tv Fareed Zakaria GPS CNN March 13, 2016 10:00am-11:01am PDT
this is gps, the global public square. welcome to all of you from the united states and around the world. >> tell the whole story, senator. >> today on the show, the zigzags and jibjabs of the u.s. presidential race have horrified the american people. many ask what does the world think? what do they make of the donald? >> something else must be small. i guarantee you there's no problem. >> how does the world feel about the hostility, vulgarity, attacks on foreigners? >> we're going to build a wall. don't worry about it. >> i have a great global panel to discuss. also -- [ usa chants ]
-- that the strongest single predictor for donald trump is something few of us could imagine. it is not economic anxiety, it is not even race. we'll talk to him and explain. and so far the presidential campaign has seen 20 -- count them -- 20 debates and there are still almost eight months until the election. we will debate the art of debating from its ancient origins to lincoln and douglas all the way to today. finally -- >> the most important thing is the story. >> other shows are reexamining what was called the murder of the century, the o.j. simpson case. we will re-examine the most famous murder in history. who really killed jewel caesar and why? fitting questions on the eve of
the eyes of march. but first, here's my take. the energy fuelling the presidential campaign on both sides of the political spectrum seems to be deep despair about the american economy. on this central issue, bernie sanders and donald trump have a surprisingly similar message. the american economy has failed. but is the analysis correct? let's see. the u.s. economy has created 14 million private sector jobs since 2010. unemployment has dropped to under 5% and the number of people filing jobless claims hit a 42-year low. the dow jones industrial average has more than doubled under barack obama, under some of the best stock performances under any president. housing and construction markets are also strong. auto sales are booming and even wages have begun to rise. the central dilemma for the united states is that the gains from growth, low inflation and
technological productivity, are spread broadly through the entire population. we all gain from lower cost goods and extraordinary technology. but the costs, the jobs lost, the wages cut are concentrated among a smaller group of people. it is the voices of these people, understandably angry, that we hear on the campaign trail these days. the present recovery has been much less robust than previous ones. but many economists predicted this from the start, pointing out that the slowdowns from the financial crisis battle the confidence of consumers and businesses. the most relevant measure, surely, is how the u.s. has emerged from the recession compared to the other world's major economies. on this, it's clear, the u.s. economy will grow much faster than the eurozone's and three
times faster than japan's. in the united states federal reserve started to raise interest rates because it worries about economic growth produced in inflation. while almost every other central bank in the world is thinking of cutting rates to desperately try to jump-start their economies. on the republican campaign trail, one of the ritual denunciations you hear is that the obama administration has strangled the economy with regulations. the centerpiece of that is dodd/frank. yet, as the financial times report this had week, america's top five investment banks made more than twice as much money as their european counterparts, beating the european rivals on almost every financial measure last year. the argument that the economy would grow faster if there were major tax and regulatory reforms is a plausible one in theory. the united states is actually a very competitive economy.
