Skip to main content

tv   Washington This Week  CSPAN  January 25, 2015 7:00pm-8:01pm EST

7:00 pm
"the des moines register your co-." randy from virginia, good morning. caller: i think the republicans need to have a more specific agenda. more like the contract with america when they had it. and say we will do this, this, and this. i think they need to focus on the economy and jobs and energy. i think the health care issue is important, but coming up with an alternative to that would be a mistake. thank you. host: fergus cullen, did you want to answer comment? guest: the republican response on health care can't be don't get hurt, don't get old, don't get sick. we need to have a message on health care that acknowledges this is a serious concern.
7:01 pm
when a loved one becomes sick, it does not become about ideology. it becomes about practicality, getting things done and being able to pay for it. republicans need to have a message beyond, we need to repeal obamacare. of course we all agree with that, but we cannot leave it there. i think that is a mistake going back to when we thought hillarycare in the 1990's. with hillary running, i think we will get a chance to talk to about it this coming cycle. host: there is a tweet. clinton, why is it not ok to say no to another bush? same dynasty problem." guest: they will have to sort this out when they come to new hampshire. it is too early to figure out whether people are are not receptive to that -- whether people are or are not receptive to that. host: chris on the democrats
7:02 pm
line. caller: i'm from indiana. i have a question. i heard on the news and on tv that ted cruz was born in canada. how can he run for president? and then, i don't know, i say hillary clinton all the way. i think it is time for a woman. i want democrats to realize only 36% of us voted in the last elections. i tell her republicans enjoy their two years. this is all you are going to have. what i see in congress does my mind about abortion and everything else. i would never ever vote for a republican. thank you for letting me do my comment. host: thanks for the call from indiana. senator cruz did make reference to growing up the first two or three years of his life in calgary, canada, before heading back to test -- texas with his
7:03 pm
parents. host: anyone can run for president. they all are running until they say they aren't running. ted cruz could spend the next year running for president without triggering any constitutional question, doing things like he did yesterday. whether he is technically eligible to place his name on the ballot, i guess that is a question for other legal experts, not for me. host: is that an issue that could come up in primaries and caucuses whether he was born in this country or in canada? guest: i don't think so at this stage. i think that is more a question for lawyers and constitutional experts. host: mike in iowa, good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. host: thank you. caller: it is obvious that the
7:04 pm
two argues -- parties republicans and democrats -- the democrats show me they care about the working man, the working family. all i hear from republicans is tax cuts for the rich, for corporations. forget the working class. the population is more middle-class than rich. who are you attracting? i'm a little confused by their message. they are pro-life. these are the same guys who go and vote for war. how can you reconcile these two points? isn't the war about killing? do you just care about the unborn? what about the living? so the republicans need to get back to basics, like the basic republican party, who believed
7:05 pm
that -- believed in equal opportunity for everyone. and if you're going to get a break to the rich, you should consider giving a break to the poor. we are not looking for handouts, just a platform where we can all grow and take advantage of the opportunities offered in this country. host: where in iowa do you live? caller: i don't live in iowa. this is the only way i could get through. host: thank you for your call. we ask that you be honest when you tell us where you are phoning from. host:guest: with all due respect, that is the same rhetoric we've been hearing since the days of franklin d. roosevelt. the republicans are opposed -- republicans want to give people an opportunity to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. the democrats want to keep
7:06 pm
people dependent on the government. the facts do not line up with the colors comments -- the caller's comments. caller:host: what is happening behind the scenes in your state? guest: i haven't talked to him about that conversation he had but i think it is encouraging that they spoke. i'm sure that he encouraged him to come to iowa, as he has all of the candidates. our state central committee that i'm part of signed a pledge of neutrality. we welcome all candidates to come to iowa to make their case. i'm sure the conversation entailed him coming to iowa and participating in the discussion. host: next, a caller from pennsylvania, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm interested in one of the two
7:07 pm
speakers -- [indiscernible] how would they vote if there was a female candidate for president in 2016? the republican, independent, or democratic party. how republican women would vote for a female candidate? host: your thoughts? guest: i think that a woman candidate shouldn't be running as a woman candidate. she should be running as a republican yen candidate who -- republican candidate who happens to be a woman. i think carly fiorina has gotten that right. michele bachmann ran a couple years ago as well. she didn't run as a woman candidate. she ran as a conservative candidate who happened to be a woman. it has to be a candidate who appeals to everyone within the
7:08 pm
party. there are lots of conservative women. you mentioned joni ernst, who is one. we have senator kelly ayotte as well. she will be running for reelection, presumably, next year. it is a broad party. i think the fact that the party needs to do a better job of appealing to women voters is a lesson we have learned through trial and error and some of the past election cycles, one taken seriously by all of the candidates, along with appealing to working-class voters. we are always preparing to fight the last war. republicans learned a lot of lessons from some of the areas where mitt romney did not have as much appeal as we would have liked to have seen. host: steve scheffler. i want to share with you this column.
