tv Public Affairs Event CSPAN October 9, 2011 5:00pm-5:59pm EDT
>> thank you so much. do you have something you want me to sign? >> no,, thank you. >> we will be back. i think she does one is signed. rosemary? thank you. thank you, rose mary. >> i am nancy. i hope you are not planning to cut the military. >> no, no. they're looking at cutting $500 billion. my dad was in the air force, too, so tell your son how grateful we are.
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> runs the white house coverage continues tomorrow with presidential candidate jon huntsman where he will talk about policy. live starting at 11:00 a.m. eastern. in new hampshire tomorrow, on mitt romney. that will be live at 5:30 p.m.
eastern. but campaign events are on c- span, c-span radio, and c- span.org. on tuesday following the republican bloomberg debate at dartmouth college in hanover, c- span will show live coverage of some of the candidates and their campaign staffs taking questions from reporters in the spin room live starting at 10:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. more political coverage now with washington journal with roger simon from politico. host: we want to welcome back to c-span roger simon who's been covering campaigns for how many years? guest: oh, my god. my first campaign was in 1976 so i began in 1975.
i followed jimmy carter around the country. then harold ford. host: we will talk about the 1976 race. i want to assure you two headlines. ridgely i want to show you two headlines. and this morning from the "washington post," this from scott wilson. he rarely spends more than a few minutes on a rope line -- guest: there are elements of truth in both articles. in fact, when president obama
for started running in iowa, four years ago, he was criticized for not working the rope lines in doubt. after all, the last democrat who won was bill clinton, who was famous for never leaving the rope line. that is the line the people that stand up after a speech, sometimes literally behind ropes, sometimes behind benches or bales of hay, and wait to greet the president or the candidate and shake their hand or take their picture with their cell phone. it is an important part of campaigning, especially in states like iowa and new hampshire, where retail politics, where they like to touch the president -- the candidate and get their picture taken with them, it is part of the decision.
-- the tradition. barack obama never seemed to enjoy it. i wrote about it at the time and i was told by the obama people, no, he goes in the private rooms and greets people and spends time with people. but in fact, i do not think that as part of the job he enjoys the most. host: does he enjoy being president? guest: i think he enjoys being president. i think you like to be reelected. but i'm going out on a limb here, i do not pretend to know the inner thought process these a president obama, but i do not think he is obsessed with reelection. i do not think that his life would have no meaning if he lost. having said that, i think he wants to win very much because he has a political agenda, many policies that he wants to see
off at 4:00 p.m., it would be unusual for president like obama to work a shorter work day. i get the impression that he works a very long work day, that it does not spend all that many dinners with his family and would like to spend more. but as to the carter comparisons, in no, i covered the carter campaign, and obviously i cover the obama campaign. they are very much different people. and the campaigns were very different. we have to keep in mind that when jimmy carter ran for president in 1976 he was the first post-watergate presidential candidate. gerald ford had been appointed president, because the president nixon and the vice president spiro agnew had been forced from
office. gerald ford had been appointed but not elected and was running for reelection. and of course, gerald ford pardoned richard nixon, with much of the country did not like. the country was in much a different mood, with the slogan, some seek to make american great again. i seek to make america could again. that might seem like a silly and i need slogan today, but it was -- naive slowed in today, but it was good in post-watergate america where it seemed that something had gone wrong at the highest levels of government. maybe democracy was no longer functioning. here came jimmy carter, a big
smile, sunny optimism, one of the first candidates i can remember who openly talked about his religion and being a born- again christian. now today a lot of candidates talk about that, but in 1976 and before, few candidates talk about that. when carter became president, he was beset by a huge number of crises. there was a hostage taking in tehran, but there was the arab oil boycott, there was his failed attempt to rescue the hostages. there was stagflation -- do not ask me to explain what stagflation is, but it is even worse than inflation. there was the soviet invasion of afghanistan.
and jimmy carter's response was to boycott the olympics, and popular with many people. unpopular with many people. -- and he had to run against ronald reagan, one of the best campaigners of the late 20th century, who was selling a different message about american greatness. he was saying -- and we had an energy crisis and carter was famously telling people to wear sweaters and turn down the thermostat. ronald reagan was ultimately scornful of that. i want to cover my children's ears when they hear that. america is a great country. we do not have to dial down our thermostats. we do not have to wear sweaters. we can be the shining city on a hill. selling american greatness, he appealed to the american voter. brac obama does not face that sort of
problem -- barack obama does not face that sort of problem set. he had a successful military venture in the killing osama bin laden. he did not fail at it. he passed health care reform early because ihe knew his popularity would be greater earlier in his presidency than later, which certainly has been proven true. unfortunately for him, the benefits of that health care reform will take a period of years to come into place. he also built up the auto industry. clearly saved it, and he probably prevented the world from financial collapse. host: he is not facing a primary challenge. guest: very good point. jimmy carter faced a strong primary challenge by ted kennedy.
