tv The Presidency Candidate George W. Bush CSPAN December 8, 2018 2:30pm-3:36pm EST
diaries. the university of north florida theessor on immigration and rise of nativism and sunday at a panel eastern, discussion on retired supreme court justice anthony kennedy. america, a 1974 conversation with democratic griffiths of s michigan and pink of hawaii. historykend on american c-span 3. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> next on the presidency come the festival brought together former campaign aides from george w. bush's runs for texas governor and president. the political strategies and behind-the-scenes efforts that led to his successful elections. the program opens with a brief discussion about the nomination
hearings for now supreme court justice brett kavanaugh. this is an hour. >> i am the executive editor of the texas tribune. i would like to welcome you to the eighth festival. it is hard to believe that we have done it eight times. this is sponsored by encore. they play no role in determining the panel's content or line of questioning. we will include a 15 to 20 minute q1 day by the door. silence your phones. the advisor for numerous candidates, including and richards and former president george w. bush. he is cofounder of no labels, dedicated to promoting bipartisanship in politics.
carl served as deputy chief of staff. you can clap. [applause] he has served as a political strategist since the 1994 gubernatorial campaign. he is a contributor to fox news and the wall street journal, so he is a member of the mainstream media. emphasis on mainstream. wall street journal? dan bartlett has served as deputy vice president since 2013, overseeing government relations and social responsibility initiatives. he was previously the president and ceo. he served as counselor to george w. bush, working on strategic communications. margaret spellings. [applause] they go. she got more applause than carl did. she is currently the president of the north carolina system. i am advised that is upside down. she is the boss of bosses. that is a mouthful.
news today. we will go through this quickly because you all work with brett kavanaugh in some form or fashion in the white house. the question for you is, how do you keep this from happening? if you're in the white house, did dumpster get fire we're watching in washington. you had the opportunity sometimes, surely. >> this is unprecedented. normally, if a member of the senate judiciary committee received a letter worthy of further investigation, they would have turned it over to the committee investigators because there is a strong history, they have a strong investigatory staff. that operates in a bipartisan fashion. these people are chosen by the majority and minority but they remain there for years. at minimum, you would have turned it over to them.
or if you felt it was at a you would have turned it over to the fbi. dianne feinstein sat on this for 60 days until after the nomination and just before the hearing -- just after the hearing is something that we have not seen before. no white house can prepare for this. if you have a member of the senate who is willing to sabotage the process as badly as she did. >> well, i interviewed a friend of mine, john kennedy from louisiana. i was trying to make a decision about what to do when i left phd, and i got my
worked for a guy named john kennedy who became part of the administration. i interviewed him last week for the circus. the significant point for me, we couldn't think more highly of brett kavanaugh. i told my democratic friends give me 10 years. you will agree with me. you would be very proud and very happy that he is there. if he goes down, watch out what comes after him. t will be a hard ideological be idate that will confirmed. kennedy kept saying to me, i just want the facts. wouldn't an fbi investigation give you more facts? for his reputation, they should do an fbi investigation. they did it for three days for
.nita hill the notion that you want the facts but you resist an investigation does not make sense to me and sends all the wrong signals. yesflake has said i'll vote an f.b.i. as to be investigation. just looking to you, dan, this is what you thought as well, right? >> you want to control your own destiny. my fear was that this would not be the case. i felt like this was going to be difficult to sustain. as mark said, we had the opportunity to help assure two supreme court justices. the process you go through to prepare for this is intense. the amount of rigor that goes into the background on the candidate and the preparation. having a little glimpse of it. he is a very close friend.
