tv Smerconish CNN September 17, 2016 6:00am-7:01am PDT
>> donald trump has been em bratsing his negatives as he turned his birther retraction into a pr circus and then last night he entered a florida rally under the banner of "le deplorable." the first crucial debate nine days away will only include clinton and trump and trump claiming the moderators will be biased suggests eliminating them all together. i'll ask the co-chair commissioner on presidential debates what he thinks. plus a revolutionary plan to report election day voter turnout live as it's happening. instead of waiting for the polls to close. is this good or bad for democracy? jeff greenfield will weigh in. and nobody knows both these candidates better or has been more critical than each than maureen dow. she is here, too. yes, colin powell's hacked e-mails expose some salacious gossip in the election.
dan abrams is here and i'll explain. but first, i want the final word on trump and birtherism. yes, donald trump finally relented and stated the obvious yesterday that president barack obama was born here but only after claiming that hillary clinton had started the rumor and she didn't. >> hillary clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. i finished it. i finished it. you know what i mean. president barack obama was born in the united states period. >> his handling of the so-called birther issue illustrates his lack of accountability. the statement that his campaign released the night before his acknowledgment of obama's birthplace is my exhibit a. will you put that up on the screen, please? take a look at the first
paragraph and leave it up. it begins hillary clinton's campaign first raised this issue to smear then candidate barack obama, smear. why was it a smear? well obviously because it was not true. so why was it a smear when raised by clinton's campaign, which by the way it wasn't, according to fact checkers, but not a smear when raised so often by mr. trump? nasty is another word used. so to vicious and conniving. why this characterization of the clinton campaign arguably because it was relying on smears. again, see, trump is alleging that clinton engaged in the behavior we all know he employed and he's admitting that such tactics are both a smear and nasty, not to mention vicious and conniving. but there's more. he calls her weak for not getting an answer. well, an answer to what, exactly, mr. trump? a nasty smear? who should have been demanding answers about a nasty smear? if it's bogus, nobody.
put up the next paragraph. here is how this begins. in 2011, mr. trump was finally able to bring this ugly incident to its conclusion. whoa. stop the clock. what ugly incident? well, the ugly incident of trump asserting a nasty smear against the nation's first african-american president so as to delegitimize him. let's keep reading. mr. trump did a great service to the president and the country by bringing closure to the issue that hillary clinton and her team first raised. i mean, this is now cough kaesque. he is claiming that where he spread a nasty smear about the president, something he now characterizes as vicious and conniving and for five years refuses to detract it. he is a closer. he was only the closer of a nasty smear that he himself initiated which he admits was vicious and conniving. there was more, but you get it. let me tell you why this needs to be addressed. because the polls are neck and neck and nothing is more
important than the debates. trump has been using this kind of circuitous logic, outright fabrication for a year. so what should a moderator do? if he or hillary clinton makes assertions that are obviously baseless? joining me now is a man with all the answers, mike mccurry, the co-chair of the commission on presidential debates. you remember him as bill clinton's white house press secretary. he rarely comes out to play. he hasn't been on cnn in 12 years. mike, thank you so much for being here. what is the job description of a moderator? >> i think the job description is to get out of the way of the candidates. the candidates are the ones that have to fact check each other and moderators that have strong opinions, like you just expressed, you know, that's probably not the role that we expect for the people who are going to put the ball in play and let the candidates then have their discussion as they see fit. now, i think there are some questions about how do you best challenge someone who is actually saying something that is just outright wrong in the
context of a debate like this. there are right ways to do that. i think we picked moderators who will be very effective at that. i don't doubt that donald trump is trying to work the ref a little bit right now in some of the things he's been saying, but that happens every four years when we do these debates. i think these moderators are actually going to present the candidates with opportunities to challenge each other, to fact each other and that's exactly the role they should play. >> okay. so in my example that i've just offered, my cross-examination of his campaign statement on birtherism, that would be hillary clinton's responsibility, not the responsibility of sa lester holt? >> that's correct. i think if you had -- if you were moderating that debate and it opened, as you just opened this program, i think people would howell and properly so because you're putting yourself in the role of trying to do what the candidates themselves need to do. that's not what we expect of these moderators. we expect them to basically get out of the way of the