ted kennedy did not win, but he waged the most dramatic speech of his life, the "sailing against the wind" speech, and he weakened jimmy carter with, perhaps, the key group in america, white, ethnic catholics. they will swing from party to party. ted kennedy weakened carter especially with irish catholics. and it looks almost certain that barack obama will not face a primary challenge and will not be weakened. the other thing barack obama has going for him, the best thing he has going for them in my opinion, is the republican field. it does not seem to be a strong field. a clear sign that is that the
party is still looking for some kind of messiah-figure, some kind of ronald-reagan figure to come to their rescue. strong candidate has emerged. well herman cain is doing very well in the polls -- while herman cain is doing very well in the polls, i see that as a republican vote 4 "none of the above." host: this story is also available on the salon website. the right really wants obama to jimmy carter. we had a conversation with former president carter about the abuse ago, talking about his 1976 victory -- about two weeks ago, talking about his 1976
victory. one student asked why he lost in 1980. >> my record was a good one. we had a good record domestically, but there were three issues that were overwhelmingly negative for us. one was that iran and iraq were at war. it created an enormous wave of inflation around the world. we were less affected by the wave than great britain, france, and germany, but the inflation rate was very high. as president, i got blamed for that. the opposition ran a very aggressive campaign against me. the democratic party was divided. the most important thing was the american hostages were still being held by the iranians. in fact, the election day was the anniversary of the hostages
first being taken, and so, all the news coverage, no matter what we tried to do in the campaign itself, was about the hostages and how i was responsible for the hostages not being free. host: roger simon? guest: i would agree with all of that. what the former president did not mention was the accusations at the time that, in fact, only the hostages had not been freed, but ronald reagan and george bush were colluding with the government of iran to keep them hostage until after the election. we do not know if that is true or not, but it was certainly -- and also, president carter pledged to not actively campaign or not campaign very hard while the hostages were still hostage in tehran, and
that made a difficult for them. ronald reagan was a very effective, very vigorous campaigner. jimmy carter's campaign style of the smiling, soft-spoken, amiable southerner was out of step with the mood of the country at the time. host: another point -- inflation = 18% home loans, which is what jimmy carter faced. guest: it was a time of stagflation, high inflation and a stagnant economy. usually, elections are decided on domestic issues. in extraordinary cases, vietnam, the hostage issue, they can be decided on foreign issues. in the case of jimmy carter, they were decided on both. plus, you had the fact that he was up against an excellent
campaigner who had had the advantage of running once before. ronald reagan ran against the incumbent, gerald ford, and lost. none of the republican field had that -- has the experience today, with the possible exception, you could say, of ron paul, who ran as a libertarian and lost. host: roger simon, a columnist at the chicago sun-times and worked for the "chicago tribune." is that like the cubs and the sox? guest: absolutely. it is pretty rare. i am a sox fan, being a southsider. and there is no way you can be both. it is only because rupert murdoch bought the "sun-times"
that i left it, my wife and i. i went to the "tribune" to do long, thoughtful pieces on american politics. as some might remember, that was the year of monica lewinsky, and i did not do long, thoughtful pieces. host: laurel, maryland, democrats' line. caller: my thing is -- you know, people tend to blame barack for congress. congress is totally against anything he does. he can put the blame on them. i do not think he has been more tougher toward congress, but that does not want to change my vote. i am voting for him. it does not matter to me. if anybody is a true believer
that it will get better and stop dividing, give him the opportunity. if you do not give a person the opportunity to show what he can do it instead of saying no, no, no, he will never get a chance to do it. my thing is being open-minded. you have people who come on and say they will not even use the word "president barack." that shows you a lot. the republicans are doing a real good job blaming everything on him. if congress are the only people who can pass legislation, you have got to have them do this. if they are not doing everything -- anything, do not just blame him. the republican congress is planning a major role in making him look bad. host: thank you for the call. guest: i think you are right in
many respects. president obama is clearly going to run against congress. that is going to be his main talking point, that he has tried to do good things for the american people, and he has been up against the party of no. in his view, a party that presents no plan of its own, but just as no to his plan. in that, he has been compared by some, not to jimmy carter, but harry truman of 1948, who everybody counted out. but he, in fact won, against thomas dooley, by running against congress. 1948 is not 2012, so we should not be carried away by historic comparisons. but congress, although the president does not have a good approval rating, hovering
around 40%, congress has an even lower one. i think it is around 18% or below. the trouble is, while few people like congress as a group, when you ask them how they like their individual congressman or congresswoman, the congressman or congresswoman does much better. he needs to run against -- the president needs to run against congress as an organization, point out to the american people how he has been trying to help them, and how congress has resisted that. host: in the "new york post" -- bill clinton is putting hillary clinton in a good position to be the front-runner in 2016. guest: well, that is interesting. i once -- if my memory were