7:09 pm
basically, what he's saying is that steve king, the congressman from your state, is making the iowa caucuses irrelevant. " for the last decade -- "for the last decade, the iowa caucus has let steve king lead the party. -- guest: it doesn't line up with the fact caller: -- the facts at all. he won his biggest election victory here by about 24 once. -- points. any republican audience in iowa, he gets a great response. he fits well with the base here in iowa and across the country. he is not making the caucasus irrelevant at all -- the caucus irrelevant at all. we are all proud of him. it doesn't line up with the facts. host: let's go to treat or to --
7:10 pm
to shreveport. do you think that bobby jindal will run? caller: i think he is running more for vice president. i voted for him twice down here. he does not live in the state. i think his campaign is going to be short-lived. my question to both of the gentleman from louisiana the other 48 states, we don't have the opportunity to have face-to-face conversations with the candidates, like you do. i'm jealous of you guys. i think you do a great job of being a filter to see how these people work with small crowds. but my problem is that -- this
7:11 pm
summer in iowa, someone can state that i'm going to have a backyard barbecue for my neighbors. you have a dozen neighbors show up. you probably have five presidential candidates show up to talk to them. i could have a barbecue for 10,000 people in louisiana and i won't get one to show up. host: fergus cullen, you are writing about the first in the nation i very -- first in the nation primary. you have a viewer who is jealous. guest: i appreciate the sentiment. i think it is important that kind of experience happens. they have earned the privilege over decades of service. no amount of money can win the primary in iowa or new hampshire. a candidate who can't sell in small group settings is going to
7:12 pm
be exposed. someone who comes in as a phony is going to be exposed in the process. there are going to be real moments that are unscripted that will happen in those kinds of settings. there is the moment famously in 2008 when hillary clinton almost broke down a couple days before the primary acknowledging the amount of pressure on her. it made her look human. that's the kind of thing that can't happen in a tv studio and, as authentic -- and come off as authentic. it is so important that our campaigns and candidates have to go through that kind of trust us -- that kind of process. otherwise it is from's downs -- from sound studio to sound studio, airport tarmac, and they never interact with a human in the process for running for president. in the white house, it will be years before they have to deal with real americans --
7:13 pm
come up to new hampshire as a tourist and experience some of it yourself firsthand. that might be the way to do it. host: an automated post poll showing mitt romney is first among those who were surveyed at 29%. jeb bush at 11%. chris christie and scott walker tied at 8% each. in texas democrats line. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. i'm baffled. my concern is, do the republican party really think they can win the presidency of the united states by alienating progressive whites blacks, hispanics, union voters gay voters and women
7:14 pm
voters? newsflash, you cannot. if you cannot win the presidency, you will not repeal obamacare. they are concerned about immigration, but not one republican is willing to stand up and say they are willing to put every undocumented person in this country in interment camps. as far as i'm concerned, hillary is already president. thanks for taking my call. host: thank you for the call from texas. steve scheffler, did you want to respond? guest: again, i think we have a great candidates. reince previous -- right previous -- rinse previous -- reince did a great job in terms of reaching out to african-american voters and other communities. there will be more and more communication with those types
7:15 pm
of voters. i expect candidates to do much better with those demographic. we are communicating with them and making them understand that we are the party of the people and the democratic party is not. host: good sunday morning. thanks for joining in the conversation. caller: good morning. i am registered republican for 50 years. i moved from new york to maine 20 years ago. i find in maine and new hampshire, like this young fellow from new hampshire, they call themselves republic ends but they are -- republicans, but they are about as far away from being republican as i can imagine. they do not stand or what is right in this country -- they do not and for what is right in this country -- they do not stand for what is right in this country. susan collins votes more with
7:16 pm
immigrants -- democrats and liberal and progressive's than any other. when they start attacking people in iowa for being conservative tea party members, what are you? if you aren't for this country then get the hell out of the way. if you are for this country then listen to these candidates. listen to walker. listen to dr. ben carson. listen to people who have decent ideas about what this country was and what it can go back to. host: thanks for the call. more of a comment, not a question. fergus cullen, did you want to respond? guest: that's exactly the kind of water that these candidates have to navigate, in places like iowa, new hampshire, south carolina. are you just campaigning for the republican base, or are you trying to appeal to enough voters to win the general election as well? candidates need to do both are they won't be successful in the end.
