensity. host: we have all 31 hours on our websites and you can watch it anytime you want. the hearings are available at we also have highlights of some of the key moments during two weeks of testimony. guest: this is charlie's last appearance on c-span. host: not at all. we have football on thanksgiving, you can watch the hearings. let's go to mike in houston, texas on the republican line. caller: good morning. mr. cook, hi. i will be supporting donald trump next year and i'm from ohio originally. you mentioned that people out there hate government and hate politicians, i would disagree entirely. i think what we fear is tyranny.
7:24 pm
we fear a government taking over our health care which is a very personal activity, a personal life experience, and requiring our doctors to become government employees and complying with the department of cable workers. we fear tyranny. we fear guns and our self-defense being taken away from us. we don't hate government. we fear tyranny. the second point i want to make, if i could. you mentioned jeff flake, he would not have won reelection by himself. acondly, joe biden was democrat who was pushed out on the democrat party. it's not just republicans who have this fantasized version of the party. the democrat party, if you can or even pro-life partially pro-life democrat running for president, i will mow your lawn with my hand scissors. guest: tell me what pro-choice republican is running for president? 17 candidates. caller: there are pro-choice
7:25 pm
republicans throughout the state. guest: you defined that as running for president. caller: but we know who is running for president this time. let me ask you this. name for me one time there has been a question about the democrats about abortion in the five debates they have had so far. name one question. guest: it is exactly symmetrical on the two sides. the pro-life position is just as unwelcome on the democratic side of the pro-choice on the republican side. it is symmetrical. yes, every one of the democratic presidents for candidate is pro-choice. i believe of the 16 or 17 republicans, i believe every single one is pro-life. but when i was talking about people who don't like government and the like politicians, that is the overall aim.
7:26 pm
one group of them are really conservative like you are and they are afraid of tyranny, but the other side, they think government should do more. they think medicare for all, that is what they think. but they all don't like government. it is just they come at it from completely different ways where they might not like politicians for totally different reasons. know,cians, people, you use google. it's not hard to find poll numbers that show people don't like government, they don't like politicians. some of the competitive senate races to watch in case senator garyested, peters of michigan and senator doug jones of alabama, that race is a tossup. on the republican side, martha makes sally of arizona and cory gardner of colorado and susan collins of maine. carolina.ter of north how did orange county, the bastion of ronald reagan's
7:27 pm
conservative republican party, flip to become a democratic stronghold? real: we are seeing a alignment in this country and it is two different groups. you got suburban america that once a -- that once was a republican stronghold. particularly women, are moving away from the republican party to where the democratic party. at the same time, we have small-town america, working-class whites without a four-year college degree, and protestants and catholics who go to church at least once a week, they are trending away from democrats towards the republican party. we are seeing very much a real alignment in american politics. the problem for republicans is there are a lot more people in the suburbs. you are seeing the suburbs where democrats did incredibly well including four republican seats in orange county california.
7:28 pm
suburban america is becoming a real problem for the republican party but at the same time, because the electoral college, smaller states have more clout, relatively speaking. democrats are having more resistance in the senate. for exactly the same thing. int: here's the breakdown the senate. 53 republicans, 45 democrats, and two independents who caucus with democrats. the house of representatives, democrat at the majority. deborah is joining us from kalamazoo, michigan. caller: good morning, how are you today? host: how are you? charlie is a fan of kalamazoo, michigan. guest: i have been there lots of times. has changed hands a few times. guest: go ahead, i'm sorry. host: the pharmaceutical
7:29 pm
company? guest: it was the biggest employer. caller: we have an even larger one now. with just had an issue republicans always going back, somebody mentioned the right to life and all this. all of it is kind of the same and i just happened to be and women bible should have a choice. they have to meet their maker and determine his judgment on their sins or whatever. when the president aligns beast, we don't really have a choice. i'm really tired of being pro-russia. i'm afraid that pretty soon, he's going to be our dictator just like putin. host: thanks for the call.