better, i could give you the ages. if she runs and 2016 -- host: she will be 67. guest: i guarantee you that joe biden will probably want to run. after all, vice president usually get an automatic place on the ticket for president -- vice presidents usually get an automatic place on the ticket for president. he would be 71. i do not know. she has done very well in terms of her public approval as secretary of state, by not trying to grab the headlines, by trying to be a lower member of the administration. i think she had unpleasant memories, to put it mildly, of her own run for office, whether she has it in her heart and in
her gut to run again, i am not so sure. if she did run, she certainly would not be unchallenged in the democratic party for that race. host: louisiana, steve, joining us on the republican line. good morning. please go ahead. caller: good morning. first of all, mr. simon, you should be a stand-up comic. guest: i do not know if that is good or bad. caller: do you remember a time when the president -- he had both houses of congress a couple of years ago. what was he able to do with it? nothing. he will go down as the worst president that ever led this country. i would propose to you that the tea party -- we are going to get
a roundhouse. we are going to knock all of them out in the next election. guest: i appreciate the call. what the president did you, of course, was passed health care, which was -- did do, of course, was pass health care, which was no small thing. we do not know what the supreme court will even allow major parts of it to remain, but, it is a success, it may go down in history with social security and medicare as one of the great social programs in american history. but you mentioned the tea party and tea party's influence. and that is a very interesting point. there was a very interesting
column in "the washington post," which i recommend that everyone, published on september 10, available on their website. and he presented your talked- about two papers presented -- and he presented or talked about two papers about the tea party. some interesting things emerged. while the tea party had an overall influence in the -- in reducing the popularity of the president and the democratic party in general, there is not much evidence that it changed very many individual races for congress and that it won many of the republican seats that were won.
the most interesting thing that i found about the column, however, was whether the tea party was a separate body that exists outside the republican party, which the republican party could be their ally with or not -- could either ally itself with or not, or whether it was the center of the american party itself. what one political scientist found and that i agree with, is that the tea party had, for years, been the activist heart of the republican party. for some decades, a very conservative part of the republican party has been not only angry with democrats, but angry with republicans who seem to want to appease or get along
with democrats. in those years where the republican party controlled not only the presidency, but both houses of congress, that activist core of the republican party felt that not enough conservative measures had been passed. host: that is what one viewer says to your earlier point about running against congress. he says "run against congress? you mean running against harry reid, don't you? --- different when harry truman was running against the so-called due nothing congress. -- do-nothing congress. guest: that is true. we have a super-committee who is empowered by law to make
billions of dollars of cuts that are designed to displease both parties. unless those cuts are made, congress then will be forced to make extremely high catz to things like -- high cuts to things like the defense budget. it is basically a poison pill. we do not hear too much about it now. we have heard about the tea party activism and the take back wall street activists. but that super-committee is yet to report. when it does report, i think we're going to find that the budget has been taken over by this super-committee, and that is really what is going to show
what is going to happen for america to begin climbing out of the huge deficit that it has. host: will we see this occupy wall street movement spread or will be isolated to a certain population centers? guest: i think it is not the tea that i will increase. some in the media are upset that the occupy wall street movement or the anti-wall-street movement does not have a set of demands that we could talk about. what it wants is pretty clear, if you look into the people who are interviewed, and if you look
at the picket signs. what they are against is corporate greed. what they are for, they are for more jobs. those are the two things that come to me. on the subject of greed, they're not naive. they realize that corporations hire people and that corporations to create jobs. -- do create jobs. i think almost everybody in america was shocked after the first bailout of the bush administration. let's not forget that the bailout started under george bush, that the economic collapse started in the last months of george bush, and that record
numbers of people losing their jobs also started in the last months of george bush. i am not saying it does not reach president obama's responsibility to cure. after his bailouts, again multibillion-dollar is, i think everybody in america was shocked by the fact that these dollars, ibillion- think everybody in america was shocked by the fact that these companies had these parties in exotic locales and they gave these reports from companies that were essentially bankrupt, and needed billions in -- that they gave these companies that were essentially bankrupt and needed billions of dollars, that received bonuses.d bonuses
barack obama indicated that he was even stunned at how wall street seemed to be so out of touch with how mainstream americans felt about the behavior of giant corporations. and i think that is what the occupy what treatment is tapping into -- occupy wall street movement is tapping into. host: here is the president's response to being asked about the state of the economy. >> it is a great country that had gotten a little soft. we did not have that same competitive edge we needed over the last couple of decades. we need to get back on track. host: we're talking about democratic presidents and challenges for being elected to a second term, dating back to