candidates, so it's the candidate's debates. bob sheafer, the long-time cbs veteran correspondent and moderated many debates said the first thing you should do as a moderator before the debate is go look in the mirror and say it's not about me. >> i noticed that bob sheafer and jim lair and between the two of them 15 presidential debates they both adopt what mike mccurry has said which is that the role is not to intrude and to to get out of the way. i think i heard mike mccurry say in your opening comment, your opening answer that you think donald trump is trying to work the refs a little bit. what do you mean by that? >> well, sometimes you sort of say if i say that i expect to get howelled at by our first moderator who happens to be lester holt from nbc, that maybe that will tone him down a little bit. and, you know, who knows. i don't want to try to get into donald trump's head. that would probably not be a useful exercise. but, you know, the candidates do this. we've seen this every four years
and their comments back and forth about the moderators. but the important thing i think is both, you know, secretary clinton and mr. trump who were invited, by the way, by the commission on presidential debates to participate in the first debate on september 26th. they have both indicated that they plan to be there and they both have accepted the moderators that we have picked. i think that's the important thing. the debates are going to move forward and we think we picked excellent moderators to help guide that discussion. >> am i right in saying that your job as the commission on presidential debates is to make a very studied determination as to who should moderate and then you step out of the way and that man or that woman has total discretion as to what will be asked? >> that's absolutely correct. we don't stipulate as to content, questions, that's really up to the moderators we pick. they have to use their editorial and journalistic judgment and ask the questions that most americans would expect the candidates to be asked. then the candidates have to respond to each other.
they have got to challenge each other and they have to engage in the debate. that's what we want to see. we want to see a good discussion about the future of our country in a dignified setting. by the way, miele ka, one of the other things we insist on, we don't have audience reaction in these debates. they are there to watch a moment of history, but it's really about the candidates themselves challenging each other, talking to each other about the future of the country and then probably making some arguments that we'll in one way or another impact the way in which one of them will govern if they're elected president. >> donald trump is talking a little lincoln douglas action. he proposes no moderator. what do you think of that idea? >> well, i have some fondness for that idea. i think it's great when we have got candidates who will stand with each other and actually do that kind of debate, but the moderator can put things in play. by the way, on our format, one of the things we've done is to get away from these highly structured one-minute here, 30
seconds there back and forth. we have divided the debate 90 minutes into 15-minute chunks of time so that the candidates actually will have to have lengthier presentations and longer discussions and more reasonable and substantive answers about some of the issues of the day. so we will approximate that kind of lincoln/douglas format. we will have a moderator there to make sure things stay in control. >> were the candidates either -- were either of them able to exercise a veto over your selections? >> no. we suspended that kind of practice a long time ago. we have to use our best judgment picking moderators. we have not heard from the campaigns that they have objectionings to the moderators that we picked. we picked some distinguished journalists, as you know, including your own colleague anderson cooper from cnn. and you know, i think the fact that there hasn't been any kind of real protest about the moderators indicates that people expect them to do the job that
they've been assigned to do. and there's been a large favorable reaction to those that we did pick. >> gary johnson and bill well took out a full page ad "the new york times" drew attention that they were 13% in the quinnipiac survey which they argue put them to the margin of error to the requisite 15%. what of the idea that where you have two two-term governors united, they're on all 50 ballots. they're doing well, better than we've seen in the last 25 years by a third party candidate. why shouldn't they be on that debate stage? >> well, we have by law and by legal precedent, we have got to establish criteria well in advance, let that be known publicly and it has to be objected. we did that last fall. so almost for a year now the campaigns have known that they have to reach that 15% threshold. some members of our commission thought that was too low. some thought it was too high. we had a long debate about it. and that i had there was historical precedent, 15% goes back to the time in which the league of women voters actually
sponsored the presidential debates. we felt there was good historic precedent for that number. and you know, it's not -- out of the realm of possibility that both governor johnson and mr. well maybe even jill stine the candidate for the green party if they work hard and build support during the course of the fall, they might well be invited to appear in the second and third debates. so there's some possibility we might see gary johnson on that stage in one of the subsequent debates. he did not make that threshold for the debate that will happen september 26th. >> final question, you stood before the nation defending president clinton's white house on matters like white water, the outset of the lewinsky scandal, now you're teaching a group of 12 at some days at the wesley theological seminary, which is more nerve wracking for mike mccurry? >> being in front of a group of seminary yans and trying to guide them through that topic.
