tv Ali Velshi on Target Al Jazeera January 14, 2016 9:00pm-9:31pm EST
"on target" tonight. mike huckabee is struggling in the polls but is not giving up his fight to be the 2016 republican nominee for president. i'll ask him how long he'll stay in the race and why he still has faith that evangelical voters will still have faith in him and reject ted cruz. the 2016 election proirnl season officially kicks off with the avoid caucus on february 1st and on the republican side there are still 12 candidates,
vying for the party faithful but if parties to be believed, ted cruz and donald trump are running neck and neck in iowa. marco rubio is running a distant third and most others are barely registering. mike huckabee swept the iowa caucus in 2008. won seven more states before bowing out to the eventually nominee john mccain. wooing the popular voters, from strang supporstrong support from evangelical christians. but now, meanwhile evangelicals in iowa appear to be throwing their lot behind ted cruz who
may win as a result. what does that mean for huckabee? he's going to have to reassess his run for the because it's too crowded ahead of the iowa caucuses. sooner or later more candidates will bow out, around top contenders, donald trump and ted cruz. i asked huckabee, what cruz said about his right to be president because cruz was born in canada. here is what huckabee told me. >> i'm not getting into that, that's not an issue for me. i i was born in hope arkansas, i'm pretty sure i'm eligible. >> governor, you have the strongest support in evangelicals what happened. >> well, first of all, i don't think that this election has been decided yet. you know, i know what the polls
say but the polls have been so wrong in elections. the kentucky governor's race is a good recent example. polls don't always reflect where things are. i still think there's going to be a big surprise on the night of february 1st. we're doing 150 events in iowa. this month just in the month of january, and quite frankly, not one person in america has voted yet. so let's wait until february 1st. we'll see how things really shake out. >> it's a punishing schedule. the 150 events in iowa. have you given some thought if the polls reflect reality on february 1st. are you staying in the race beyond that? >> well it all depends on how things, you know, cluster. if we're up nearhe top then certainly we keep going. i mean if we're in single digits and we just don't get traction then it's hard to keep going. but we're not anticipating that and that's why i mean -- look if i honestly thought those polls
were reflective of where we are and where we're going to be three weeks from tonight, heck i'd go home. >> i hear yah. >> i'm still committed to this. that's why we're doing 150 events in january. you only do that one or two reasons, you are committed to winning or you're stark raving nuts. that's the only reason would you do that many meefnts th events . >> governor, you've been quoted as saying these are your words if you reward people who play outside the rules and punish people living within the rules pretty soon no one is going to play within the rules. you're talking about immigration here, we are a nation of immigrants but we are also a nation of laws. i want to just sort of move away from immigration on that one. you do believe we are a nation of laws but you gave a pretty g
big embrace to kim davis, deemed to be in direct contravention of the law. i'm just wondering how that squares about you viewing the nation as a nation of laws on immigration but not on same-sex marriage. >> well i hold to the view that the constitution expressly says that the courts can't make a law. kim davis didn't violate a law, all she had was the kentucky constitution. the law the people speak of is the supreme court ruling made by the nine supreme court justices or five unelected lawyers. the court can't make law. that's been evident since the beginning of the constitution, jeffersoning affirmed that, madison, jackson, that makes the supreme court the supreme branch and overrules the other two. so congress can make a law, that's their constitutional duty. the courts can't.