a recent ubs report for the economic world forum identified the countries best able to take advantage of the fourth industrial revolution, and america ranked fifth. in an essay of foreign affairs, lawrence summers, former president of harvard and former treasury secretary, carefully explains why the fundamental problem in the economy today is a lack of demand. too much savings, too little spending. and he advocates as the single central solution a major boost in infrastructure spending. he's pointed out to me before, in a house a deferred maintenance ensures you have a much larger bill when things break down. better to borrow money at low rates and spend it now to boost growth and kick off a virtual cycle of demand. future generations will be better off owing lots of money in long-term bonds at low rates,
in a currency they can print, than they would be inheriting a vast, deferred maintenance liability, he writes. from what they have repeatedly said about infrastructure on the campaign trail, it appears that donald trump and bernie sanders would agree with all this. for more, go to cnn.com/fareed and read my washington post column this week. and let's get started. excitement, horror, other -- utter confusion. these are a few emotions americans are feeling about the 2016 presidential race. but i wanted to find out what the rest of the world thinks of the likes of trump, cruz, rubio, kasich, clinton and sanders. do they feel the same emotions or different ones? here with me is a writer for the
global magazine. adam gognik was, in the late 1990s, the magazine's paris correspondent. we're calling him an honorary frenchman today. a lecturer on political theory at harvard, born and bred in germany and giddeon rockman joins us from london today, the chief columnist for the financial times. what is going on in europe, in general? certainly, when they look at trump they're thinking about what's happening in europe. >> one of the things that's happening is you've seen a mountain of right wing national
parties. now running the extreme right party, actively endorsed donald trump, marine le pen. she said she would vote for trump if she were an american. i think it suggested they see and it's not limited to the extreme right, trump as primarily a nationalist. i think it's terribly important that we see trump in that conte context, as a nationalist. it's a very different thing from a populist or conservative. >> giddeon, you wrote a column called in defense of donald trump. explain what you mean. >> well, i started with a lot of the same horror that you said was being felt in the united states and so on. but i guess it was the death of nancy reagan over the weekend that reminded me that much of the same horror had been expressed about ronald reagan, when he came to power. i was a student at the time. and i remember in the uk acres
lot of people thought we were on the brink of world war iii and so on. i wondered whether, perhaps, is our reaction to trump overstated? in some respects, it might be. if you look at his positions on foreign policy in some respects, he's actually more moderate than a ted cruz, who wants to rip up the iran deal on day one. but in the end, actually, i gave up my defense of donald trump two-thirds of the way through the column, i must admit. there are worrying aspects, as much to do with his temperament and style he brings to politics, as his policies. the misogyny, flirting with racism and also just his extreme touchiness. i think i would be worried to have somebody like that in charge. >> the person who he does seem to resemble an awful lot was
berlosconi, almost a vulgar style, but italians love it. so tell me what we can learn from berlusconi. >> i think the parallels between the two are really striking and i think they go well beyond politics and the question of style is really important here. it's the very brash, abrasive record that trump is using in the campaign reminds italians very much of the sight of berlusconi had or displayed for the 20 or so years he dominated italian politics, whether as the head of government or head of the opposition. calling names was a very common thing that berlusconi would do regularly, justices or communists out to persecute him and journalists were criminals. he made a habit of suing them any chance he got. rivals were dangerous liars and this is what we're seeing this year. >> would you say that berlusconi's legacy for italy has been bad?
he has kind of coarsened italian democracy? >> yes, and shattered the trust that italians have by basing public discourse around politics and democracy and institutions. if you say over and over again that everybody's corrupt and nobody is to be trusted, judiciary is a corrupt system with political aims, sooner or later, people are going to start believing it, especially if you're seeing that from the white house. >> you've written about this. the loss of faith in democracy. how much of it is you have a spirited attack on not just your political opponents for having different policies but almost for being criminals or traitors to the country? >> now we're at a stage where people don't trust anybody in politics anymore. any politician who stands up and does their best to convince voters, look, i'm an honest guy. what we like about characters like berlusconi or trump, at
least they're not hypocritical about it. when he's asked why he invited him to his wedding hillary says i thought it was fun to go. trump says well, i'm a real estate magazinate. i had to go after political favor. people like the fact he's honest about this t. i think is it also then going to deteriorate. what really worries me about trump is that he has his only course is himself. that makes him willing to do anything. that's very dangerous for the republic. >> we'll take a break. when we come back i want to talk about, among other things, germany. the most important case in europe and where you do see the rise of a far-right populous. with creative new business incentives, and the lowest taxes in decades, attracting the talent and companies of tomorrow. like in buffalo, where the largest solar gigafactory in the western hemisphere will soon energize the world.