7:17 pm
i think that politics is a game of multiplication and addition. candidates will succeed when they can appeal to the broadest number of voters not just a segment within the party. there are other voters who disagree strongly with that, who would argue that it is all about purity and would rather lose an election than be seen as compromising in any way. that is personally not my view, but it is not held by perhaps 1/3 of the rebel can base -- of the republican base. host: good morning. caller: good morning, steve. thank you for taking my call. i would like to make a couple of comments addressing a couple things i've heard said on your program. the gentleman from iowa talking about the compassionate conservatives, saying that conservatives were interested in getting people a job and not dependent on the government. as a democrat, i'm interested in getting people a job that will
7:18 pm
pay them enough to keep them away from the federal government programs. the other gentleman was talking about how broad the republican party was. put up a picture of the leadership in congress as it currently stands right now. look and compare the leadership positions and see which one reflects the look of america more. maybe they could explain that. host: i appreciate the call. steve scheffler from the iowa faith and freedom coalition. guest: as mike huckabee mentioned in his speech yesterday, the democrats talk a lot about the minimum wage, but we should be talking about the maximum wage. we are talking about the opportunity for people to bring himself up by their bootstraps. the republican party is the party of hope and opportunity. that's what we need to head down , as opposed to making people
7:19 pm
dependent on the government. the democrats have set up so many social welfare programs that it is not an inducement to work. host: among these 2012's winner of the iowa caucuses, former senator rick santorum, in attendance yesterday. [video clip] >> in the 22 or 23 debates held in the last election cycle, i think there was one debate on the subject, maybe one or two questions and most during the debate -- national security. remember, the war was over. in lawton was dead. al qaeda -- bin ladin was dead. al qaeda was defeated. extremism was gone. and what has happened since? we have seen the impacts of isolationism. we have seen the impact of weakness on the part -- and
7:20 pm
indecision on the part of an american president. an inexperienced raw american president who had ideologies that did not face reality. [end video clip] host: for somebody who won in 2012 in your state what's the chance of him coming back and winning a second time? guest: again, i think it is way too early. i doubt that more than 10% of the people in the audience yesterday left that for him -- that forum thinking, yeah, that's the person i'm going to sport in the iowa caucus next year. rick santorum has been underestimated before. he came to iowa and visited all of the counties. to underestimate him at this point i think is not a good thing. he and governor huckabee and mitt romney -- there might be higher expectations for the other
7:21 pm
specific. ""washington journal" continues. >> we want to welcome back steve mcmahon. you twit other what handle? guest: i actually don't twitter much. i should twitter more but i am plenty business in on or about ways. host: mcmanondem. if you want to try to follow me i will try to do better. host: let's talk about the hill democratic field. let's talk about jim webb. how serious is his candidacy? guest: he is a serious candidate. how seriously it will be taken in iowa and new hampshire remains to be seen. he is the anti-establishment, anti-everything, anti-identity politics. he was a senator from virginia for six years as you know ronald reagan's secretary of the
7:22 pm
navy andesis got this instinct to talk about the plight of the working white male which is a constitwains that he feels is overlooked and often ignored by politicians in both parties but especially in his party. and it will be interesting to see how that goes. he was a pretty good candidate in 2006. he beat george allen, the incumbent senator from virginia and nobody really expected him to do that. he left after one term. some people said because he thought maybe he couldn't win rely. others believed because he was tired of the gridlock up on the hill. he is going to run a campaign that's based upon the idea that maybe the two parties can work together. he has worked for republican presidents. he served as a democratic senator. he argued gridlock is keeping america from moving forward. a lot of voters agree with that. we will see. >> george will this morning in his column writing about bernie sanders, independent, who is considering a democratic bid for the white house and making an
7:23 pm
an analogy to gene mccarthy a lengthy piece about his possible candidacy candidacy. he has been in iowa and new hampshire and staff saying despite his aiming, 73, 74 years old, he serious. guest: i think he is serious. there is a restive, progressive wing in the party that wants a debate that the elizabeth warren and others bring forward. many believe that debate is healthy for the party keeps the democratic nominee whoever it is, in this case i think it's probably going to be senator former secretary clinton t keeps them honest moves, moves them to the left a little bit. it holds their feet to the fire with the base, and there are a lot of people who feel like it's a productive part of the process. there are others who think that it's divisive, creates problems and moves your candidate farther left than they want to be. you can argue it round or square