i guess given my checkered past in politics, we would call this the doctrine of atonement, but i enjoy my teaching that i'm doing now. >> hey, this is going to be super bowl-like. you know, i cannot wait. the nation cannot wait. thank you. i salute the work of the commission on presidential debates. >> thank, michael. >> that's mike mccurry. so what do you think? tweet me and i will read some later in the program. still to come, no newspaper columnists know the clintons or donald trump better or is more critical of them. i'm going to talk to pul itser prize winner maureen dowd. this revealed a problem, i think, with partisan politics and dan abrams will be here to explain colin powell's e-mail hack. s handsome as charles stephens' barrel on his farewell voyage over niagara falls... but stood up to any kind of weather... ...no matter if the forecast is this...
...or this... ...or this. if a stain can make your deck beautiful and survive any amount of torture... ...is it still stain? arborcoat from benjamin moore ranks highest in customer satisfaction by jd power. my eyelove is finding a ♪"all yodifferent angle.plays my eyelove is season 1, episode 1. my eyelove is making a story come alive. eyelove is all the things we love to do with our eyes. but it's also having a chat with your eye doctor about dry eyes that interrupt the things you love. because if your eyes feel dry, itchy, gritty, or you have occasional blurry vision, it could be chronic dry eye. go to myeyelove.com and feel the love. when you ache and haven't you're not you. tylenol® pm relieves pain and helps you fall fast asleep and stay asleep. we give you a better night. you're a better you all day. tylenol®.
i'm claudine and i quit smoking with chantix. smoking's a monkey on my back. it was, it was always controlling your time, your actions, your money. it had me. it had me. i would not be a non-smoker today if it wasn't for chantix. along with support, chantix (varenicline) is proven to help people quit smoking. chantix reduced my urge to smoke some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. some had seizures while taking chantix. if you have any of these, stop chantix and call your doctor right away. tell your doctor about any history of mental health problems, which could get worse or of seizures. don't take chantix if you've had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. if you have these, stop chantix and call your doctor right away as some can be life-threatening. tell your doctor if you have heart or blood vessel problems, or develop new or worse symptoms. get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. most common side effect is nausea. it's me in control now. ask your doctor if chantix is right for you.
garlock's and coltec's products were used in industrial and maritime settings, including where steam, hot liquid or acid moved in pipes. votes must be filed by december 9, 2016 call 844-garlock or go to garlocknotice.com she's covered the clintons and trump since the '90s and she's been critical of both. she won the pulitzer prize for her coverage of the monica
lewinsky scandal for the new york times. maureen dowd says she's never seen anything like this year's race and she's chronicaled her amazement in her new book "the year of voting dangerously" the derangment of american politics. maureen dowd, thoroughly enjoyed the book. it's great to have you. it makes a point, it's filled with columns and work of yours only about these two. that's how much you've written about clinton, the clintons, and donald trump. >> yes. but it also has a long essay about the bush family, whom i've covered for 30 years. and also i started covering on the national stage obama and biden, so all of the cast of characters at this crazy dinner party i started with. >> i've gotten so many things wrong as donald trump likes to remind people about this cycle. what have you gotten wrong that stands out? >> oh, wow.