7:30 pm
president trump just evokes very strong emotions. people either strongly approve of him or they strongly aboutrove, and generally 1.5-one .8% of people who strongly disapprove for everyone that strongly approves. he has this intensity that we have never seen with presidents before, and even within the republican party, there is sort of the republicans that love him and really approve of all his policies or most of his policies, then there is a group that may not like him personally , they may not like his style and his language and behavior, but they like where the economy has been. they like the tax cuts, they like less regulation, and they really like conservative judges, so they are brought in. dropis why you got 88, 90%
7:31 pm
-- job approval ratings among republicans in time, the other side has approval ratings around 6% or 7% among democrats. and obviously, independents in the middle. post: trump at 7:34 this morning, he had a number of tweets including this. polls have now turned very strongly against impeachment, especially in swing states. 75% to 25%. thank you. i've not seen a 75% in any swing state. but obama, i've seen a 55% in swing states. our guest is charlie cook, the editor and publisher of political report. you can follow him on twitter. good morning from washington state. caller: yes, i have a question about impeachment. in the constitution it says article one section three that
7:32 pm
the senate shall have the sole power to impeach. now, is what the house is doing just a propaganda phase? are they just trying to make trump look bad? is, what theing house does, the senate doesn't impeach. the house impeaches and the senate tries the case. the house is roughly the equivalent of a grand jury. the senate is more like the trial. you are either convicted, acquitted, or whatever in the senate. this is all part of the process that is laid out and starts in the house. the house has to draw and pass articles of impeachment, and then he comes over to the senate where there is a trial to the supreme court presiding over the trial. you can agree with it or disagree with what republicans are doing right now. as part of the process. you know, i think because there
7:33 pm
are -- you need 67 votes in the senate if everyone was voting. there are only 47 democrats. it's not clear to me that there will even be one or two republican senators voting for conviction. we know the outcome of this movie which is why i'm not fascinated with the hearings. you know, we know the ending. host: let me go back to my earlier question. do you think that this would put policy -- put nancy pelosi in a bind? and where would that put her among the democrats? guest: i think she was slow walking this. i think she wanted us to go away and as i said with revolutions -- revelations on ukraine, part of a redistricting where just as a republican district, most of them tend to be really, really republican.
7:34 pm
once the ukraine development started coming out, there was no stopping that. she had to go along with it. to me, -- host: what would you advise her to do? guest: i think she opposed as long as she could and now she is just trying to slow walk it. try to make it so it hurts democrats as little as it possibly could. democrat, i would want this election to be a referendum up or down on trump. i would not want it to be a referendum on impeachment. i mean, the thing is, there have been 68 major national polls out since the president took office. in all but one, he has been upside down, underwater, higher disapproval's. no president is ever been there. he has never had a majority approval. democrats should want this just
7:35 pm
to be a referendum on him. impeachment sucks all the oxygen out of the room. i was here in washington during the nixon impeachment. i was here during clinton. it sucks the oxygen out of the room and these democratic candidates are not getting anything. that debate the other night was completely overshadowed by was going on in the impeachment hearings earlier in the day. know, i would argue that democrats are not acting in their own self-interest. that partisans get driven by hate and the hate that a lot of republicans have toward president clinton i think blind their judgment and when the push for impeachment without strong national support, i think the same thing is happening the democrats right now. host: roseann on the democrat line, you are next. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call.
7:36 pm
are amazing. everything i was going to say, you have already said. political process is more controlled by corporations than anything. because they are the ones, they have so much money being thrown into this effort. job creation is dependent upon companies and corporations, and it seems to me they are the ones that are running the show. i mean, we have the decimation of unions, and now this divide. i've never seen such a divisive country in my life that it's kind of scary. i don't know where it's all going to go. you have pockets of the country where you have cities and like you say, it's different states that are more moral. the way things are run are different in both areas. so, i really don't know how we are going to be able to bring them together and really become united.