he's a very close friend. i say that with anybody, this has been a sad day for our country. i think the biggest fear is, who will put their hat in the ring going forward when you see a situation like this? it is hard for us to think that we will see this in the future, well-qualified people wanting to step up. one of the most powerful moments from brett was when he said -- his 10-year-old girl said a prayer. i never dreamed it would escalate to where we are today. >> you are putting this together in the white house. you know what the senate is
like. don't you foresee that we are walking into a minefield? >> you assume people will respect the fundamental rules. if there is a serious question about the character or conduct of the nominee that there will be a referral when that information is received, not two months after it was received. 94% of republicans voted for ruth bader ginsburg. 74% voted for stephen breyer. then harry reid intruded into the process and we had 50% of democrats vote for roberts and 50% vote for alito. oh, fine. my point is this. both parties are now at each other's throats. the republicans better not aid the procedures of the democrats because it is our country that is being trashed by this.
i do not care if you are republican or democrat. this process stinks. brett kavanaugh, whom we all know, brilliant, great integrity and he chose a life of public service rather than to cash in at some big law firm. how many people will say yes, i will subject myself to this kind of abuse. undergone seven fbi investigations and not a single hint of this kind of crop. if anybody thinks that the things that we have on the table now are the only three by the end of the next week when the fbi investigation is over, you're kidding yourself. more trash will be coming out of the ether. >> they call your high school friends. they call the friends of the friends of the friends. >> i think it is heartbreaking
to watch two individuals with their lives being destroyed. they will be known in the obituary as that person. it is a sad day for our country when people like brett kavanaugh, 30 years of public service, one of the most stellar colleagues we ever had, and his life is ruined. i hope he can keep his family together and move on, no matter what. >> do you think he will get on the supreme court? >> i do. >> the fbi, i think if the vote went through today, it will just give more balance for those people. it will be just more he said, she said. who knows?
we will see. >> to that point, what you have to do is say the door shuts on this day. >> he was clear. he wanted the current allegations. we have ramirez and the 10 gang rape parties to be considered by the fbi. i thought that was a good move on his part. out of all those people on the committee, he is one of the -- most in arriving at something that repairs the reputation, that restores something to the process. >> it is not fair to have the candidate be the one trying to defend the prerogatives when he is a victim in the process. >> he will go back to where we were going to start. texas is now in year 25 of the
republican hegemony as carl likes to call it. >> i did not use that word. the republicans haven't lost a in texas since 1994. >> this started in some ways before the george w. bush campaign, but it really began its run there. some democrats won in 1994 and nobody won after that except for the republicans. did you see the state shifting? this was a moment of luck. would any candidate have made it? made itay williams have in 1994? was the state just changing like that or was it this candidate? >> george bush was successful as governor and president because he was a compassionate conservative. remember that? remember when republicans could trade and immigration and family reunification?
no child left behind. all those sorts of things that people could get around together. carl probably disagrees. centrist type a vision, that government was necessary, but not necessarily government. it was appealing to the people. we have lost that along the way. >> i think it is broader than that. we're talking about two different things. we are talking about texas and the compassionate conservative george bush. karen hughes was the reflector of the phrase, but the phrase began when bush talked about i am a conservative with a heart. myron talked about compassionate conservatism and came into the orbit. that is different than what is going on nationwide. nationwide, both political parties are being disrupted. today, not back then. today, we are in a period, for
the last 8, 10, 12 years, populism has been flowing through the political system in america as it has for most western democracies and being felt on the left and right. partly in reaction to the financial crisis and partly in response to other things. both political parties are disrupted from top to bottom, nationally. >> i think i am a pretty good surrogate for a lot of what happened in texas, which is, i a democrat buten i worked with democrats. i was at a point in my life where i was paying more taxes, feeling a little more conservative. before that time, texas was a two-party state. there really was no republican party.