harry truman, jimmy carter's defeat in 1980, bill clinton's success. ed, good morning. caller: good morning. i am a canadian. my wife teaches at columbia graduate school of business. i propose two decisive move that obama could make. first of all, canada is 31% of the u.s. oil. mexico and canada are 2/3. saudi arabia is only 4%. what i would do is, i would take the $2 billion bought by k of theer the cloac iraq war and sell it. second, i would propose that obama take in a decisive move
on afghanistan. the number-one killer of african-americans in the united states is heroin. afghanistan has gone from 31% to 91% of the heroin trade worldwide. host: thank you for the call. let me pull about this piece about the other -- point out about "the other war haunting obama." guest: i have never heard a figure that the number one killer of 1/3 of all black people is heroin. i would guess the number is heart disease. but, that aside, afghanistan is a terrible mess.
president obama clearly did not start it. we just observed -- we cannot say celebrated -- its 10th anniversary last week. but we seem to have lost track of either its goals -- original goals, or once again have found ourselves in a war in which we are having difficulty in two things -- one, defining what victory is, and two, extricating ourselves. the war was launched by president bush to punish al qaeda for the september 11 attacks on united states and the taliban government in afghanistan for giving them a safe harbor.
it has been very successful, the taliban government has been toppled. it has not been replaced by a great government, by any means. it has been replaced by a corrupt government. at least it has been replaced by one subject to the u.s. al-qaeda has been almost decimated in afghanistan itself, although it has found safe refuge in pakistan. -- pakistan, which is an ally of the united states, an uneasy ally, but still an ally. so, we are still fighting the taliban and some al-qaeda troops in afghanistan. it is a very difficult country in which to wage war. we're still taking casualties, but the matter render discussion is, and the difficulty is, if we
leave -- the matter under discussion is, and the difficulty is, if we leave afghanistan now, having made promises that we wanted to establish an honest, functional, democratic government that provided human rights to its citizens, especially to women, which were not provided before -- can we leave now and assure that takes place? the answer is probably no. host: rogers talking about new l numbers released last night. are youhere? guest: yes, i am. host: tell us about the poll numbers that came out last night. guest: this is the establishment, the real poll of new hampshire done by the university of new hampshire, the most credible that we have got. we partner with the television station here.
no real risk but -- surprise about who is in first place, a release sizable leadn this state. he has never been second place since we have done this poll. he got 37% support britain next place is a surprise, herman cain, who has 12%. herman cain has obviously been rising nationally in the poll. but in new hampshire, he is only been here once, shaking hands, and that how can it rises in the polls. so we're scratching our heads as to how he is in second pce. but good for him. third is ron paul. ron paul with 9%, who has always had a strong contention here. -- contingent here. he has been second place in
recent polls but is there. jon huntsman, rudy giuliani, who was getting so smoke signals in new hampshire that he was running for president even a couple of weeks ago, and it is more difficult for him to jump in now. the takeaways from this poll is, number one, romney is dominant. buwe always knew that. and he dominates everywhere among tea party republicans, to democrats who are voting in the republican primary, or independents. his hard to see where opponents will attack him. their real contest has been for second place and we will see herman cain in the spotlight has basically every presidential candidate will be in new hampshire this week, starting tomorrow, really. herman cain will have the
spotlight. the othererson to watch is rick perry, a guy who comes in with a lot of buzz and momentum , and our last poll was in july, he was at 4% then. he is at 4% now. and then michele bachmann, who d the opposite finding that herman cain did. herman cain went from 2% to 12%. she went the opposite way. she went from 12% to 2%. she says that her fus is not on new hampshire. clearly there is one poll that you have to realize and taken, the fact that only 11% of folks in new hampshire say that they know who they are going to vote for. the converse means that 89% of the state of likely voters in
the new hampshire republican primary are undecided. new hampshire always makes up their mind very late. the contest is wide open. that is encouraging news for mitt romy's competitors. host:, james pindell, you tell us that new hampshire voters make up their mind very late, but the new hampshire primary could come earlier than usual. tell us the current situation of when they will try had the new hampshire primary and how that relates to the iowa caucus and the other pmaries and caucuses that follow new hampshire. guest: the decision from the republican national convention of the four early states, all of the republican national mmittee said this, and florida decided to move up their primary
to january 28. that got the calendar into a tizzy in the last couple of weeks. the republican national committee never punished florida so therefore every state will have to move. the situation is that you head -- you have january 28 with florida, then south carolina said that they would have the saturday before that on the 21st. in nevada, they have caucuses and decided they would have them on the saturday before that, which is january 14. new hampshire is squeezed with our state law, and we have not stated -- set a date yet. host: indeed "wall street journal," but they said the date was possibly january 3 is you mentioned.