7:37 pm
thank you for taking my call. host: thank you. guest: i think each side thinks the other side has too much power and one thing about corporate america is in washington in the political legislative process, it's always easier to stop something than to start something. always easier to stop change, to stop reform. that comes into play a good bit. i share the colors broad view that our system is not working well. it's off-track. i worry about how we get our country back united again. i really do. 9/11, whent after you had congress the democrats and republicans gather on the capitol steps saying god bless america, i felt maybe something good will come out of this horrific nightmare.
7:38 pm
and i don't blame either side exclusively, but then we invaded iraq. it pull those wounds that open again. what kind of horrible thing, do we have the magical, wonderful leader like we had several times in american history that brings the united -- the united country together? i hope it is that a not some crisis. something has to happen. host: jim says we don't even have an opponent yet but charlie cook is saying he is at risk. please elaborate. all, i think we kind of know. you can look at job approval ratings, you look at questions like the election being held today, would you vote to reelect? or do you think it is time for change? there are all kinds of metrics. one that was republican is getting more and more purple, more and more swing.
7:39 pm
we are going to have a lot more competitive races. when you look at the suburbs around charlotte, around the research triangle, this is getting to be a more challenging situation, and it's not even anything he has done because if he were a democrat, the state is getting very evenly divided. they are going to see more races like this. just like cory gardner, the marthacan in colorado, makes sally in arizona, or susan collins in maine. these are states that are very evenly split, in some cases more evenly split than they used to be. you're going to have incumbents getting difficult votes. host: 40% republican california what percent of the
7:40 pm
vote is undecided? there is a lot of good data but let me talk on a national level. when you ask people if you consider yourself a democrat or a republican, and then you push them and find out how they 90% of theted, people who called himself republicans vote republican. you have close to half of the people saying i'm independent if you ask them -- ask them if they lean democrat or republican, of the independence is a they lean democrat, they vote for democrats like 80% of the time. same thing with the independence of the republican. when you boil it down, there are only about six or 7% that are is,pendent and the thing they are not watching c-span, they are not watching much news.
7:41 pm
they don't read the newspapers that much. they don't pay attention until very late. it is that six or 7% that is the most persuadable, and then you have concentric circles out of who are somewhat persuadable. it just depends on how you define it. host: we will go to gym in virginia, republican line. you are on the air with charlie cook. caller: gentlemen, good morning. charlie, i'm not sure this is directly for you, it's not necessarily a republican or democratic question. i happen to be a military officer. and i happen to also notice that it appears to me, for the first time, there is an active military officer who is campaigning while in the military and announcing that fact.
7:42 pm
and i a little bit skewed in my understanding of the hatch act? guest: i'm not sure who you are referring to. think she is reserves, isn't she? this is not my area, i think they are governed by a different set of rules. you've got all kinds of members, look on capitol hill. all kinds of members of congress that run for reelection that are members of the reserve. lindsey graham was air force reserve. lots of people in reserves. this is not really my area. i'm sorry, i can't help you. host: but thanks for tuning in. we will go next to alexandria, virginia. caller: good morning. i just wanted to thank mr. cook for his perspective, for his
7:43 pm
time now. i just wanted to make a comment real quick, two comments real. i think that the democrats are actually not pushing as hard as they should be doing. for example, during the impeachment hearing, i didn't see tv ads talking about cohen whereen -- he mentioned that almost falling trump will end up in the same way as they ended up being in jail. the democrats should be forceful. this is the time for them to be able to show the difference between a corrupt president and the president who actually had every element of a dictatorship. i have been in a third world country before. i feel very, very scared. i've seen it coming. if trump wins another four years, it would be a disaster for this country.