george bush came to town with this compassionate conservative idea. i remember issues that were compelling to me. there were a lot of us who crossed the bridge at that time because it was a compelling idea and vision. we had not had that alternative. when he came to town, that is why a lot of us signed up. >> why were the democrats leaving where they had been? >> if lloyd bentsen had showed up in 1996, he would have been republican, i think. >> this started before bush. this starts 20 years before bush and it begins with the urbanization of texas, in migration from around the country, then along comes bill clements. ways, the 1978
victory is an accident. but he takes advantage of it and credentials a lot of people come and begins to develop in east texas and then central texas. then we have a series of leaders. ronald reagan and george h the viewport. in 1980, we forget this. the new york times had 10 battleground states. texas was one of those battleground states. the race was considered up for grabs right up until the end. this was a movement that took place over a number of decades. opinion, hastened it. the kind of campaign he ran and the governing that he did were enormously attractive. >> with two democrats. >> he came into office and developed a close working relationship with two very
tough, hard to deal with, but very smart democrats who cared about texas. when the young governor, baseball boy from dallas, proved to both of them that he had the smarts, a vision and a willingness to work hard, that helped bring about a lot of positive changes that reinforced his message. >> so we had plenty of 1998 and 1992.in >> you are one of them. >> i was not. i was in the mainstream media. why wasn't this blowing up? overere they able to cross and not able to cross over now? different mething about this period. the climate is different. one of the things that i think has always helped, it is a part-time legislature, so you
only have 40 days to get things done. let's be honest. the civic partisanship that we see on the national stage is largely driven. you have a situation where more members of congress wake up worried about a primary opponent, it is a fundamental issue that we have to address. you would hope that the information would make us more efficient. to reinforce tion our views. after we had returned to the environment, not only worried about the joints, there are people in russia and elsewhere that can engage in the election. the technology has lit this on fire. >> what flight did you switch?
>> i searched. i do not know. what we are missing now, politics and policy. what are we about russian -- what is our idea today? you said it all the time. good policy makes good politics. i do not know what good policy is anymore. i think our challenge is to define those first principles that unite us. they are missing. >> what drives politics now? if an idea used to drive used to drypolitics politics, what do you tell staff? >> to her point, there used to be a consensus broadly within the national parties of what the ideas were. -- but there be
isn't anymore. it is impossible to be a free trade pro-business democrat? what's republican when you've the freedom mp and caucus? it will short itself out. the party that gets its act together first is going to dominate american politics for some period of time. >> free trade is what drew me towards the republican party. >> the democrats wanted nafta. >> yeah. >> we should see it in the white house. >> i remember the colombian free trade bill. from a standpoint of economic impact. it was a foreign-policy issue. somebody was trying to fight off the castro brothers and all of that. not the texas castro
brothers. [laughter] cousins. older >> yeah. rove.at was karl [laughter] >> just kidding. >> we would bring in people, free trade democrats, and they would say if i vote for this, i will get a primary vote on it. the same thing on immigration reform. we bring in republicans who are this, i'll if i do get a primary opponent. >> gerrymandering got much worse. >> it is not a new concept. microchip has e perfected it. i must admit. i am worried. i do not like this either, but there is no good answer. we have had the commissions in california and arizona. the democrats win out and said
jimmied the e process to get more democrats than we would have gotten. it should reflect the share of their congressional delegation. california gerrymandered against the republicans. only one state in the union has been able to pull off the it work so nd make you have reasonably competitive districts that are not to one party or iowa.ther and that's i'm convinced that's because they are pleasant midwesterners. the rest of the other three years they can be nice, pleasant and fair. otherwise, it does not work. >> mark, you were in a weird position before you joined bush. was the difference in those two years politically just the republican candidate?
a lot of us ys, that were covering that 1990 race, a lot of us thought and the lost that race, state had in some way -- it was already purple and was ready for a republican to win if you didn't screwed it up. >> that is exactly right. it would have started earlier with george w. bush. and richards had no right winning that race on the basic demographics of where the state was at the time.