and in syracuse, where imagination is in production. let us help grow your company's tomorrow - today - at business.ny.gov a blade. many blades. tsharp blades.g. blades here, blades there. some more over there... whoa! that's not another blade. this is shielding. with lubrication here and here. the new gillette with proshield lubrication before and after the blades shields from irritation for a close, comfortable shave. the new proshield from gillette. the best a man can get. and one proshield refill gets you up to one month of shaves. you're an at&t small business expert? sure am. my staff could use your help staying in touch with customers. at&t can help you stay connected. am i seeing double? no ma'am. our at&t 'buy one get one free' makes it easier for your staff to send appointment reminders to your customers... ...and share promotions on social media? you know it! now i'm seeing dollar signs. you should probably get your eyes checked.
good one babe. optometry humor. right now get up to $650 in credits to help you switch to at&t. i am totally blind. i lost my sight in afghanistan. if you're totally blind, you may also be struggling with non-24. calling 844-844-2424. or visit my24info.com. put under a microscope, we can see all the bacteria that still exists. polident's unique micro clean formula works in just 3 minutes, killing 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. for a cleaner, fresher, brighter denture every day. (vo) you can check on them. you can worry about them. you can even choose a car for them. (mom) honey, are you ok? (child) i'm ok.
and we are back with gideon rachman and our panel. we're going to talk about germany. before that, gideon, i have to ask you about english nationalism. how much of the right-wing revolt against david cameron, the attempt to get britain out of europe, how much of that is the rise of a kind of english nationalism that feels has been bent in by the scots, the welsh and now europe? >> well, it's mainly aimed at europe. it's got deep roots. it goes back to facsism.
the sense that parliament has lost sovereignty to brussels. that's been there a long time. it's been given a lot of fuel. there, i think, there is some parallel with trump. we don't have control of the borders. interestingly, they wouldn't yet go as far as trump. i don't think anyone campaigning say for britain to leave the eu says we should have a complete ban on muslims leaving the uk. >> people would be concerned about a far right movement in germany. so far since 1945, there hasn't been much of one. now there does appear to be one, with this woman, petrie. tell us about her. >> that's right. when you look at representation, every single one of them has quite significant foreign populist party and all came into parliament in the last ten, 15 years. in germany, up until now, i
think they've been a little scared of going there. i think they were just lucky in establishing that kind of party. now it looks like it's coming together. >> is the appeal similar to trump's? >> absolutely. i think what's going on with foreign populists, they have the exact same political image. the average guy knows what there is to do. then obviously as a country, you fill in the variables. in the united states, you know, mexican immigration is a big issue. all of trump's rhetoric is against mexicans. in germany, the refuge issue so it's all about syrians and alternative for germany, the name of the party, in order to stop immigration, we should be willing to shoot at children at the border. so, the particular, outrageous statements are different, but the basic political imagery is the same. >> gideon, when you look at
trump from england, what is the discourse there? what do people think? is it different than here in america? >> well, look, it's incredible how much interest there is. i think originally, the reaction was rather similar to the american establishment's reaction that was a kind of only in america phenomenon, but it would soon fade. they didn't really believe it would have legs. then it's been replaced by increduality. now i think a degree of anxiety as well. although, people are still, i don't know whether it's denial or being realistic, but i think people still find it hard to imagine he would go all the way to the white house. i think the fallback london dinner party position as well, okay, even if he gets the nomination, surely he will lose to hillary clinton. so in that sense, i don't think people have quite yet gotten themselves into the position where they really think it's real. >> i'm glad you're revealing
your reptorial technique, gideon. >> it's been widely discussed in the media. amusement and increduality are the feelings in italy as well. it's hard to see america going down the same path we went down 20 years ago, and a lot of people didn't think it would get this far in italy, like they don't here, didn't here. >> the difference, though, is that berlusconi was a successful tycoon, right? he had actually done some things. one thing that makes trump, and people in france have noted this, so peculiar is he is an entirely american figure in some ways with all the commonalities that he has. the great american figure of the confidence man, the music man, in that way. he has had relative -- he is, by new york real estate standards, a very trivial and second-class figure. by -- we're talking about ronald reagan, let's remember, he had been governor of the biggest
state in the country for eight, on the whole, successful years. so this isn't like those previous things, it seems to me. and it has some quality, some 19th century quality of the bunkum artist that is mesmerizing and frightening at the same time. and i think in france, you know, it's funny how each country has its own peculiar history. in germany, terror that the far right would come back up. in france, it's the question of can you ever allow the far right out of its cage in a sense, that's the heritage of collaboration. >> fascinating conversation. thank you all. next on "gps," debates. what are they good for? >> look at those hands. are they small hands? >> certainly have been entertaining this u.s. political season. how enlightening have they been? was it better in the old days? we will ask two scholars. the wonderment of nature.conneh the detail on this surface book is amazing. with the tiger image, the saliva coming off and you got this turning.
