tv Peter Thiel Delivers Remarks on Campaign 2016 CSPAN November 1, 2016 12:39am-1:37am EDT
>> if you were asking whether we know if comey has had an impact we won't know for couple of days. the polling is very vexed. it is showing up, but i don't think that we will see the full effect for a couple of days. since he mentioned that the polls were conduct did [inaudible] the numbers are post debate and we are giving nightly tracking.
>> on the social justice question you asked, there's a lot of talk saying catholic social teaching is very different from the traditional new deal liberalism. there was a piece by research denotes and there has been in the catholic tradition a kind of christian democratic tradition that isn't dissimilar from a social democratic tradition that really does see a substantial role in ensuring social justice.
it is a pro-government tradition in the same that it also believes there is a vital role for the social justice. you can debate around the edges and talk about the emphasis at different times and say certainly the statist systems like those in eastern europe were violated in the catholic tradition as well but there is a substantial role for the government in the social teachings of the church going back in the 1890s. >> they believe there is a role to provide the services that they are the least of all the demographics in america to take advantage of those services. and it has a lot to do with the force taking care of without being disseminated and to put
aside the millennial vote i did mention it is 27-years-old. 44% of the latino vote is under the age of 35. it's the generations bigger than the baby boomers. this is the first generation they will be allowed to vote as well and larger than the millennial generation but also the most diverse. also it is majority white. so as we start talking about these different social issues and a that the pipelines within the church, we have 25 years to ensure that this generation of americans are primed and ready to take on the leadership positions.
i do have to ask a skeptical question in simulating itself the past couple of years. if white evangelical protestants and what they've been saying the past generations ted cruz into the republican party. i'm beginning to wonder, and here is my analytical question. to what extent is religion actually an independent variable in shaping the beliefs and political activity as opposed to the function of socioeconomic
status. is there any religion left over come i'm wondering if it is all that is cracked up to be. >> i am very worried that religion is becoming more a form of tribal identity than a set of traditions that leads people to reflect on how the politics connects. and if you look at evangelicals and there's a lot of talk these were more per ted cruz and i wonder if that is a gender gap where it was more. you see it and those that voted
russell moore, and they gave a sermon i don't want to misrepresent, but these are tough times. we are being pushed out of the culture and sometimes you need a strong hand to defend us. and i think they are people that believe things were so messed up that we are willing to risk someone like trump because that's what it takes to preserve our role in this. whenever you are talking about white voters, there's always an element of race that's been in this picture and there's been a certain movement away from the
democratic party and that is part of the story. that's not to say these people are racist. >> one outline on the religious tribal identity, the other thing that's going on looking at the dynamics and what we concluded it's about what the country looks like and whether that is good or bad and all these cultural changes does looking back with better or make america great again in this backward looking. i will show you the breakdown because this may have as much to
do but we asked the question do you think the country has changed for the better or the worse since the 1950s and it turns out 50% of white catholics be the that's changed for the worse in 65% hispanic catholics say it's changed for the better. to say that backwards? the bigger divide some of the gender split isn't that big. so 1950 or 2015 was the title last week with our partners here at brookings. >> i have it right here. [laughter]
>> i know that it's been a long season but we've seen over the last year and a half of playin o playing up the support and the tectonic shift. is it possible after the dust settles that there is room for a christian democratic party and the full range of catholic social teaching and are we so lifted into the major political parties. >> i want to hear what you have to say. i'm curious. it's always easier to proceed rather than to follow her.