williams, how much was he up? >> he was up double digits in september. >> any reasonable republican candidate would have likely won that race. but with everybody looking to 1994, expecting a hailstorm. >> in typical fashion, the democrats did not see it coming. >> i drove up to the reelection speech. i remember it like it was yesterday. it was one of the flattest speeches i had ever heard. there was no energy. it was interesting right out the gate. there was no energy in that campaign. back on it and say, they really struggled with what the message would be for reelection. credit of president bush and others here, we came out strong with a
agenda and stuck to it. it was a solid campaign. >> she was enormously popular. they did not cross until september. she was enormously popular. she was the delight of the democratic party. we had to prove that he was capable of governing and had a reason that he wanted to run, other than revenge for his father's defeat. in 1992. it had to be a substantive campaign of authenticity, all about what he cared about. juvenile justice reform was not a critical issue. education was. him?hy did you pick >> because he cared deeply about them and when he talked about them, people would say, he cares about this. when he got to talking about
welfare, it was an entirely different way. than the ordinary republican talked about it. had graham talking people in the wagon and all the people riding in the wagon. bush talked about welfare and the way that we are losing some of our best. we have to help people become the best that they can be in life. >> to underline that, carl gets a lot of credit, but it is often overshadowed. just to give you a reflection of that, whenever he sat down with me and my media team, here is what i think, here is what i do.l ou figure out how to communicate it, but that's what
i want to do. there was never any discussion. the best example was the campaign for president on the issue of immigration. a bunch of people were saying this is crazy. we want to reform this in a border friendly way. he just said stop. i do not want to hear it again. i do not care if it is problematic because i believe in it. >> a normal reaction is if this polls badly and i think it is the right thing to do, i will do it. >> that was a long day. it was interesting. he was -- i will never forget. it was a local fox affiliate. we were already back -- this was
a day -- then, it was the day that the criminal justice system -- were going into effect. a bunch of guys were out there. it was going to be a great photo op. first day of hunting. we were going to take a shower and then go back to dallas. we were at the hotel when he got think he shotg, i the wrong bird. it was a funny story. everybody is freaking out about it. game warden out there. so he gives me a check. he says go take care of this. so i'm out there. >> that's texas politics, right? this poor guy was crushed. the guide knew.
picked up the bird and had hit it. he was freaking out. the game warden is like, we never had anybody get captured so we all drive into downtown houston. they are all looking at us thinking, what are we going to do? there has to be rangers. so i literally said, is this like $100 in court fees? we all took a picture. the battleground was east texas. it humanized bush in a way. she was on her own hunt in northeast texas where i used to hunt.
extraordinary. the human organization that was around a great media shop. and a strategy. >> being a new candidate, he got his training wheels off. >> i love the stuff about beto going to all of the counties and making it a big deal. we were doing that in 1993 and 1994. i had to swear a little more. the f word is coming. margaret: are you running for something? >> when did you and bush start talking about the presidency? how early was that? karl: 1996 in san diego. >> it was not before 1994?
karl: if you look back, you can see the beginning in 1995, at the meeting of the republican governors association. there is a huge class of new governors that come in a 1994. anyway, the old ones are in the front of the classroom and in the back or all the new kid, shooting spit wads at each other and cracking jokes. there was a camaraderie there. these were people in tents upon trying to do new things to make their states that her. you could see in retrospect that they were clicking and the natural leader in their group was bush.