that's why i need this kind of resolution and computing power. being able to use a pen like this. on the screen directly with the image. it just gives me a different relationship to it. and i can't do that on my mac. this is brilliant for me. ♪ think you know t-mobile's coverage? think again! in the last year we've doubled our lte coverage. our new extended-range lte now reaches twice as far... ...and is 4 times better in buildings. see for yourself at t-mobile.com slash coverage. (phone rings) hi mom! hi dad! (vo) some people get to travel for work. i'm video chatting with my parents. they just moved down to boca. (dad) honey, can you see us? (vo) it's the little things that make a big difference. courtyard, make room for a little fun. i thione second it's there.day. then, woosh, it's gone. i swear i saw it swallow seven people. seven. i just wish one of those people could have been mrs. johnson.
first-ever televised debate. the story goes if you heard it on the radio you thought richard nixon was the victor. >> i know what it means to be poor. >> if you watched it on tv you were certain that senator kennedy then won. why? well, nixon looked sweaty and sickly and kennedy was young and handsome. welcome to the world of television. fast forward to today's debates where the insults fly and references are made to the size of genitalia. >> and he referred to my hands if they're small something else must be small. i guarantee you there's no problem. i guarantee. >> we should step back and remind ourselves of the purpose of debate, its terrific power and the great debates of history. with me, professor of history at columbus university. and hunter rollins, the president of the cornell university, now the president of association of american universities. welcome. hunter, i thought we would start
with you. you're a classicist. why do we have debates? it used to be that people made speeches. but you and i talked about how at the heart of it all is really the idea of dialogues. why did plato start writing dialogues? >> plato started writing dialogues because he thought a lot of public speaking was superficial and weak. he felt the best way to get to the truth was for you and me to have a serious argument. in a serious argument, i can take your ideas and put them under a test, and you can do the same for me. that way, we're going to, we hope, get towards something that's true, as opposed to my winning the debate or your winning the debate. >> how was that regarded at the time, the idea of having these kind of debates? >> well, the ancient athenians loved public discourse, they loved speaking. they loved rhetoric.
athenians did not elect politicians to make the big decisions. they made the big decisions themselves sitting in large assemblies. >> so the debate was crucial because in effect you were that perhaps they didn't even know about? >> yes. you had to be a very good speaker. you had to be able to speak to 10,000 or 12,000 people live and that, of course, takes talent and a lot of practice and frankly, education. so, someone like paraclese, was regarded as a superb speaker. in fact, his nickname was the olympian. when he spoke, it sounded like zeus, thunderring down from on high. >> where do debates start in political history? >> well, of course, the constitutional convention was full of pretty profound debates. but this was all in private. they were not public debates at all. proceedings weren't published until much, much later. but pretty early candidates, not for president, as you said.