7:24 pm
but bernie sanders is somebody hillary clinton will have to deal with. >> joy biden telling abc after the state of the union he would make a decision this summer. >> joe biden is somebody that i just think the world of and he's been a loyal soldier. he has been a great vice president. he has been the guy that the administration sends up to the hill when they have to get things done. he is is able to work with republican leaders and his old democratic colleagues and bring them together whether it's, you know ending the shutdown of the government or putting together a budget deal. he is a legislator's legislator. he would a lyndon johnson like president if he could get there but there is no question that he's been completely eclipsed in terms of the coverage and the conversation by secretary clinton. so, i think his shot on friday was a don't forget about me but i think a lot of people in this town and particularly inside the add miles per hourstration believe if secretary clinton does run -- and most people think she will -- vice president biden probably will not run. but i think that's a decision
7:25 pm
that he wants to make, and he doesn't want that decision to be made or imposed upon him by any of the washington ones. >> elizabeth warren of massachusetts? >> she is interesting in the same way that bernie sanders is although i think if elizabeth warren ran she would be -- she would eclipse bernie sanders in the same way that hillary clinton has eclipsed joe biden in many respects. she is something that the left is intrigued by. progressives love. she continues to say, i am not running for president. it's present tense who gets everybody who likes to parse words interested in asking whether she really means it, whether she might change her mind, whether she might be running for president in the future, whether it might include 2016. i think she has been clear and unequivocal to this point she is not running for president currently. i think she has left the door open enough if hillary clinton doesn't run she would easily and quickly be able to become a
7:26 pm
credible candidate. i think that's by design and not by accident. >> this is the headline from politico at hillary clinton's fear of leaks. avowing to avoid a repeat. how do you do that? you have been part of a lot of campaigns. gecht guest: yeah. i understand their concern about leaks. leaks were clearly a problem last time. it sort of goes with the taken tory, though. if you are trying to avoid the mistakes of the last time the mistakes really weren't the leaks. the mistakes were mistakes made on the tam pain trail technical mistakes. after iowa and new hampshire and when it was clear this was going to be a proceed tacted nominating fight. the clinton campaign hadn't filed delegate slates in all of the slates that were holding caucuses and primaries later in the process. they discovered that the obama campaign had done that. >> that's why relatively early on people who understood the process and how delegates are accumulated and, after all
7:27 pm
nominations are determined by delegates at conventions and not bottom primaries-- by primaries won. people knew obama was going to win long before the clinton campaign knew obama was going to win. >> late >> host: late february early march guest: and they were wondering why the clinton campaign was ringnizing the inevitable. those are the kind of mistakes that the clinton campaign needs to avoid. the leaking is going to happen, you know, presidential administrations try to stop leaks. they continue to happen. campaigns try to stop leaks. they happen. i don't think that was the principle problem for the hillary campaign last time. host: our guest is steve mcmahon, a veteran of a number of democratic campaigns. now, the founder, co-founder of purple strategies which is what? guest: a bi-partisan public affairs firm that was co-founded by myself and a guy named alex
7:28 pm
capiansa and we work with challenged brands and in challenging circumstances. we all kind of do democrats and republicans working together which is kind of rare in this town and they all do their campaigns at night and work during the day at this public affairs firm, which is a pretty cool place. host: let me ask you about the now former governor of maryland martin o'malley who had visible appearances last fall, stepped down as the governor of maryland. it's been protocol quiet guest: he is the most interesting wild card in this race. he was very active early, traveled, last year, i think to 23 states a two-term governor of maryland a very successful governor by most people's assessment. he was, you know, he abolished the death penalty, raised the minimum wage in maryland one of the first to pass civil unions to marriage equality. so gay marriages were occurring in maryland before they were elsewhere. he was against the war.