>> the other thing that happens, i saw it happen with mark white. i saw it happen with ann richards. if you are the governor of texas, people start talking about you running for president. it is not just texas, if you are the governor of california, new york or florida, chatter starts happening. karl: literally, we had just nominated bob dole. people were coming up to bush and saying, i hope you run for the next election. remember me for 2000. >> in 1998, it became a full dress rehearsal. using the playbook to start the
national attacks, coordinating all that. it was on. >> they were talking to him. some days he looked in the mirror and said, you should do this. karl: let's just say, his attitude in 1996 on 1997 and 1998 was tolerance. his attitude was i am the governor of texas and i have 20 to do. i am not made up my mind, but i recognize that if i do want to do this, things need to be done. do not count on me doing it. >> i went back to the committee and we discussed it when we started organizing. karl: i went back to the secret papers. >> so you went back to your garage. >> i am not saying where they are located. undisclosed location. cheney
visits there frequently. in may of 1997, al comes down. he is from jackson, tennessee. very successful in the private equity world. he does something that people in business do not do. he becomes very act of. hugely involved in education reform. and deeply involved in center-right think tank's. he and his wife come down and spend the night with bush. he's thinking about if you want to run for president, here's some smart people. there is an interesting guy named larry lindsey you want to talk to. he said, i want to meet that guy. in july myron has come down. has read his book on the
role of intermediate institutions and solving the problems of dependency and welfare in poverty. bush is beginning to collect the intellectual capital. there are two events that kick it to another level. one is in april of 98. george scholz has heard about deeply involved in the hoover institution. we're going to build a fund-raising network around the country. also you had to raise less money out of texas. also we created a network around the country. scholz called and said i want to host bush in my house. he spent the afternoon. in there was three economists.
all of whom had been big luminaries. marty i think was there. russian expert at stanford named condoleezza rice, pretty good p and a player apparently, she was there. in the day is mostly spent on a conversation about anything they want to talk about, including at one point a spontaneous discussion about the international monetary fund and reform of it. ofy don't know what to make bush but they have an agenda they want to talk about. he's a sop for information. and he's asking really good questions. meeting, we'rehe leaving after five or six hours. scholz says to me, that young men can be president. he goes to say goodbye to his guests and he says, ronald reagan's campaign for presidency began in the same living room. the next day bush goes to give a
speech to the lincoln club of northern california and monterey bay and somebody asked him a question about the international monetary fund. detail theut in arguments for reforming it or leaving it as it is. having absorbed all this information. and expands when he's in favor of this kind of reform and not that kind of reform. two of the economists are sitting in the room listening to their new student and immediately reporting back to scholz, back i paid attention. on among the intellectual types, this guy is real. and he's serious about it. we stopped having to look for opportunities. and we curated groups of policy experts that we assembled
that wanted to be with the it guy. usy came to town and helped flesh out a political agenda. >> what is your first encounter? >> through karl, when he owned the texas rangers and you introduced us. it was when he was think about running for governor the first time and he wanted to know about governor -- about education. he was a very good student, hungry for information. talk beforea lot of 94. >> in 90. >> would was not the right time for him to run. margaret is the big dog of school finance, represents the school boards, and she's a huge player in austin.
and bush says, i want her in my campaign. influence, weuge say we want you to organize 254 counties and be the political director of the campaign. she says this ought to be fun. sense, i want her close. >> i will say this, the longest -- the staff member press corps out of george bush, this can't get out of the senate. the public speaking, maybe he was driving the car. let me call you.
do you think it was a formidable candidate to? here's a telling story. i was excited and petrified. went around and talked about the people still alive. it is not static. if you can do some thing for a cycle or two, then it involves. one thing i noticed into that , thehat was happening powerful ingredient to successful committee case should , people are skeptical about any
political communication. people know that. our challenge is how do we break through that? be authentic. i was in very few ads that weren't scripted. the good thing is when he wasn't reading a script he sounded human. i would get a little piece of him in a conversation. during a presidential campaign you have three opportunities where you can move the dial. one is your announcement speech, to is your convention speech. the announcement speech is an opportunity because you get to be unfiltered.
the convention speech is also a time when you've been talking to a base and the rest of america doesn't know you. there is a conventional thing we do where we introduce the candidate with a biofilm and you get to tell your story. i went to the ranch and foam the lot in crawford with george and laura bush. there was one scene where i was asking them about their daughters, and heat started talking about when they were born. he just completely mangled what he was trying to say. it was funny so i said let's do it again. got it perfect. going to the editing room to edit the film. laughed, said get rid of that come up in the good one, then five-minute later i said, .ait a minute let's put in the bad version.