but candidates for other offices, lower offices had to debate. certainly in the 19th century there were plenty of debates for candidates for congress in different districts. the lincoln/douglas debates are rather unusual because they were both candidates of the senate. you'll have these seven debates where they're out there speaking to hear 10,000 to 20,000 people coming to hear these lengthy debates. they lasted three hours or more and quite profound in many ways. debates between the two candidates. >> did they make a difference? >> they made a tremendous difference. they made a difference in the long term in making lincoln a national figure. we didn't have the tv or the internet but newspapers from all over the country covered these debates. the telegraphs were there and it could be sent around the country quickly. but they were a debate over fundamental issues, the place of
slavery in our society, the future of slavery, the role of african-americans. who is really an american? is it only a country for white people? do free blacks have any rights? >> when you watch these debates and you look at it as an historian, what is your reaction? >> well, you know, it's -- i'm usually appalled, particularly by the republican debates, which have sunk to a pretty low level, as you mentioned before. but, you know, we should not think that american politics has just been a polite debating society until now. there's always been demagoguery. you can go back to what they were saying about george washington and the thomas jefferson, i do think that you know, the lack of substance so to speak and just the elevation of personal insult and personal
egotism is kind of a new low in our political debates. i hope that this is not a trend which will continue, but just a reflection of the particular moment we happen to be in. >> pleasure to have you both on. lincoln and douglas went on to fight a presidential campaign fight a presidential campaign against each other and that is the subject of tonight's episode "race for the white house." take a look at this clip. >> douglas focuses his attack on lincoln. >> if you desire negro citizenship then support mr. lincoln and the black republican party. >> his weapon, race hate. >> he accuses lincoln of being in favor of race mixing, in favor of black equality. he calls him a black republican. he calls him things far worse. >> lincoln did a lot of things that today seem unethical, but
he never appealed to the darker angels of our nature, and douglas did. and steven douglas should have been ashamed of himself. >> watch more of the political drama in the upcoming episode of "race for the white house," tonight at 10:00 pm on cnn. up next, we are on the eve of the ides of march. do you remember who was killed on it? we will take a new look at the most famous assassination in history. that of julius caesar and why it still resonates today. u stay up. you listen. you laugh. you worry. you do whatever it takes to take care of your family. and when it's time to plan for your family's future, we're here for you. we're legalzoom, and for over 10 years we've helped families just like yours with wills and living trusts. so when you're ready, start with us. doing the right thing has never been easier. legalzoom. legal help is here.
try align for a non-stop,ive sweet-treat-goodness hold-onto-your-tiara, kind-of-day. live 24/7 with 24/7 digestive support. try align, the undisputed #1 ge recommended probiotic. beware the ides of march. those were the words of william shakespeare. indeed, what we think we know about the assassination of julius caesar comes not from 44 b.c. but from the 1500s when sha shakespea shakespeare's play premiered. what one historian has found will surprise you. barry strauss is the author of
"the death of caesar," a past book of the week of mine. we thought it was fitting to talk about this on the eves of the ides of march. >> absolutely. >> the subtitle, the story of history's most famous assassination. why is it such an important assassination? >> i'm really glad you asked that. the death of julius caesar was a turning point. this was an opportunity for the republic peacefully to make the reforms that were necessary. >> this republic we're talking about is rome. >> the roman republic. >> the most powerful at the time, the america of the world. caesar becomes this great military conqueror, who seems to be morphing into an emperor? >> absolutely. caesar had more power than anyone ever had in rome, the richest man, the strongest army rome ever had. >> how large is the roman
empire? >> britain to syria to north africa, to spain. it's enormous. and there are about 50 million people in it. >> what was caesar like, as a person, from what you can tell? >> as a person, he was absolutely fascinating and absolutely maddening. he was brilliant. he was a genius. he was smarter than just about anyone else, and more talented than anyone else. trouble is, he knew it. he is a rare person in history who is a great general and a great politician and also a great author. we don't see that very often. >> shakespearean version that caesar is betrayed and assassinated by a group of people, eventually led by his closest friend, the man he considers his son, brutus. and there is that famous line in shakespeare, et tu, brutus, you, too, brutus, then brutus befalls caesar. >> it's true that brutus was one