7:29 pm
after the torture report came out, he was the only candidate to say or potential candidate to say there should be a special prosecute. or. he positioned himself if he wanted to be the liberal art alternative to secretary clinton, but he's gone kind of quiet lately. his hand-picked successor was unsuccessful in the governor's race and i think that was a little surprising to him and to a lot of us who watched maryland politics. i think he said he is going to make a decision, i think by the ends of this month but certainly in the near term. host: let me ask you about money in politics. an editorial in "the new york times." yes pull it -- i will pull it up. this is on a growing shadow of political money. $63,000,000,000 was spent in the presidential election and concongressional races of 2012, $6.3 billion. these candidates have got to raise a lot of money in 2016. guest: that's going to be ultimately the big advantage for a candidate like secretary clinton or somebody like mitt romney or jeb bush who has either done it before or has a
7:30 pm
famous family name like jeb bush has. the big advantage they have is the ability to raise massive amounts of money very very quickly. what you saw last time in 2012 were candidacies that were not very successful at raising money at the grassroots level or even at the large donor level. and they were sustained by wealthyy wealthy donors through independent expend temperature committees. rick santorum never raised any money. he stayed in the race because he had wealthy wealthy backers running a dark-money campaign to support him. newt gingrich had the same thing going for him for a while. mitt romney had to raise his money. he did. he raised a ton, almost a billion dollars. >> that's what the president raised is almost a billion dollars. >> that's what it takes today. >> that's going to be the challenge in the democratic primary for any of these people we talked about besides hillary clinton. jim web is interesting but if he can't raise more than a few hundred thousand dollars or a few million dollars, he won't last very long. the same is true of anybody else that we just talked about.
7:31 pm
host: this elder in "the new york times", the growing shadow of political money, as much as $8,000,000,000 expected to be spent. charles koch saying we are just getting started. this is a piece from, a big gathering taking place in southern california this weekend guest: everyone is moving from the big tent of steve king to the big tent of the koch brothers out in california this weekend. i think that's what you are going to see is these candidates and particularly the fringeier candidates will chase big dollars because it's people like the koch brothers or the koch brothers who can sustain a candidacy for a long time after the candidacy has run out of steam and it can no longer raise money. rick santorum, and newt gingrich, i suspect you are going to see some of the folks who were at steve king's event yesterday getting money from some of the players who want to push this thing far to the right. >> that's going to create a problem for the event nominee because ted cruz is not going to get nominated by the republican party but he can make sure that
7:32 pm
whoever does get nominated is not electable in the general election if this goes too far. host: let's go to foenldz. lisa on democrats line from louisville kentucky. caller: thank you for c-span. hello, mr. mcmahon. i think you are a very smart democratic strategist bur i am not really a hillary clinton fan. i think she has had her time. and i think it's over. i would like to know what you think about governor steve bashear of kentucky. he had a successful healthcare rollout, which is very hard for a democrat to get elected two terms in kentucky and be successful. he also brings a lot of newer business from overseas to kentucky. i think he would be a great candidate, and i also like chris van hollen. i would like to hear your comments. host: host thank you. guest: thank you for the nice kind words. my mother will be very excited
7:33 pm
to hear about that. i think governor bashear would be a great potential candidate. when i was just a child, i worked on his unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign. he, of course, was successful later and is now governor of kentucky. the rollout, as of mentioned of knet or kinet was so successful that mitch mccogtried to run for ely to the senate saying we can have knet and not have obamacare even though knet was the implementation of obamacare. so, he has done a pretty spectacular job. chris van hollen is one of the leading thinkers in the democratic party right now who just came out with an economic plan that would actually work harder for the middle class by taking away some of the tax breaks that wealthy individuals get. either one of those people i think, would be a great candidate. governor bashear is a little older. i think -- i don't know if he is
7:34 pm
interested. but chris van hollen is somebody you should watch because he is a comer in this town. host: you told us on "newsmakers" he is looking at the possibility of running as governor of maryland. his speech available as with all of our programming including this interview on our website at tony from glouster virginia republican line. caller: good morning. how are you doing? thank you for taking my call. host: thank you for phoning in. caller: thank you. i had more of a comment than anything. i am more concerned about where the country is heading at this point. we are the -- we can't be -- our allies don't trust us. we are the laughing stock of our enemies. i don't agree with raising taxes, capital gangs or any other. i think there should be a flat tax rate. i am a conservative basically, more of a reagan conservative. i would like to see if we need to get a republican president. i'm sorry. but that's just how i feel. host: the president in the state of the union address saying you need to raise taxes
7:35 pm
on wealthier americans to pay for roads and bridges and infrastructure. caller: i don't think that's necessary. i mean they have plenty of taxes from gasoline and all of this what are they doing with the money that's there for infrastructure? think about that. hoecht. host: thanks for the call. following the state of the union address, this tweet from former secretary of state hillary clinton saying that the state of the union pointed the way to an economy that works for all. now, we need to step up and deliver for the middle class. will tax be a center piece of the debate in 2016? >> i think tax will be a center piece of the debate in 2016. i think the president laid out a tax proposal that's probably going to have a difficult time up on capitol hill with the republicans in charge. host: speaker boehner is saying it's dead dead dead. guest: i think he wanted to present a framework for a conversation it's going to have this year with the congress and candidates are going to have to have with voters in 2016 and
quote quote
7:36 pm
beyond. i believe, you know, that the middle class in this country is feel like they are working harder and making less which is actually true and having a more difficult time paying bills, which is true and they see the wealthy doing well. i think there are a lot of people including a lot of democrats and the president was a great spokesperson for this who believed it's time to actually level the playing field a little bit more. and make the economy work a little harder for the middle and a little less hard for the very very wealthy. host: more from the president last tuesday evening in his state of the union address. [video clip.] >> first, middle class economics means helping working class families feel more secure in a world of constant change. >> means helping folks afford child care, college, healthcare a home retirement. my budget will address each of these issues lowering the taxes of working families putting thousands of dollars back into their pockets each year.