>> so in fact unless you see an affirmative law about same-sex marriage you don't believe that's the law of the land? >> well, there's nothing in the constitution that even speaks to marriage period. not just same sex marriage. there's nothing in the constitution that speaks to marriage at all. >> right. >> so how do the courts reach out and create a right that is never defined in the constitution if the limitation of their review is in fact the u.s. constitution? and that's what they're responsible for doing and they reach beyond their responsibility. i mean if you read kennedy's opinion he virtually indicated that, that they to reach intoout thin air. they picked ds reach out into thin air. jufght justice kagan when she was going through her confirmation hearings to be solicitor general, led me remind you under oath that there is no
constitutional right in united states law, for same-sex marriage. so what change between 2009 -- assemble by that extension there would be no constitutional right to opposite sex marriage, right? >> to what kind of marriage? >> to a man and a woman getting married. if there's no coverage of it in the constitution that works both ways. >> well, it's a matter the states have always held the jurisdiction of that. and you know there's i think every reason to believe that that's the way it was intended. the founders expressly said in the 10th amendment if it's not in the constitution it is the purview of the states and that's where it should have been left. >> so when it comes to these social issues, if there are people who wish to make same sex marriage legal, wish to make abortion legal and they went through congress to do that and congress passed such laws you would then accept them as affirmative laws that are not otherwise spoken of in the constitution? >> well what you do if congress
passes it, the president signs it and agrees to enforce it, you may not like it but you enforce it, you create a process that sir couple vent circumvents the constitution should have rejected the process by which they supposedly and i say supposedly, i don't think they got what they wanted, i don't think there's such a thing as automatic same sex marriage because of the constitution, but there should be very, very wary of allowing this process to be decided by courts rather than the people's elected representatives. because just remember if that's the weapon they choose then some day if there is a court that decides the other way, then i guess they've certainly set themselves up to say well, there's nothing we can do about it. it's the law of the land. so i just want to ask you this: do you think the left would have reacted in the same way had that
been the ruling, 5-4 in favor traditional biblical marriage and if it some day it changes will that be the reaction of those on the left in support of same-sex marriage, there's nothing we can do, it's the law of the land. you and i know the answer to that is no. >> but the history is that people who are in favor of change or against change do the same thing. they try get legislation passed in states. they try get legislation passed in congress and if there's a test in the supreme court they try win that too. people try come out on sides that works for them. i guess i'm trying to determine if there's a law passed by congress that guaranteed same-sex marriage would you have had the same support of kim davis? because i suspect davis ohave done the same thing one way or the other. >> i think then she would have the right to say look, i can't
do that in violation of my conscience. remember kim davis was an elected official. the kentucky constitution expressly said marriage was a relationship between one man one woman. now the relationship comes you can't do that because of your conscience. should there be an accommodation for people's faith? i've been to gitmo.i see the accommodation we make to people who are there. we paint lines on the cell floors that point to mecca, we give them the opportunity to practice their faith, these are people who are being detained for either murdering americans americans. are you telling me that it's okay to accommodate people who are in gitmo under those kinds of circumstances, but we can't accommodate an elected county clerk in kentucky? i find that hard to believe.
>> right but we're not accommodating the gitmo prisoners, none of that breaks the law, what kim davis was doing, in the meaning of some was breaking the law. >> the differences though, it wasn't that people couldn't get a same-sex marriage license in kentucky. the question was whether she had to personally sign it. if a couple is interested in marriage more than they are making a point, why do they care whose signature is on the certificate? shouldn't they be less interested in the signature of the clerk and more interested in their signatures? that's why i thought this was so disingenuous. not make sure they could be married because they could be. were they going to force a person of christian faith to go against her conscience and force her to do something and then the judge criminalized her christianity by putting her in
jail because she could not bail bow to that particular practice. that's why i feel this was so disingenuous for people on the left. they want no one to be able to legally and even ethical ly just say okay, you goat do your marriage but i'm not going to have to personally approve i.t. or applaud for it. that's not good enough. they want you to be forced to accept it and to sign the certificate. i just think that's a little bit evident that it's not about the marriage, it's about forcing those who oppose it to have to accept it. and even to accommodate it. and support it with a signature. >> coming up mike huckabee says evangelical voters in iowa may like ted cruz right now but that won't last. the former arkansas governor says he still has faith had a major surprise on february 1st. that's next.