of the chief conspirators. it's not true that he was caesar's greatest friend. in fact, he had fought against caesar originally in the civil war and caesar then makes peace with him and brings him over to his side. he had a very strange relationship with caesar, because brutus' mother was caesar's ex-mistress. >> why does it succeed, simply? >> it succeeds, in part, because it was extremely well planned. the picture we get from shakespeare is this was a group of guys at the last minute putting it together and they just get a lucky break. in fact, the leaders of the conspiracy are some of rome's top generals. they were experts in ambushes. they knew exactly what they were doing. they cased the place. they really had this planned down to the minute. they even brought gladiaters as backup in case they were needed, something that's not there in shakespeare. it also succeeds because caesar really doesn't believe it. he is a victim of his own
success. he is someone who sucks all the air out of the room every place he goes. so, there's nobody there to say, caesar, i think you really better take this seriously. in fact, there is one person in shakespeare that gets it right, his wife, calpernia, a very experienced roman politician. her father is one of the top politicians in rome. she comes from political family. caesar takes her seriously when she says, you better watch out. you better not go to the senate meeting. >> there's another woman in your story who doesn't really appear marginally in shakespeare. that is cleopatra. >> yes. amazingly. this is a touch that not even hollywood would dare invent. but she was caesar's mistress and she was actually present in rome on the ides of march. she was living in caesar's villa. she probably had their natural child with them, their son, whose name means little caesar. she was a very controversial figure. many romans despised her and
thought she was the proof that caesar really wanted to be king. bauts because, after all, his girlfriend was queen of egypt. >> what's the big lesson of the assassination? >> the biggest lesson of the assassination is that politics always trumps military thinking. you always need to have a political plan. it's not enough to be able to fight people. you have to have a plan for how you then govern them. both caesar and the assassins were lack iing any such plan. and that's why caesar failed and why the assassins failed, in turn. the person who inherits it all, that no one could have predicted, was an 18-year-old kid, who turns out to be wiser than either caesar or the great men who killed him. >> that's augustus? >> yes. he inherits and manages to put the pieces all back together again. though it's not an easy process. >> it is an absolutely fascinating book. barry strauss, thank you very much.
>> thank you. next on "gps," what is the single best explanation for the rise of trump? an academic has a starting book that will worry you. economy is growing, , the with creative new business incentives, and the lowest taxes in decades, attracting the talent and companies of tomorrow. like in buffalo, where the largest solar gigafactory in the western hemisphere will soon energize the world. and in syracuse, where imagination is in production. let us help grow your company's tomorrow - today - at business.ny.gov
when a moment turns romantic why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction and the urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas for pulmonary hypertension, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis and a $200 savings card. unless you have allergies., then your eyes may see it differently. only flonase is approved to relieve both itchy, watery eyes and congestion.
no other nasal allergy spray can say that. when we breathe in allergens our bodies react by over producing six key inflammatory substances that cause our symptoms. most allergy pills only control one substance. flonase controls six. and six is greater than one. complete allergy relief or incomplete. let your eyes decide. flonase. 6>1 changes everything. ...of fixodent plus adhesives. they help your denture hold strong more like natural teeth. and you can eat even tough food. fixodent. strong more like natural teeth. fixodent and forget it.
if i say do it, they're going to do it. i would bomb the [ bleep ] out of them. i could stand in the middle of 5th avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn't lose any voters. we will build the wall. >> as donald trump continues his medioric rise, his opponents wonder is this an american brand of authoratarianism. obviously, his supporters would
zblae disagree. let's listen to what a fascinating book has found a political scientist co-wrote a book in 2009. jonathan weiler. they say trump might be the first in a series of 21st century strong man candidates. welcome, john. >> thanks for having me. >> what is the thesis of the book? >> the thesis of the book is polarization is actually be driven at the bases of the two parties and the level by differences and personality among the voters supporting those two parties. >> and the personality is is there's certain kinds of voters mostly on the republican side who like authoritarian side of politics. >> what they're attracted to is they believe very strongly in a need for social order as traditionally refined.