i go to the campaign and they said, are you crazy, you're putting in a mistake? i said yeah, because his authentic. funny, it's vulnerable, it's human, people can relate to it. let's admit the obvious and lower the bar of expectations of the oral skills of our guy. [laughter] a national presence cut friends. he had one of those moments, it was 30 seconds of dead air time. i said it was like i was stuck in a rhetorical cul-de-sac. there were a lot of cul-de-sac's along the way. when you put them in the right
environment and and tried overly script them -- there would be -- there was a time i will never forget. been morehave never comfortable in my life giving a speech, it was because he just owned it, he owned the substance of it. this is two hours before the speech. it was just another lesson that forcing any politician or ceo in environment they are not comfortable with, it clearly didn't work with bush. we do have some meeting in the roosevelt room. he may like 15 headlines. when you have to have a
government on as your speaking, every word matters, that is a -- if you're always having to be ahead of yourself, what you're thinking as you are talking, it's not easy. >> when bush went into spanish and ripped into spanish spontaneous way, people ate it up and it was authentic. it was real and obviously connected. >> that's perfect offensive language. went around to the small counties and 93, part of that was because nobody in the bay counties with pay attention to us at that time.
bush went to seminole or jacksonville, it was a big deal. >> the seminole media was there to cover it. chance tove him a play around with what he wanted to say. education, juvenile justice, welfare. the other three were his right from the beginning. this gave him a chance to go out there in 93 and 94, talk about how we want to talk about these things. major.a yale history he would talk about things and read the crowd and revise. it's also recognition that when you are running for governor of a big state like texas you may run for the congressional district. but it's a bigger stage. this is a lesson he learned on the presidential level.
recognized there was a bigger stage with bigger necessities and bigger requirements. haveknow the policies changed radically. if you have a candidate who comes to you now, or a potential candidate with these kinds of qualifications, has a good family name or whatever. , do they run now? run these plays anymore? or do you have to reinvent politics of the time you run a campaign? >> 1973. >> you know what i'm saying. you have the same relationship now. can you run this kind of play anymore? >> it's very different. after this we are going to line up at the mic. ask jeb bush.
we want to be a legacy are a candidate or long established lineage of politicians. that could flip completely in a cycle or two. >> every election as a reaction to some degree to a previous election. the zeigler says i will restore dignity in the white house and reaction to what the previous four years have been about. if jeff had started off not being the $100 million man, which was what the first note thathis campaign lit out he was under raise 100 million dollars, if yet been on the guy who went to tallahassee florida and turn state government upside down as a disruptor, he might have had a better chance. candidate as a strategy was our an ers, money,
establishment/endorsement, substance and relevance. you could pull a similar act under the circumstances. both parties would be smart if they got a unifier. biden, weminated joe are all in this together, they have a better shot at winning, because in part it will be a a reaction to the 2016 election and what happened after. to looking ation 91, 90 two and 93 and realizing the state had big problems, about which nothing much was being done. one of the things that was happening, they liked her, she was highly entertaining. she had a 62% approval rating on election day. if we beat in the head of your opponent we would have lost.