i don't know. you tell me. i don't know. >> maybe it's all subjective. donald trump listens to you. you know, when you've -- you point this out in so many columns that when you raise with him concerns or questions, it seems like he's interested to know what maureen dowd is thinking. >> well, listens to me i think is a bit strong. you know, i picture kellyanne conway like a lion tamer trying to keep donald trump on his stool. but, no. i have confronted him with many different things that seemed wrong to me, for instance, i asked him -- i told him that it was wrong that there was violence being incited at his rallies and that reporters were getting roughed up. he paused, your right, he did listen, then he disagreed. he said he thought the violence added excitement. and i said, how can you criticize bill clinton for infidelities, you're making that part of the campaign and maybe
in the upcoming debates when you had one of the most famous infidelity scandals in new york history, the marla maples best sex i've ever had new york post headline. and he said, well, i wasn't the president. so, he always has some glib answer. he did list -- not listen to me but listen to my sister who has an essay in the book. she is like you, sometimes she's a republican and sometimes she's not. but i told him -- he said is your still still voting for me. and i said no because you retweeted this unflattering picture of heidi cruz and that was really wrong and he tried to say it wasn't that unflattering. i said, yes, it was why don't you just apologize? he thought about it for a minute and he apologized. so once in a while but not really much does he listen to me. i'm not advising him. i'm just stating what is unacceptable behavior. >> you talk about your sister. you also talk and he writes your brother kevin. something the two of us have in
common is that we are both a butter knife away at the thanksgiving day table from trump supporters. so how is trump doing -- how is trump doing among your kin? >> well, you know, it's funny because i have my own little basket of deplorables. and i read all these other columnists who have to go on these anthropological mark ret meade road trips to hunt down the exotic trump voter and see what they're thinking, what could they possibly be thinking? one of the columnists wrote an open letter and said he would like to actually meet a trump voter and reason with them. and i just have to go home, you know. i hear it all. i hear all the conspiracy theories, all the hillary clinton complaints and i'm sure it's the same with you, michael. >> let me address hillary because one of the maureen dowd columns that stands out the most for me is one that you wrote about her. put that up on the screen while i read -- all these woe be gone
republicans whining that they can't rally behind their flawed candidate is crazy. the gop angst, the gnashing and wailing and searching for last-minute substitutes and exit strategies is getting old. they already have a 1%er who will be totally fine in the oval office, someone they can trust to help wall street, boost the u.s. chamber of commerce, cuddle with hedge funds, secure the trade deals beloved by corporate america, seek guidance from henry kissinger and hawk it up, unleashing hell on syria, and heaven knows where else. the republicans have their candidate. it's hillary. explain. >> they are twisting and turning trying to fit in with a platform that is basically about his equo. so when he cozies up to the evil empire, which is not at all in the tradition of republican policy, they have to try and go
along with that, which is crazy to watch. and that's just like a grade school thing, putin complimented him so he likes putin, but according to steven lee meyers, our reporter, you know, who has a biography of putin, the word was mistranslated. he didn't call trump brilliant. he called him flashy. so this whole crazy bromance with putin may be based on a mistrangslatimi mistranslation. he was a new york democrat, so we have these kind of two new york democrats running against each other, but in many ways hillary is, you know -- she is in to muscular intervention, she is a hog, she
>> this was not a deathbed scenario. i think it was a kitchen table, but the point you drove home was that beau wanted his dad to run. can i put that quickly up on the screen and remind people of what maureen dowd wrote. beau was losing his nouns and the right side of his face was partially paralyze md ch h head a mission, he tried to make his father promise to run arguing -- continues on. that the white house should not revert to the clintons and that the country would be better off with biden values. here is the question for maureen daud. do you think joe regrets not having got into this race? >> yes. well, he has said himself he thinks about it everyday and if i were joe biden i would be really angry because he would be walking straight into the white house and that's usually the vice president has the right of first refusal, you know. but they thought that he would shoot off his mouth and have a lot of gas, but in the ear of
trump, that -- his gaffes would seem like nothing. and there was some democrats the other day when hillary had her health scare who we're saying maybe she -- if it got worse, maybe she would have to step aside for biden which would be ironic since they pushed biden out for hillary. >> the year of voting dangerously, as i like to say, maureen, i've never seen anything like it in my life and i hope i never do again. thank you so much for being here. >> i agree with you, michael. thanks. >> tweet me your thoughts at smerconish. still to come, colin powell's hacked e-mails. one editor dan abrams later apologized. why? i'm going to speak to him. also, election day turnout is never revealed until the polls close. but a new organization plans to change all that. is that good or bad for democracy? multiemmy award winner jeff greenfield will weigh in. >> here is another tweet, this one about my opening commentary.
let's see. he didn't initiate it, sir. he did close the deal. you are a clinton surrogate. no, i'm not part of any crooked media. i'm calling out facts and not enough others have done so in this cycle. thank you. yeah. well, we gotta hand it thto fedex. glasses. they've helped make our e-commerce so easy, and now we're getting all kinds of new customers. i know. can you believe we're getting orders from canada, ireland... this one's going to new zealand. new zealand? psst.