7:37 pm
host: steve mcmahon, you heard what the president had to say. was it an eye on 2016 or a serious proposal for tax reform? guest: i think it's both. in order to move tax reform a along the path toward priorities you think are important, you start by saying here is what we think we should do. the republicans will come with a different framework and say here is what we should do. there will be things in the middle. both sides agree corporate tax reform is something that probably is good for america in terms of competitiveness and the ability of companies to create jobs. i think the republicans have a different set of priorities. they want to roll back taxes, capital gains taxes and do things the president would never do. the president wants to do the opposite. the question then becomes if either side wants tax reform there will have to be give and take. i think in terms of 2016, one of the beautiful things about what
7:38 pm
the president just did is this is going to force a conversation among presidential candidates and at the senate and concongressional campaign level where it's going to be clear which candidate is on the side of working people and the folks who have, you know, worked harder and made less over the last 10 or 15 years and which party is on the side of corporate america and the very wealthy. that's a debate that democrats welcome and, frankly, it's the reason the president won in 2012. >> that's campaign that was successful when he talked about an economy that works for the middle class, an economy that's built for the middle class, an economy that doesn't just favor the people who have already made it. >> that's the conversation where democrats actually move a lot of working class republicans to their side of the table. so, it's smart politically. host: to the birthplace of john f. kennedy in brook line massachusetts. good morning. on this date two interesting tidbits in 1961, his first news
7:39 pm
conference. in 1960, he entered the presidential race. go ahead, doug. caller: jim web has been targeted by apac for annihilation including other israeli lobbiests. would your guest care to comments upon the power of these donors and their ability to affect united states outcomes? thanks very much. bye-bye. guest: that you have beening for the calml -- thank you for the call. apec has a constitwains and an agenda. when their agending a is threatened, they speak out. when individuals are threatening it, they speak out against those individuals. they are not really unlike any other institution in this town the chamber of commerce or the pharmaceutical industry or organized labor or the koch brothers or folks that are able to fund independent expenditures or publically disclosed
7:40 pm
expenditures that addvocate for their point of view. there is no question that it will be better n my view if some of these voices were constrained a little bit more, particularly those who are funding the secret dark money politics that so many people object to. apac is a legitimate advocacy organization in this town, as are many others and then there is the secret sort of off of the books super funds that do the more nefarious work. i have no problem with what apac does every single day or what they are doing to jim web because they do it, you know in pursuit of an agenda and a cause that they glooechly in that people can -- you know people can object to or agree with and they can fund if they would like. but this other no different than any other legitimate advocacy group in this town. host: different candidates but as you know in the 1998 primary a dividing situation.
7:41 pm
jimmie carter. clinton went to the primary process battered and beaten but came back stronger as a primary candidate and in 2008 where hillary clinton and barack obama we want all the way to june as opposed to barack obama wrapping it up in january or early february, saying that that actually helped the obama campaign kind of cycle through the process and really get its campaign mechanisms in gear. if hillary clinton is running with just token opposition how does that bode for her in 2016? guest: i am one of those people who believes as frustrating -- when you are inside a campaign and you are the presumptive nominee or the presumptive favorite you are often frustrated by what you recall to be knees gnats out there swiping away at you but i have found over time when you step back and look at it, it makes you a better candidate if you run on your own campaign. the challenge is to not be
7:42 pm
forced into doing things that make it more difficult to win the you want mat prize. she is not running to be the democratic nominee. she is running to be the president of the united states host: like romneyts comment. guest: i was going to go back to that. if i were a republican candidate, the wiser choice would have been to skip the steve king clown show and not pander to a base that produces caucus winners that don't get nominated and don't become president. if you look back at the winners of the iowa caucus, it's littered with folks who didn't go very much further from rick santorum to pat robertson. the list goes on. it generally doesn't produce a candidate who is going to be the nominee and the president. on the democratic side, the history has been different. it often does produce the nominee of the party and somebody who either becomes president or who -- or who is very competitive and i think it's, you know, a different
7:43 pm
constituency that those are the caucuses for democrats, but each you've got a situation where each of these things tests your character, your medal, your willingness to run your campaign and not campaign that somebody else is pressuring you to run. it makes you a better candidate if you pass those tests. if the you don't, as mitt romney failed to do in 2012 when he went way too far right on immigration, it makes it very difficult for you to come back and win a generally. host: do you think mitt romney will run? guest: i do. if you look at what he did last time, he lost the election by five points or so. he was running against a very -- he was running against an incumbent president and it may be the best political machine ever assembled. and he came within five points. so, if you are mitt romney, you know, what's the downside of running a third time? ronald reagan ran three times and won the third time. so i think you will see mitt romney.