>> so where we are standing... this will be the panama canal? >> this will be flooded. >> technology, it's a vital part of who we are... >> they had some dynamic fire behavior. >> and what we do. >> trans-cranial direct stimulation... don't try this at home. >> techknow's team of experts show you how the miracles of science... >> this is what innovation looks like. >> can affect and surprise us. >> i feel like we're making an impact. >> awesome! >> techknow - where technology meets humanity.
a follow out monday from quinn pique university said, ted cruz leading donald trump, 31% to 29%. but among white evening or born again voters, cruz has a seven point lead with 34% of the volt. mike huckabee by contrast has just 5% of that evangelical vote, that's a huge difference from 2008 when huckabee won the iowa caucus. that's where i started my conversation with the iowa governor. governor, i think in most other years chris christie would be considered the most bombastic cairnt on thcandidate on the st. and right now he's getting all his oxygen sung sucked up by dod trump.
but the compass is pointing towards ted cruz right now. what do you have to say to social conservatives to evangelicals, to religious voters right now to say i'm your guy, been here for a while? >> well you know, i'm not a person who says something different in manhattan than i do in marshaltown, iowa. i don't say something different in walkee iowa than i do in washington, d.c. a movement conservative doesn't mean you move to wherever the polls show you need to be or you move depending on what your gps location is. so i just, deep down believe that a lot of folks when they start thinking bit over these next three weeks will know that i am the person who has said exactly the same thing not just in this election cycle but since i was a teenager and there's been no real change of my personal conviction and views. because they're not views that are based on political polling.
they're based on deep convictions in part because of my faith. but in part because this is where i landed years ago, philosophically. and you know my dad always taught me son, if you tell the truth you don't have to remember what you said. you just tell it the same way the next time. >> good advice from your father. how do you feel about the fact that there are people who may believe in a lot of your message who at the moment seem to be leaning towards ted cruz because ted cruz seems quite winnable. that there is money going towards the cruz campaign, that cruz has got momentum behind him and yet there are people voting for him who would be very, very comfortable voting for you as president. >> well in three weeks i've just got to get them even more comfortable voting for me and that's part of the challenge. but the iowa caucus voters break late. i like to say they date everybody in the field and tend to enjoy company of new people but when it gets down to it these are people that don't put
a ring on it until wedding day and i fully believe this is going to be an election where there's going to be major surprise is on february 1st. >> coming up mike huckabee says defeating i.s.i.l. means united states needs to have a ground game but sending in troops is hugely unpopular among americans who are tired of ground wars. i'll ask huckabee how he feels, flex.
december have made national security a major issue in the 2016 presidential race and that presents a potential challenge for presidential candidates "like" mike huckabee, who are far more identified with social and domestic issues than international policy, that's what i spoke with the man vying for the republican nomination. >> at 43% up from 26%, just back in november, social issues have fallen from 7%, they twhearnt high in thweren'tthat high in t% to 4%. the drop in social issues has to hurt you. >> you know, i don't think i've ever been a candidate that was solely about social issues. i'm unapologetically pro-life because i don't think we want to be the culture that thinks some people are valuable and some people aren't. i refuse to accept the notion
that some human beings are disposable. unabashedly month-marriage. living out the challenges of national security from the time i was first in office and certainly have a clear conviction about rebuilding our military, make it the strongest it can be. i have a unique plan and i think most important and significant pathway to get our economy going again through passage of the fair tax which really empowers poor peel and supercharges the economy by bringing about $31 extremely of money that's parked offshore back to the u.s. so social issues while they're important to me while i'm never going to changes change my view or run away from it, it's never what i get asked about in town halls or what i spend the majorities of my time talking about. in part i don't have to prove my
bona fides on marriage, and i've never said anything different when i'm out of iowa and that's something people do care about too. >> let me talk about this governor, i talk about economics a lot, i want to get to that in a minute. let's talk about national security, at the moment i snow the governors in the race, you governor kasich, governor christie, have to convince legislators have more nuanced views about what we should be doing about national security and the fights that are going on in the middle east and i.s.i.l. and yet you guys are the ones who are having the greatest trouble gaining ground vtion peoplversuspeople who haven't had the need to make executive decisions, as a result you can't have the most outlandish views. >> i think a lot of i.t. is that people are so angry at government it's not just a dissatisfaction, they're a
seething rage out there in the electorate. and many hold everyone responsible who has ever been elected to anything. even though those of us who are governors, most of us, some have been in congress but most of us have never lived a day of our life in washington. never got a paycheck in washington. i tell voters every day, don't blame me for what's going on in washington. senators are a part of it, blame them not me. but i do think there's an unusual atmosphere in the election that almost says the more experience you have the more qualified you are maybe the less attractive you are as a candidate. but that's like saying i'd like to go up in an airplane and i want to fly with a pilot who has never flown before. i want him to fly me through thunderstorms and turbulence. i want to go against head winds but i don't want anyone who's ever actually flown the plane. i want ocomplete amateur, a person who has never been behind the stick. that's who i want to fly with. well nobody would think like that.