>> and these voters have personality traits that predispose them to authoritarian politics? >> that's right. those personality traits are going to attract them to leaders who speak in clear terms about imposing order around them. >> when did people start trying to figure out whether ordinary people had tendencies toward authoritarian or nonauthorit nonauthoritarian style? >> research is several decades old. there's others who explain fascism. more resent decades thinking about the democracies, there's been an interest in why a particular personality type would be associated with people who feel a strong need for order, who want to ensure people not like them are put in their place and want clear, simple solutions to complicated
problems. >> and in order to figure out whether people have this tendency toward authoritarian-style politics, you actually ask questions that are not related to politics? >> that's right. we asked parenting questions. we asked people to tell us what kind of attributes they want children to have and to a fascinating degree, how people answer those parenting questions tells us an awful lot about how they see the world politically. >> so what you find is that people who want presumably their children to have respect for elders, obedience, good manners and to be well-behaved have a tendency -- >> to be more authoritarian. >> now, when you take this data and then looked at the trump phenomenon, what did you find? >> so, we found -- so matt mcwilliams did a national survey
in december and included the four parenting questions and found to a degree that how they answered this was by far their best predictor for donald trump. better than the gender, education, demographics. the things that explain political preference are these four parenting questions, that tell us whether folks liked trump or not. >> that's fascinating. so it tends to be working class whites or poorly educated whites, the answer to these questions were even a stronger predictor of whether you'd be a trump supporter? >> much stronger. so much of the narrative has been about white working class support for trump but the truth is, white working class voters, they don't like trump at all. and college-educated voters who are high in authoritarian like
trump a lot. so the degree to which working class status explains trump, it goes away. >> and you think that this is the beginning of something because this polarization, where the party has captured two kinds of people, has just started? >> i think what has happened is that the republican party in particular has cultivated a base that sees the world and of course not all republicans feel this way but they have cultivated a base. many of them share this world view and they are now beholden to this base and need to reflect the world view and the concerns and the fears of that base. so from that perspective, i think it's possible that trump will not be a one-of-a-kind politician. >> pleasure to have you on. >> thank you very much. next on "gps," none of the
antonin scalia died one month ago today and we have been waiting for a nomination of the supreme court. it's crucial for many reasons but prime among them, it's a lifetime appointment. it brings me to my question. how many other oacd countries grant life tenure to all of their members of the highest constitutional courts? is it zero, two, three or six? this week's book of the week is a biography of john quincy adams. he should be, by rights, one of the most famous presidents. he was the only one to serve in an elected office after leaving the white house and a man of vast intelligence and political courage who died while debating in the house of representatives. yet, he's an obscure figure. james traub has rectified this
in a book. are we see a bright spot in the war on drugs? recent data from the border patrol shows that marijuana seizures along the southwest border are the lowest they have been in a decade. this supports the theory that mexican cartels are now facing tough competition from american marijuana sources from some illicit production to legal recreational sales to states in colorado, as "the washington post" pointed out. the state has issued roughly 1,000 licenses to dispens marijuana. the sales reached nearly $1 billion in 2015 and the state collected more than $135 million in taxes and fees, according to "the denver post." that is money to go towards schools and services and including drug education. so if the cartels lose and the states make money, is it about time to legalize and light up
all over the country? canada seems to be moving in that direction. well, there are some areas of concern. weed-related emergency room visits rose by 44% for colorado residents and 109% for visitors less experienced with potent colorado cannabis. in general, the benefits seem to outweigh the costs. but the best way forward would be to study the data coming out of colorado and other states where countries that marijuana is legal and to draft the best policies going forward that take the crime out of drugs but address the fallout from more widespread. the correct answer to the gps challenge answer is, a, zero. the united states is alone in providing life tenure to all constitutional court judges.
every oecd nations, according to the international law institute. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. happening now in the "newsroom" -- >> do you ever consider whether you should be trying to lower the temperatures when these protests erupt? >> i think in many cases i lower the temperature. i tell the police to police -- >> this is now multiple rallies where people are assaulted and beat up. >> mr. trump's words with a grain of salt because i think, as almost everybody knows, this man cannot stop lying. >> there's no question that donald trump has created a toxic atmosphere, pitting one group against another. you can go into a room and get people depressed and down and angry or walk into that room with the sameeo