ah, false alarm. hey! you guys are gonna scare away the deer! idiots... providing global access for small business. fedex. when you ache and haven't you're not you. tylenol® pm relieves pain and helps you fall fast asleep and stay asleep. we give you a better night. you're a better you all day. tylenol®. across new york state, from long island to buffalo, from rochester to the hudson valley, from albany to utica, creative business incentives, infrastructure investment, university partnerships, and the lowest taxes in decades are creating a stronger economy and the right environment in new york state for business to thrive. let us help grow your company's tomorrow- today at business.ny.gov when age-related macular have degeneration, amd
we came up with a plan to help reduce my risk of progression. and everywhere i look... i'm reminded to stick to my plan. including preservision areds 2. my doctor said preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula that the national eye institute recommends to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd... after 15 years of clinical studies. preservision areds 2. because my eyes are everything. ...stop clicking around...travel sites to find a better price... the lowest prices on our hotels are always at hilton.com. so pay less and get more only at hilton.com.
sharing a ten by ten room,ng threestruggling.nding, i rent this place and then i started home sharing. my roommates help out all the time. they are glad to meet the guests and that opportunity that airbnb has given me is such a priceless gift. i was able to take three months off to take car of my family during a family tragedy. the extra income that i get from airbnb has been a huge impact in my life.
♪ partisanship, so bad in this country that it now exceeds patriotism, that's my take away from the colin powell e-mail hack. surely you saw the huge headlines this week when the hack exposed the former secretary of state scorned for donald trump and difficulties with hillary clinton in unvarnished language that the general clearly thought would remain private. after every news organization, including ours, enjoyed the juicy details, suddenly came the
morning after, "the new york times" put it concern over colin powell's hacked e-mails becomes a fear of being next. are any of us safe? we're caught up in the salacious gossip of the partisan picture, wherepatriotism. enter dan abrams, he issued a public apology to colin powell for printing the e-mails and it reads in part, rather than focussing on the fact that powell is the victim of a crime potentially at the hands of the russian government&ended his privacy has been shamefully compromised, we exs a per baited it. dan abrams joins me now. it's law news with a z at the end, those are your two websites. as you point out, you enjoyed feasting on every morsel. what brought you to the change? >> i needed to expose my own hypocrisy on this, right?
which is to say that my websites are publishing all the details of this and i feel horrible about it. i guess the point of this was at least let's admit that this is terrible. i mean, it seemed to me like no one was even talking about the fact that it may have been the russian government that had hacked colin powell's e-mails. think about it this way, what if someone a la watergate has literally gone into colin powell's house and stolen his diaries, right? then it had come out and published them. wouldn't there be at least outrage, at least hand ringing, at least thinking out loud should we be publishing this? in this case, there was none of that. my only point was at least let's incorporate that into our thinking and i laid out in that piece why i came to the conclusion that while i was incredibly sorry about this, in the end, i had to go ahead and publish them because they were
news. >> hey, dan, i have an older brother, growing up like brothers we would fight. but if you came along and you wanted to fight my brother, believe me we were both against dan abrams. why hasn't that kicked in in this scenario. we have hillary and we have trump and it's partisan. but we're talking about the russians here. why aren't we united against a common enemy? >> i think two reasons. first of all, there's not 100% certainty it's the russians and most importantly i think the gossip is just too juicy that we just can't resist it. that, oh my goodnd, colin powell, the sar moans you powell who sort of rarely gives his unvarnished opinions about politics, giving -- offering up juicy gossip and analysis of this political campaign, i think it was just too much. even beyond that think about it, this isn't the first time the sony hack that occurred in 2014, there was very little sense of,