7:44 pm
host: jack in irvine, kentucky. good morning. democrats line with steve mcmahon. caller: yes this is jack. i am interested in miliary clinton and her story about being totally broke when the left the white house. i was in white house helicopters in the marine corp marine corps. if she was flat broke, her and bill, we don't need somebody like that running our country. and if she lied about it, we don't need somebody like that running our country. host: jack, thanks for the call. she apologized for that remark but to jack's point. guest: well i mean, i think the context or these kind of remarks is important. what she was talking about was she said that she was inhe will gants and shouldn't have said it this way, was the fact when they came from the white house they came from the governor's house where the salary is about $45,000 a year and they were in the white house for eight years
7:45 pm
and when they came out of the white house, because of all of the investigations and things that the republicans had gotten started, they had millions of dollars of legal bills. if you look at a balance sheet, what she had was accurate but if you look at a political context for the comment like that what she said was something that was ridiculous. she realized that quickly and she took it back but what she said was actually technically, if you are looking at a balance sheet, absolutely correct. >> this is from one of our viewers saying the democratic primaries will be all about who gets to be vice president: i am [with that. guest: that's with a comments. i am not sure the democratic primaries are about who is going to be vice president i think hillary, assuming she is the nominee, the candidates who run against her, i would argue, are probably in no better position and may be in a worse position to be selected the vice
7:46 pm
presidential nominee because of the nature of campaign. the only way they are going to do well or well enough for people to think they should be on the ticket is by making campaign competitive if you walk that back how do you make it competitive? by drawing contrasts and doing things that the hillary campaign probably won't appreciate. i don't want that puts you in a position to be vice president. it's more likely that nobody who runs against her is considered and people like steve bashear orris chris van hollen or somebody outside of washington who can give a different rook to the ticket would be a stronger candidate than somebody who ran against her. host: what is john podestats roll? guest: to be the grown up in the room to make sure campaign
7:47 pm
staff isn't bickering, to try to control to the ex tent possible. but it will ultimately be impossible the leaking that occurs naturally in a campaign. it's going to be, you know to make sure that all of the is are dotted and the ts are crossed. tell delegate states in montana and idaho and in the states that come late and that don't -- that most people here in washington don't focus on until the end, all of those delegate slates and other details are taken care of. things that we want done last time. the fact of the matter is, you know even after senator clinton or then former senator clinton action secretary clinton now, started to make her comeback in the campaign against the president in primaries in 2008, it was by the numbers, it was too late. she could have won a number of those later states and still not been the nominee bays the obama campaign at the time had done a better job. john podesta is going to make
7:48 pm
sure that doesn't happen again. host: peter joining us from florida, good morning. democrat, republican or independent? where do you put yourself peter? caller: a little of each. i am a retired veteran in crystal river, florida. i will turn my t.v. off right now. host: okay. caller: i would like to say... host host: are you with us? caller: they talk about the republicans being for the upper part of people with the bids and& the lower ones being for the working man, the party. how can you go to work if you are in the lower group of business people or the upper business people to put you to work? a poorman can't put to you work. that's all i've got to say. host: thank you for the xhoecht. guest: there is no question that businesses and actually, it's not big businesses usually. it's small businesses in this
7:49 pm
country create the overwhelming number of jobs. in many cases, they aren't wall street titans making 9, 10, $15 million a year as big companies. they are running mall businesses. a lot are family-owned businesses. >> that's the backbone of the american economy. it's the back bon of job creation here in america. i think, you know, you can be for the i would guy and the little guy includes the small business owner and the employee of the small business as well as the large business. you or for the big guy ceo the hedge fund manager making, you know, maybe $100 million a year and paying a capital gains tax rate while people who work every day with their back and do labor are paying much more. >> that's the conversation at a time president is trying to encourage, not about the big business or the small business as much as it is about where the capitol and income flows and
7:50 pm