>> in response to the question now i don't think there is a chance for the emergence of any kind of new political movement that incorporates the full ran range. i don't see it as a possibility and the lines of the polarization are so deep that skating over it is impossible now but nevertheless i do have a little more hope. arab voters for whom the religion matters and the
teachings that are in their matr political engagement. i'm tempted to test the microphone to ms. campbell for nuns on the bus for the strong reception to hurt network organizations outreach on this issue but like you i think by and large for the vast majority it becomes a means to rationalize the voting decisions and policy decisions made on a variety of other grounds. >> if there were a year a 80 yef third party might emerge you see where they are.
that's lower than 10% and it just doesn't happen. if donald trump had won his third party would have some members. i have no data to support this and i love data, so this is bad. but i've come to believe that we understand if we start splitting into a bunch of political parties we would be in a mess. the country is so big and diverse in many ways not just religiously and all that but
economically and i think we gravitate towards other politics being centralized and these parties however they contain a lot and we've seen this in the course of my lifetime and we will win this election and that's where that change comes. >> i always thought it was to make everybody feel guilty about something and therefore when you look at catholic social teaching it runs to the conventional conservatism in some ways. people bother more liberal on one site don't take the church positions on the other.
there was a wonderful story many years ago about the small number of people in the legislature that voted pro-life against abortion and also against the death penalty and he was able to fit them into a story because it was such a small overall percentage of the state legislature and the prospect for the christian democratic party or any religious-based parties are very low because of what he suggested, the disaffiliation of so many people together so this party would even have problems among the over 65 right now but in the long run it would be difficult and a lot are in trouble now because of this. >> last question. >> can do panel speak briefly about how they might break down the ballot?
>> you've got the numbers. >> it tends to be bistate. we have that ticket splitting in this country and maybe now i will be different. let me see if i can get them in first right. 44% of the voters voted one way for president and another way for congress. in 2012 it was 6% so we pretty much ended ticket splitting so the weather had been republicans
asking to split the ballot to check hillary clinton. there's no reason to think that catholics would be any different than any others in that arrangement. since the weather, many of the same candidates started running ads saying vote for me, vote for trump. >> there is a group of republican leaning independent state has been able to get to trump and the percentage that are catholic will depend on the demographics of the state. >> i agree on what has been
paypal cofounder on why he's supporting donald trump. this is about an hour. >> thanks for having me. everybody knows we've been living through a crazy here. these events seem like a rehearsal for saturday night live. only an outbreak of insanity would seem to account for the unprecedented fact that this year a political out spider managed to win a major party nomination. the people that are used to influencing the choice and give money to the reasons why, it all seems like a bad dream. donors don't want to find out why we got here. they just want to move on and they hope everyone will go back to business as usual. but it is just this temptation to ignore the difficult
realities indulged in by the most influential citizens that got us where we are today. a lot of successful people are too proud to admit since it seems to their success in question but the truth is no matter how crazy this election seems from it is less crazy than the condition of our country. look at the generation that supplies most of the leaders. the baby boomers are entering retirement in a state of actual bankruptcy. 64% of those have less than a year's worth of savings to their name. that is a problem especially when this is the only country where you have to pay up to ten times as much for simple medicine as they would be anywhere else. america's overpriced healthcare system might help subsidize the rest of the world but that doesn't help the americans that
can't afford it. the youngest citizens may not have huge medical bills but their college tuition keeps inflating at a rate every year for the 1.3 trillion mountain of student debt. america is the only country students take on loans they can never escape not even by declaring bankruptcy. maloney also the first generation that expect their own lives to be worse than other parents. incomes have been stagnant. in real dollars the median household makes less money today than 17 years ago. nearly half of americans wouldn't be able to come up with $400 if they needed it for an emergency. yet while household struggle
with the challenges of everyday life, the government is wasting trillions of taxpayer's money on faraway wars. right now we are fighting five of them, iraq, syria, libya, yemen and somalia. not everyone is hurting. and thin the wealthy suburbs tht bring washington, d.c., people are doing just fine. where i work in silicon valley, people are doing just great but most americans don't live by the beltway or the san francisco b bay. most americans haven't been part of this prosperity. ithe festivities. it shouldn't be surprising to see people vote for bernie sanders or donald trump was the only outsider left in the race. very few people who vote for president ever thought of doing something as extreme as running for president.