7:44 pm
all of the republicans of the halloween him, turning the other way, turning a blind eye with all of the things that this president is doing, nobody hates donald trump, it's his behavior that people of poor. host: thank you for the call. right now, the fight is not getting far except for the early state on television. we are going to have 10 months of attacks out there and for people who live in swing states, you say you lived in alexandria, i think? will see some, although virginia may not be contested as much in 2020 as it was in the past. i think it is pretty likely that democrats will hold in virginia again. but the people that live in swing states, they are going to be seeing ads coming out of their ears. they are going to see more than one. for people who live in states
7:45 pm
either reliably red or blue, they will see a lot less of this. just stay tuned, there's 10 months ahead. host: we saw this in the washington post, forming aipac indicating he might run in 2021. speaking of that, michael bloomberg spending upwards of $34 million. this is a story from politico. tomorrow, our first look at the michael bloomberg ad. >> he could have just been the middle-class kid who made good. guy bloomberg became the who did good. after building a business that created thousands of jobs, he took charge of a city still grieving from 9/11. a three term they are helped bring it back from the ashes. bringing jobs and housing units with it. after >> mike bloomberg started as a middle-class kid who had to work
7:46 pm
his way through college and build a business from a single room to a global entity, creating tens of thousands of a paying jobs along the way. he could have stopped there. when new york suffered the terrible tragedy of 9/11, he took charge, becoming a three term mayor who brought a city back from the ashes and brought back jobs and hope with it. creating tens of thousands of affordable housing units so families could have a decent place to live, raising teachers salaries and kids graduation rates and creating a more open and livable city for the millions who call it home. he could have stopped there. when he witness the terrible toll of gun violence, he put his money where his heart is, helping to create a movement to take on the nra and politicians they own, to protect families across this country and help turn the tide. at the bloomberg campaign. >> a little while ago, i made the point that you can make about whyd arguments they can win the democratic nomination. he was one of the most impressive people i ever met in my life.
7:47 pm
very, very smart and very able. a terrific mayor. having said that, is the democratic party pining for a billionaire? is it as open to a business oriented candidate as they were back in the 90's? just as people are saying other candidates have problems with voters, i think he will have some problems with some minority voters and things like that. you can certainly make arguments against each one of them. one of them is going to win the nomination. couldt sure that you forfeit iowa, new hampshire, nevada, south carolina, and then pick up in the super tuesday race and move forward, but at the same time, we've never had a self funder who is trying to do that.
7:48 pm
not having to leverage doing well and i look, new hampshire. this is uncharted territory. he's a very impressive guy, but i think if mayor bloomberg clearly believes that parties should not go the elizabeth warren bernie sanders route. elizabeth warren was not doing as well, it would not be getting in. she would be a lot more comfortable with a centerleft. there does seem to be something of a vacuum but the question is, can bloomberg fill that vacuum? host: let's go to jeff in carrollton, georgia. caller: good morning. i was born in america. i have the right not to be governed. the democrats since abraham lincoln decided that we should
7:49 pm
be united states. this is federal government. old and i've years seen it all. veteran, i'm in the military. the way america is going now is cracp. guest: i'm not sure what it means right now cannot be governed. you can like the government were not like it. we have it. sure what to say. that let's conclude with point because just the division in this country. if i cr. you just wonder, where does this go?
7:50 pm
historically, we have had great leaders emerge people who united the country and pulled us together. and i hope that could still happen. i don't care if they are democrat republican, i hope that could still happen. if the process really allows the elevation of the kinds of leaders that we have had in the past that united the country. whether the process does. i worry about where things are. now that i got a grandchild, i have to worry about generations down the way. we are not a good place right that the nexte generations us a little bit better job than my baby boomer generation. i hope they will. host: and we will conclude on that note. we hope you come back again. announcer: more campaign news
7:51 pm
came this morning as michael bloomberg released a video officially launching his presidential campaign. he has bought over $37 million worth of television advertising over the next two weeks. here is the announcement posted on his campaign website. >> mike bloomberg started as a middle-class kid who had to work his way through college and build a business from a single room to a global entity, creating tens of thousands of good paying jobs along the way. he could have stopped there. when new york suffered the terrible tragedy of 9/11, he took charge, becoming a three term mayor who brought a city back from the ashes and brought back jobs and hope with it. creating tens of thousands of affordable housing units so families could have a decent place to live, raising teacher'' salaries and kids graduation rates and creating a more open and livable city for the millions who call it home. he could have stoppeer


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on