so i think the voters if they start thrig bit and that's what i'm -- start thinking bit, and and -- about it and that's what i'm hoping will happen, will have a sears conversation with themselves, maybe it's not the best idea to put this country in the hands of someone who hasn't had any challenges as the executive. >> gloafn, i know you have to keep going to your events, i want to end with that one topic, national security. your views on how to handle things in the middle east. they oar little bit nuanced and the fact is when a president comes in it's complicated. what you're going to do about bashar al-assad. you've actually opened the door to placing troops on the ground to fight i.s.i.l. that is something a lot of americans are against, something the iraqis are against and clearly something the assad government is against in syria. how do you win this war?
>> we can't win it strictly by air, i wish we could but we can't. we have to have an aggressive campaign where we actually drop ordinances. , we were dropping the ordinance ordinance ordnances. i wish we could have a ground game, there seasonality. o have a resurgent guerilla operation, unless you are willing to take the fight to the towns that they've inhabited and that's got to be part of it. it's got to be a multinational coalition of countries. the united states can't go it alone. we shouldn't pay for it ourselves, we shouldn't shed the blood by ourselves. we have to convince the american people that we are under threat. not threat for real estate, this is a threat for our way of existence. there is a threat to civilization itself.
>> governor you said you really were quite strongly against the iran deal now that it is in place do you still believe that it should be torn up when you get into office? >> it absolutely has to be. by the way, the iranians haven't even signed it so we're such chumps. we got onto this deal, released $150 billion of froze en assets and when do we get for it? nothing. pastor abedini and others are still there. we got nothing. all we got was the promise of the iranians who have never department a promise this 37 years. it's the most horrible agreement and i have no idea why the president would ever have pushed this but even bigger i have no idea why some of the republicans voted for the corker bill that made this bill easier for president obama and harder for the u.s. senate to really stand against it. >> governor huckabee you told me when we met you would sit down
on my show. you've done it thank you for being on al jazeera. >> thank you very much. hope we do it again. >> thank you for joining us. the news continues on al jazeera america. ftc >> we're here to fully get into the nuances of everything that's going on, not just in this country, but around the world. getting the news from the people who are affected. >> people need to demand reform... >> ali velshi on target.
thanks for joining us, i'm joie chen. it's a welcome announcement. the world health organisation announced that west africa is officially ebola free. there may be a false sense of security attached to that sigh of relief, even though no new cases emerged in 42 days, something else has. a debilitating set of health problems known as post-ebola syndrome. lisa fletcher with a survivor, a doctor that fought the virus at ground zero. >> it was the height of west africa's ebola outbreak. a medivac plane rushes another american healthcare worker home and into a bio-containment facility. the fate of the doctor was uncertain, as was the care he would receive. there were no proven drugs, no