the people that run are often polarizing. both candidates are imperfect people to say the least. i don't agree with everything donald trump says or does. nobody thinks that his comments about women were acceptable. i agree they were offensive and inappropriate i don't think the voters pull the lever in order to endorse the candidates for it's not the lack of judgment that leads americans to vote for trump. it's because we judge the leadership of the country to have failed. it's been hard for some of the most prominent people. it's been hard to accept for some of the valley where many
people have learned to keep quiet if they decide from the coastal value. americans send the message they do not intend to tolerate the views of one half of the count country. this intolerance has taken on bizarre forms. the advocate magazine that praised me as an innovator had published an article that says i am, quote, not a gay man because i don't agree with the policies. if you don't vote you don't count as diverse a matter your personal have. if they think the situation is
serious why do they think that donald trump of all people could make it any better i think it is because the things that he gets right. free trade hasn't worked out well for all of america and it helps that the other side doesn't get it. the highly educated peopl peoplt make the policy explained that cheap imports make everyone aware that in actual practice we've lost tens of thousands of trees and millions of jobs. the heartland has been devastated. maybe they don't worry about it too much because they think they are among the winners. the size of the deficit shows something has gone wrong.
the most developed country in the world should be exporting capital. instead of the united states is importing more than $500 billion every year and that flows into the assets to distort the economy in favor of more and gives the people who benefit a reason to defend the status quo. they are also tired of war. they've spent more than $4.6 trillion more than 2 million people lost their lives and more than 5,000 american soldiers have been killed but he hasn't won. the administration promised $50 billion could bring democracy to iraq. insteainstead we just goinsteade
squandered 40 times as much to bring about chaos. chaos. chaos. in the bipartisan failures the democratic party is more hawkish today than anytime since it anyt began the war in vietnam. going back to the no-fly zone now hillary clinton has called for a no-fly zone over syria. that would be a mistake even more reckless than invading iraq. most are russian planes and the proposed course of action would be worse than involve us in a messy civil war, it would risk a direct nuclear conflict. what explains this eagerness and how can she be so optimistic about the war i would suggest that comes from a lot of
practice. for a long time that yo time b s have been in the habit of denying difficult reality. whenever there is a hard problem but people want to believe in an easy solution they are tempted to denying reality. something about the baby boomers whose lives have been so much easier than that. virtual print allowed them into bubbles again and again. these stories haven't been true and voters are tired of being lied to. it was insane and inevitable that the insiders expect this to be a rerun between the two
dynasties that led us through the financial bubbles of time. president george w. bush presided over the inflation of the housing bubble so big that the collapse is still causing stagflation today. the housing bubble was an attempt to make up for the games lost the decade before that. in the 1990s, president clinton was over the bubble and the devastating crash in the and that's how long the same people have been pursuing the same disastrous policies. now someone that addresses the stories that tell us everything is fine and his larger than life persona nobody would suggest
donald trump is a humble man but the big things he's right the amount they needed dose in our politics. he's questioned the concept of american exceptionalism. he doesn't think the force of optimism alone can change reality without hard work. just as much as it's about making america great, the agenda is about making america a normal country that doesn't have a half trillion dollar deficit, we don't fight five simultaneously undeclared wars and a normal country the government actually does its job. it's important to recognize the job. voters are tired of hearing conservative politicians say the government never works.
they know the government wasn't always this broken. the manhattan project, the interstate highway system, the apollo program. you can't doubt the government that got them done but he has fallewe havefallen very far froe standard. we can't let the free market ideology served as an excuse for the decline. no matter what happens, it isn't crazy and he is not going away. it's a party beyond the dogma. he points beyond the remaking of one party to the new american politics that overcomes the nile, the czechs thinking and dragons with reality. one of the distracting spectacles that are forgotten and the history of the finest
written the only important question will be whether or not the new politic came too late. thank you. [applause] >> appreciate you being here at the national press club. we have a few hundred questions i think already. let's talk about the campaign. your candidate has talked a lot about what's wrong with america and there's a lot of dissatisfied voters. do you see this as anything more than a contest to see who will be the next captain of the titanic? >> i've always had a bias towards outside candidates.