if we say this is about the , i want to save a generation from a dependency on government and being sucked into the criminal justice system -- as long as those things came to people minds at the end of the campaign -- we loved having the picnic every summer because she is so outrageous versus the guy who wants to get things done for texas. >> good afternoon. thank you. i would like to revisit judge kavanaugh. it is a multipart question. is it plausible that the man you all knew, this upstanding, great, everything -- but maybe in the days of high school and college, fueled by alcohol, that
he was a different man? if some of this stuff that happened like with dr. ford or something, do you think that means that he should not be elected or rewarded to the supreme court? not whether he would, but should he? is that a disqualifier? >> the first question, i will take and the second one, i will let you take. [laughter] oftentimes, the character of a person reveals itself throughout their life. you truly see the character of somebody during times of high stress, which we all experience. at your core, you are who you
are. in high school, you make more juvenile decisions. your core character is the same. i have gotten to know quite a few of his childhood friends as well. i have had several beers with brett over the years on multiple occasions. at our neighborhood. on our front porch. i have never seen the man ever out of control. that is why it does not seem to me that all of a sudden, this is a different person that flipped a switch. that kind of binary thing. my personal experience with him as an adult but also the people i talked to and got to know him back then as well. margaret: i think that is a good
question for psychologists. it depends. depends of the predominant view of how severe or not the particular event was. is it a disqualifier? we might all have different opinions on what is and what is not. karl: i am with dan on this. someone at 16 and 17 and then suddenly different the next 30 years? what we do know about harvey weinstein and others is that it is a practice and attitude and conduct that exists for decades. we are not neutral. we worked with this guy. we saw him up close. we saw him in moments of stress and pressure like you cannot imagine. we saw him dealing with
difficult issues. he had to do with us. [laughter] this was one of the most accomplished, kind, diplomatic, thoughtful, insightful, gentle, kind people you could ever hope to be around. >> we are very protective his wife worked for president bush. she was our favorite as well. we would not -- karl: doe-eyed ashley is what my wife called her. we were very protective. where are all these people now? where were they 15 years ago? 20 years ago? 30 years ago?
>> growing up in the church, do you say that to all the kids? in pennsylvania? who are coming out? karl: i do not know the priests. i'm an episcopalian, so i am not allowed to have strong opinions of things that are religious. i have friends who are deeply questioning their faith because of this. i am not blind to the fact that these things happen in our world. again, do you think if we have a priest prey on one child, that they only do it once in their lifetime? no. they do it time and time again. >> this question is mostly for rove. bush's reelection was the last presidential election where a republican candidate won the popular vote. what does the republican
candidate need to do to convince a plurality of the electorate to back them? >> a majority of the electorate or plurality? >> plurality. karl: we are in a strange. two of the five president selected recently won the majority vote. the republican party has to get itself right with the changing demography of america by the mistreating that it is open to that diversity.
we need more alberto gonzaleses. more mia loves. recognize there is a center-right majority in this country for limited government and personal responsibility. the to be argued by candidates in a way that draws people into the party. uniter's win more often than dividers. we are at a point in our politics where both parties are putting a bigger emphasis on dividing been uniting. it was not just donald trump. "deplorables" is a mindset in which you believe that part of the electorate deserves to be washed out to sea. there's a great book, talks about of the critical elections of american history, it's brilliant, insightful, it has sex, everything. i think i did a hell of a job with it.
>> visit our website, c-span.org/history. view our tv schedule, preview upcoming programs and watch college lectures, museum tours, archival films and more. american history tv at c-span.org/history. c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979 c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage. and around the country. by yours brought to you cable or satellite provider. >> today on the civil war, with letters, photographs and diary entries, keith snyder shares
personal accounts from soldiers who fought on the battle of 17 1862.on december then it was rainy, it was miserable. a conclusion i've reached by reading a lot and thinking about it. another reason i think the battle is so -- this is totally miserable. everybody there is soaking wet. has no food, has no coffee. the next morning they want to hurt somebody. letting you know, that's one of the things that makes it so terrible. >> learn more about the fears, anxieties and private thoughts about the men who fought at the battle of antietam on the civil war. only on american history tv.
>> at the turn of the 20th century african-americans moved to los angeles for jobs, community and the promise of equality. talks about their experience when they arrived. american history tv recorded this interview at the annual meeting in san antonio texas. >> professor marty campbell teaches from loyola. one of her areas of expertise, the immigration of african-americans. what time period are we talking about? what impact did they have an l.a. and southern california? >> thank you for having me. my study begins in 1850 with the very first group of african-americans brought into the state when it became a state.