boy, this is wrong. it was all about what did these sony executives say that was bad and wrong and there were heads that were going to fly, et cetera. instead of saying, wait a sec, why aren't we making any judgments at all about the hack, in particular in this case, where you're potentially talking about not just the russians hacking, but potentially the russians hacking too try to influence the election. i mean, why -- where is the outrage on that? >> you previously broke down for us a legal analysis of hillary clinton's actions relative to her private e-mail and private e-mail servers. it was a great sober analysis. i want to ask you a street smart question. if, in fact, may be the russians, we don't know, you're right, but somebody hacked colin powell, a former secretary of state, doesn't that increase in your mind the likelihood that hillary operating multiple devices, her own domain, and
private servers, probably was the victim of such a hack as well and maybe we're going to find out in the next 55 days? >> i don't know about probably. i certainly think it makes it clear that it could have happened, right? i'm not going to sit here and say, oh, well this means therefore hillary was hacked. it certainly means that hillary could have been hacked. and i think that that's been agreed to and i don't think that -- as you and i have talked about, that that relates to the legal analysis on the hillary clinton case. but, there is real concern, i think, on everyone's part now that we all can be hacked. and as a result, you know, you see people now encrypting their e-mails and making greater efforts. that's fine. but again that seems to me to shift the issue away from pointing the finger of blame at who did this and then having a little soul searching on our part. in particular on the media's part to say, huh, shouldn't we
be thinking a little bit about why we're publishing this? are there certain aspects of the powell e-mails maybe we shouldn't have published? maybe we should have just published the ones that related to specific thoughts on the elections and not maybe some of the more salacious ones. should we in the media have offered him any privacy knowing what the source of this information was? it's a tough question. i think the answer is that the vast majority of what was in there can be considered news and that's the reason i didn't ban it and i admit it. you know, i'm sort of laying all of it out there for the public to judge me by saying look, i didn't have the fortitude to do it. i'm competing with my websites against the politicos and daily beasts of world that do double my traffic and as a result i'm admitting that's coming into my thinking. you can argue that's horrible, dan abrams, that that's the way you're making the decision and i'm just laying it out there for the readers and viewers to
decide that at least i'm admitting it, at least i'm thinking about, and at least i'm talking about it. >> i think it's a healthy conversation. thanks for being here to explain, dan. i appreciate it. >> all right, michael. still to come, news organizations have always been careful not to call elections until voting was completely done, but there's a new plan for this year to reveal what's happening in realtime. is that a good idea? here is an exam from the 2000 election of how calling an election doesn't always work out -- >> excuse me, senator. we have a projection. nbc news is coming on the air right now and we are projecting that when all the votes are counted the state of florida will go tonight to the vice president, mr. gore will take the state of florida. >> stand by. stand by. cnn right now is moving our earlier declaration of florida back to the too close to call column. that didn't make cars made plastics that make them lighter?
the lubricants that improved fuel economy. even technology to make engines more efficient. what company does all this? exxonmobil, that's who. we're working on all these things to make cars better and use less fuel. helping you save money and reduce emissions. and you thought we just made the gas. energy lives here.
at precisely 11:12 p.m., election night 2012 nbc was the first to declare that barack obama has been re-elected president. until then, everyone had followed journalistic protocol waiting until the last polls had closed but the result was surely not news to either the obama or romney campaigns, which operated sophisticated war rooms in which they track voter turnout. here is the question, why did the public watching tv all day long hear reports about the weather or turnout in a very general sense but nothing more definitive? if the campaigns know they're doing well in realtime, why can't that information be made available to the public? my next guest wants to give americans insiekt into who is winning the election as the vote is taking place. would that be good for democracy or will this technology suppress or otherwise impact the vote? joining me now to discuss both points of view, ken smukler is the founder of vote caster, that's a project to broadcast vote turnout as it happens.