the new hampshire primary is generally a week after the iowa caucus. guest: generally a today. host: so that would be january 11? guest: usually is on a monday night, but there is a state holiday. so new hampshire has two options here. one, a deal could be made that it that bad a move as their primary back to -- nobody moves back to january 17, then new hampshire could go on january 10 and everyone is ppy. if it does not move, then it may well go into december. host: you were talking earlier that herman cain had only been in new hampshire once.
tell us about the frequency of visits by the other candidates and whether you see more visits coming up as the primary gets closer or if more visits may affect how people are ranked in terms of their popularity among republicans in new hampshire. guest: he has been here one since august. he was here a lot before that. but you cannot explain his recent rise in polls, given his lack of visits. most candidates have spent -- i would argue that the seismic experience of the ames straw poll in august, that is certainly true for mitt romney has such a strong lead, spending a lot time. jon huntsman, as you know, says hes all in in new hampshire. even moved his national campaign headquarters here. even lesser known candidates like much -- buddy roemer have
moved to the state. gary johnson has also basically moved to the state, and you're finding a number of candidates spending a lot of time here. most of them, practically all of them are in the state of the next few days. host: james pindell of wmur-tv in manchester, new hampshire, sarah palin said that she was not running, and chris christie. what was the overall reaction to those two candidates? guest: very few people wanted chris christie to run in new hampshire. he was basically a washington and a new york story. people are interested and like him, but it was not a lot of buzz. no organizing of a draft chris christie effort.
sarah palin has never been populain new hampshire. she would have skipped t state. we did include her in the poll because she was making her decision. she w at 3%, in between newt gingrich and rick santorum. host: james pindell has been on the phone from manchester, >> wrote to the white house continues with presidential candidate jon huntsman at southern new hampshire university where he will talk about foreign policy. live at 11:00 a.m. eastern. also in new hampshire tomorrow, mitt romney at a town hall live at 5:30 p.m. eastern. but campaign events will be on c-span, c-span radio, and c- span.org.
tuesday, following the bloomberg debate at dartmouth college in hanover, c-span will show live coverage of the candidates and staff taking questions from reporters in the spin room. live starting at 10:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.org. >> during deliberations, the only people allowed in the supreme court conference for more the nine justices. who gets the door? >> it is my first or second conference and i was paying very close attention to the discussion. i faintly hear the knock on the door. brennan on my left and rehnquist on my right both got up to answer the door. they made me feel like i was about two feet high. one of the most important jobs of a junior justice is to remember that you are a doorman. >> retired associate justice
john paul stevens on his new memoir "five chiefs" on c-span q&a. quite similar good story has a good beginning, solid metal, and a strong ending. >> you do not need the best video equipment. cell phones and flip cams do a great job. if you do not have access to the d.r. equipment, do not lead it stop you. >> the process can be confusing, but c-span will help you stay organized. i find it helpful to make a checklist. the process becomes clear wants
to get started. >> another great thing is that you can work alone or in teams. for example, if you are a good writer but not good with a camera, get a friend to help out. you'll both learn something and increase your chance of winning. >> you do not need be an expert to make this work. you can use your parents, other students, teachers, and c-span as resources. this is both on and extremely rewarding. with a little bit of effort, anyone can do this. >> on monday, the army secretary addresses the association of the addresses the association of the ar