i supported ron paul in 2008 and i supported carly earlier in the race so i have a strong bias for outsiders. the insiders are much more polished and talented but a lot of what they do feels like rearranging the chairs on the titanic. that's why we need to think a little outside of the conventional policy box an boxie a broader public debate about the kind of things we want to do but certainly i worry about the decline and i take it very seriously and i would have liked to see a race between donald trump and bernie sanders. they disagreed about what caused it and what to do about it and it would have been different. we have a debate between one candidate who says everything is
as good as it can be and another who says we are on the titanic about to sink so i prefer the second one. >> is there something to be said about somebody that understands washington better to get things done? >> we've been trying that for quite some time. on the issues i talked about today at the trade bubble, the globalization, they've been getting it wrong for a long time. they were even more asleep when we had the housing bubble in the last decade and a they've been doing these policy adjustments s and putting the massive bubbles
inflate on their watch so there is an argument. she has experience but it's bad experience and that resonates with me. >> does mr. trump have any close relationships in silicon valley? >> it's generated a lot of discussion and has gotten pushback to say the least. close business relationships are very well intact. >> t. have any people you deal with that are endorsing donald trump that don't want to say it publicly? >> one of the things doing this service not a large number but a small number of people that can't say it in public and what not.
>> what have you learned about the appetite for political difference? >> it's more polarized than i realized. i thought it was a fairly liberal, fairly democratic things that backed obama in 2008 but i didn't think there would be this sort of a visceral reaction. it is surprising that anybody would say that you're beyond the palyou are beyondthe pale for tn that have extreme fringe views.
i've often supported the views and this is the first time i've done something conventional. it doesn't feel contrary and. it's the first time i've done something big in my life if the country believes in and it's the most controversial things of surprises me. >> is the company suffered any blowback because of your position? >> that would be an even crazier thing. the companies that i invest in our anatomy and their employers so if you inflate groups like this that is a crazy thing to do. perhaps we should hold people responsible have 1 degree separation froofseparation fromw people that are two or three of
separation that's insanity. >> oif your company hasn't faced anything because of your position? >> not in a meaningful way, now. >> you said it's hard to see where america has gone wrong. do you think that silicon valley understands america and where is the disconnect? >> silicon valley has been extremely successful the last decade or so it's been a success of specific companies and the story they wanted to list the specific success that gets completed with the general progress in the united states, so we are doing well, the whole
civilization is doing well. that's the narrative people like to tell the specific success linked to general success. on our website we have said we wanted flying cars and all we got is 40 characters. people that work there have well-paying jobs that not enough to improve living standards for 300 million plus americans. >> how do you think that shapes the companies and products that are creative?
>> one way that i described it as most of the economy is a world of atoms. there's been a narrow, the progress around with those industries but then you have less understanding for the industries that involve building things. they are more heavily regulated so you might be concerned about the government regulation. perhaps silicon valley has focused on this because it's
often hard to do things. there were a lot of different fields you could study and they were all bad decisions, they were industries that were on the decline because they were getting out of. even the electrical engineering was good for another decade but not so much anymore. computer science isn't a fueled anymore. that was the last technical field that had a future in the 1980s. >> was the timing in any way related to the excess hollywood
almost all the people voting for trump. >> you mentioned that he isn't necessarily humble. humble. are you concerned about the comments about women and the more bombastic style. we have been pretty clear this year there are things he said to decade ago that even he would absolutely no longer say today. so i think that part of our discourse is getting policed adequately.
i think that temperament, the place i worry about that on a policy level is do we get into more of the war or not. i would worry more on that that still involves confrontation with russia and i don't think that hillary clinton has accused [inaudible] are you concerned with his temperament and nuclear codes at all? >> i would think that she's much more dangerous than trump. >> what about the temperament with other countries like north
have to acknowledge. the tech bubble was exciting and seemed to accelerate things tremendously but then after it crashed into the whole thing led to this allocation of capital and people lost their jobs. this has been catastrophic and that is an honest assessment of what to do. temperamentally, trump
understands the way that government regulations aren't that bad for big business because sometimes they even like regulation because it knocks out the small business that might compete and there's been less formulation of the small business and you can debate why this happens but my instinct is that it does have something to do with the toughness of the regulatory climate in the country. >> he's built himself up as a big businessman but the fact he won't release taxes and has contributed to charities to raise a concern in your mind?