and of course jeff greenfield is the veteran emmy-award winning journalist who worked with cnn, abc, cbs, ken, let me begin with you. how would this work? >> sure. thanks, michael. we basically collect four pieces of data, three pieces prior to the election, one piece on election day. we take the early vote numbers which allow us to set the table for election day. we do our own survey research just like nate silver would be doing, but we do large scale surveys immediately prior to the election. then we do historic turnout tracking models that tell us what to expect at each precinct in a battleground state in terms of total turnout. on election day, we send our field to capture precincts. we capture one piece of information which is actual turnout at that presings. when you have that turnout number and run it against the models that we've set up with the other day tarks you get
projected out come. >> how far will this go? during the course of the day while the nation is voting, hillary clinton is winning colorado, donald trump is winning colorado? >> colorado is a hybrid because it's entirely vote by mail. if there's going to be a call on colorado, that call may, in fact, come right when the polls open on the east coast. i would rather focus on the six state s where we actually have doing play by play on election day. i want to be clear about this. we are the play by play announcers, so that if the eagles, for example, were crushing the giants in a football game the play by play guy in the third quarter doesn't say, hey, the game is over. we know what the score is. the play by play guy keeps playing out the game until the final whistle. it is for the networks after the election is over to call the election. and whether they succeed -- >> i know -- >> or fail is on them. >> i know that a veteran journalist like jeff greenfield
will immediately be thinking, 1980. let me show some tape and then i'll turn to jeff. >> well, the time has come. you've seen the map. we've looked at the figures and nbc news now makes its projection for the presidency. reagan is our projected winner. ronald wilson reagan of california, a sports announcer, a film actor, a governor of california is our projected winner at 8:15 eastern standard time on this election night. >> hey, jeff, you know that people were upset. they said the west coast was still voting. they're calling the election. what concerns, if any, do you have about ken's proposal? >> i actually have done a 180. when i first heard about that, i thought, oh, the barbarians at the gate, this is terrible. i have completely change mid mind. i'll tell you why. >> wow. >> the exit poll particularly back in 1980 don't forget carter
conceded while the west coast was open. that concern is largely based on two democratic members of the house who lost close races on the west coast. and the evidence is all anecdotal. i've never been able to figure out who stayed home, the people who knew they won or the people who knew that their guy had lost. but the difference is that in this case let's say that you're a clinton voter in a battleground state. and vote caster is telling you that the trump turnout so far at 11:00 a.m. in the morning is higher. you have the option to call your friends and to e-mail and to facebook and say, hey, come on, let's get out there and vote. as opposed to numbers that tell you what has happened, you know, and you can't do anything about it. so, in this sense, i do think it is potentially an empowering mechanism for voters, unlike the motion of leaking exit polls at 1:00 p.m. or 2:00 p.m. in the afternoon which used to half before they locked all these people in a sealed room and took
their cell phones away. it may surprise you, but i think this could be good for democracy. >> jeff, why not the full monty, right? if the ability exists totally votes in realtime, let's put aside vote caster and their modelling and their projections, let's just put -- run the tote board all day long. >> i think that -- i think the -- i'm not sure. but i think one of the differences may be that you actually can't do that. i mean, there's a point at which you know, you can't keep going into a voting booth every hour and pick up the numbers. the thing that concerned me about early leaking of exit polls -- i'll make this story very brief. 2004, a bunch of us journalistic-types and political-types are at a steak house, you know. it's 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon and, oh, let's get the first wave results. one of our colleagues, informs it was tom brokaw comes back and says, these numbers are really sketchy. my guys back home tell me don't believe them, but everybody is
saying we've got to have the numbers. they're all for kerry. he is tied in south carolina. he is winning every battleground state. newt gingrich gets up. i knew that goose hunting trip in ohio worked. john kerry is president. it misinformed. if i understand what ken is doing right, the potential for that misinformation is left. >> ken, you got the final word. what makes you think you can do it accurately? >> well, we have the best and brightest teams working to execute this plan. teams that modelled turnout and did the dash board for obama won and teams that did it for george w. i think we have the best and brighter. we are setting up our platform. and we're working with slate to make sure there's a robust enough platform so that every eyeball in america that wants to see this data can actually see it in realtime on election day.
you put the right people in place and execute and you can succeed in this game. >> hey, jeff greenfield, slate is his media partner. it would be very interesting to see come election day what other media outlets, if any, feel comfortable in running with his data. >> that's right. and -- the one cautionary note is this may tell us decisively whether or not if this were to be a blowout, whether or not down ballot votes were affected in later states. so there is that question i think we still have to answer, but i just don't think we should run garments and yank our hair out at this. >> i think it's a great conversation. intrigued is a wonderful word. jeff greenfield, thank you so much. ken smukler, appreciate you being here. thank you both. still to come, the best and worst tweets. i haven't seen anything. i have no idea what's goes on here. katherine, is this about me that he's talking? cnn -- is it? you know, i wish that he would
use my twitter handle. when he hammers me, can he at least acknowledge who he is hammering? thank you, mr. trump. welcome to opportunity's knocking, where self-proclaimed financial superstars pitch you investment opportunities. i've got a fantastic deal for you- gold! with the right pool of investors, there's a lot of money to be made. but first, investors must ask the right questions and use the smartcheck challenge to make the right decisions. you're not even registered; i'm done with you! i can...i can... savvy investors check their financial pro's background by visiting smartcheck.gov
now that fedex has helped us we could focus on bigger issues, like our passive aggressive environment. we're not passive aggressive. hey, hey, hey, there are no bad suggestions here... no matter how lame they are. well said, ann. i've always admired how you just say what's in your head, without thinking. very brave. good point ted. you're living proof that looks aren't everything. thank you. welcome. so, fedex helped simplify our e-commerce business and this is not a passive aggressive environment. i just wanted to say, you guys are doing a great job. what's that supposed to mean? fedex. helping small business simplify e-commerce. ♪"my friends know me so well. they can tell what i'm thinking, just by looking in my eyes. but what they didn't know was that i had dry, itchy eyes. i used artificial tears from the moment i woke up... ...to the moment i went to bed. so i finally decided to show my eyes some love,... ...some eyelove. eyelove means having a chat with your eye doctor about your dry eyes
because if you're using artificial tears often and still have symptoms, it could be chronic dry eye. it's all about eyelove, my friends. still not sure whether to stay or go on that business trip? ♪ should i stay or should i go? ♪ this fall at choice hotels, the more you go the better! now earn a free night when you stay with us just two times. book direct at choicehotels.com. when you ache and haven't you're not you. tylenol® pm relieves pain and helps you fall fast asleep and stay asleep. we give you a better night. you're a better you all day. tylenol®.
i always like to say you can follow me on twitter if you can spell smerconish. i don't know what's coming. put it up on the screen. some of the best and worst of the week. if the candidate uses the forum of the debates to promote an idea the moon landing was faked the moderator should let it go. no, i think that matt lauer for whom i have the utmost respect. he should have called out donald trump by an interview he gave to howard stern. the moderator has to say, wait a minute, mr. trump, wait a minute, mrs. clinton.
beyond that it's a debate. and in my opinion that job of cross examination is left to your opponent. not lester holt. hit me with another one. a butter knife away from trump supporters at thanksgiving smerconish. thankful the holidays are at the electi election. i have that in common with many of you. there's a lot of diversity of opinion within my own house. i like the way that she said other journalists may have to look for contrary points of view. i'm surrounded with them. one more if we have time for it. i don't even agree with anything about cnn but i'm watching for pure entertainment purposes only. i don't care if you're watching me for entertainment purposes, for factual purposes, for whatever purpose you choose to watch me. i just want you to watch me. and i know that donald trump is one of those who watches because he often tweets about the show
even though he doesn't acknowledge it by name like he did this morning. hit me with another tweet, please. i could do this for an hour. instead of it being 15% to make the debates why can't it be being on the ballot in all five states. i'm with you. my cards are on the table. i would have liked to have seen johnson and weld debating. they're two former governors, they ought to be on the debate stage. thank you so much. i'll see you next week. driving is a skill. very gently release the clutch. okay. that was too fast. so is managing your credit. get experian creditworks basic for free today and you can start getting better. you'll get access to your experian credit report and customer service experts to help answer your questions.
so you can learn to be better. good job. start building your credit skills today for free. visit experian dot com slash free right now. experian®. be better at credit. experian®. across new york state, from long island to buffalo, from rochester to the hudson valley, from albany to utica, creative business incentives, infrastructure investment, university partnerships, and the lowest taxes in decades are creating a stronger economy and the right environment in new york state for business to thrive. let us help grow your company's tomorrow- today at business.ny.gov
youthat's why you drink ensure. sidelined. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. when you ache and haven't you're not you. tylenol® pm relieves pain and helps you fall fast asleep and stay asleep. we give you a better night. you're a better you all day. tylenol®. nope, it's lemonade. is that ice-t? lemonade. ice-t? what's with these people, man? lemonade, read the sign. lemonade. read it. ok. delicious. ice-t at a lemonade stand? surprising. what's not surprising? how much money marin saved by switching to geico. yo, ice-t! it's lemonade, man! fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.