>> he's been a successful businessman and real estate developer there is no question. we can debate how many zeros he has in his network but is a huge number. real estate is a different industry so i wouldn't consider myself an expert at some of the specifics. it's a tough industry especially big urban cities like manhattan or san francisco and i would expect in many ways it was a parparfor the course in that co. we have an enormous amount of transparency and that there is a new thing on the whole.
we ask so much to examine under a single biggest reason people do not run for political office or get involved. i don't know whether trump should release his tax returns but at this point the american people know enough about the two candidates. >> usehuge think it should be strong and thorough. >> is that there is a large number running today and i think the vetting process .-full-stop
it's not clear someone like kennedy could be elected in this world. >> is there any appointment for same-sex marriage nationwide. >> i do think that he represents a change from the republican party of bush 43 and a buffet tt that he was speaking about marriage in the election. everything indicates he would be quite expensive. >> do you support mr. trump . comments about banning traveling to the united states?
>> i don't support a religious test and i certainly don't support the specific language used by the media is always picking him literally, not seriously with literally. a lot of the voters taken seriously but not literal so when they hear things like the muslim comment or the wall comment, the question is and like what you could go the wall like the wall of china. what they hear is we are going to have a sensible immigration policy and try to figure out how do we strike the right cost between.
it's not that you should let nobody in. there is a policy question of how to tackle that and i do think there is some thing in the immigration bubble we say it's all good you should ask questions. i think we could have a better policy. i would like one might canada or australia. they have better policies than ours. >> do you believe you set a dangerous precedent with the publication of the whole code in a video and are you engaged in any other lawsuits but let's start with that precedent is set a dangerous precedent to set?
>> i don't think so. let's involve the facts of the case. if you make a tape of someone with their permission you are a pornographer but if you make one without their permission you are a journalist. that is an insult to all journalists. it's not about the first amendment, it's about the most egregious violation of privacy in someone's bedroom and to hide behind the first amendment in journalism, that is an insult to journalists and that's why they lost to so catastrophically at the court in tampa florida because they were arguing
abstract theories and we focused on the fact of the case. there was a position of the editor that published. we asked is there one you may not publish and they said if it involves a child. what age? >> for-years-old. he was like an aspiring child pornographer and that is and what journalism is about. i believe journalists are a privileged group in the society and they play an important role in getting this information in the system of checks and balances but these were not journalists. >> do you think it could happen to other news publications?
could well be powerful people seek revenge against a news organization because of something they didn't like and use their money and influence to take them out of? >> i think if they try they won't succeed. it was a pretty flimsy business, it was a bad business that didn't make much money but they could have withstood all the lawsuits. they lost because of the verdict that came in against. i could have written many more lawsuits. the problem was they lost on the facts. i thought we didn't even bring the wide election. i wanted to make that clear in the case that it wasn't about
the media. >> are you engaged in any lawsuits in these organizations? >> i've been involved in the case but nothing else. they were singular sociopathic. if was my view that other journalists and other media organizations were not remotely in the same ballpark. >> tell us how you got involved and when you got connected to the lawyer in the case and why you did this secretly. >> it was a multi-year -- >> i have to be careful commenting on this since it is still ongoing.
it's one of these when you got involved he believed there were so many different people you interact with been destroyed and it wasn't super prominent people, it was people who couldn't afford to do anything and one of the striking things is if you are upper middle class or a single-digit millionaire you have no effective access to the legal system. it costs too much into thi and s the modus operandi, to go after people who had no chance of fighting back. we can debate about whether the more appropriate thing would be to be transparent funding it all the way through