whether enough of that capitol income is flowing to the workers who are producing it and then how the people who are paying taxes are being treated and are they being treated he can quitbly and fairly? >> the conversation that i think he started with the state of the union speech. i think it's a conversation that folks out there are going to hear a lot more about in the next couple of years. host: steven schweitzer asks what about brian schweitzer? is he considering a bill? host: brian schweitzer is like o'malley o'malley. he was out there quite a bit last year but he is really not been heard from much over the past few months. he has said that he is, you know maybe interested. i think he probably is a little bit more than maybe interested. but again, a lot of these folks are sitting back and they are waiting to see what hillary clinton does because the presumption is that she is running and every indication is that she is running and that
7:51 pm
hiring john podesta would suggest she is running. until she says she is running, people are saying wait. what about me including the vice president. host: joseph says, marcy cantor from ohio should run for president. most knowledgeable and fair person i have seen. let's go to stephanie joining us from missouri democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am quite excited to see hillary clinton for the next president. my second pick would be joe biden. i think he would be a refreshing, figure for us. host: let me ask you about hillary clinton. if she runs like many suspect, what should her message be? what should she campaign on? caller: i think she could bring a lot to the table as far as foreign policy is concerned. i think she has a good business sense. i think sxlik that she would
7:52 pm
definitely be good. i think that we saw a lot of her. i don't want to make it as if she was with bill. i mean, you know, they were separate. but i think they were also a package. i think we saw that. i personally elizabeth warren i appreciate elizabeth warren being honest and wanting to stay where i think she feels she can do the most benefit. and with them trying to dismantle dodd-frank, i think that's incredibly important. i love her honesty in want to go stay genuine to what she feels she can do the best benefit for us. i travel the united states for my business and what i do notice a lot is that in the republican states, you find that fuel and gas are higher and, and there is an enormous amount of poverty. so, i am listening to all of the callers. i think the callers actually made more sense tonight or today than what i saw from the freedom
7:53 pm
summit unfortunately. i think on the republican side and the democratic side the callers seem to be quite sensible. but what i would appreciate from all of the callers that are listening, is if they could go to the library of congress right here on c-span action you see the debates, go on the internet. check out records. check out the voting history. check out how your representatives have been doing within the state, you know, and take a ride. gas is cheaper now. take a ride outside of your own town, outside of your own state and see what's going on. too many people don't get out of that i be own bubble. i find this a lot. he specially the northern west. i'm sorry. to the people who live up there there is very little communication up there. host: okay. i will stop you there because we are short on time. a few minutes left with our guest. we will give him a chance to respond. thank you. guest: i think stephanie said something interesting and smart among other things that she said
7:54 pm
that were really interesting and smart. take a look at what's happening out there that stephanie just mentioned. one of the things i think republicans are going to finds challenging is when people look at what's happening out there, you are seeing gas at about 2 bucks a gallon in washington and the obama care experiment begin to work and so the economy is creating more and more jobs and unemployment is going down. the republicans who are counting on the economy that was faltering and obama care that wasn't working that was unpopular and a general sense that things aren't going well in this country may be surprised in 2016 if the economy continues to roll if gas prices remain low and consumers have more money to spend and the economic growth numbers pick up if unemployment goes down, if the job creation continues to expand. it may be a much more difficult environment for the republicans in 2016. therefore, a lot easier for hillary clinton if she is the nominee. after all, the republicans wants
7:55 pm
to run against hillary as the third term of barack obama. she is obviously going to make that challenging jut by running her own independent campaign but if the economic circumstances make it more challenging and then you've got the electoral college and democrats start usually with about 240 of the 270 they need, it's going to be a pretty difficult thing for the republicans to get over and get past f there are more steve king like space minutes and more of the republicans moving the mainstream of the party to the right, it's going to be even more difficult. host: on this weekend, iowa republicans going to the meeting by steve king. long time strategist of purple strategies. a minute or 2 with your phone calls. bob from pawpaw, michigan good morning caller: i am interested if you have any idea of candidates viable candidates that will not
7:56 pm
be 70 years old by the time they take office with the democratic party. i feel like the vetting process really needs to be very strict in terms of health because this is a really high-energy job any more in washington. and we have had examples and you know them very well over the years, where an older person like that is just the energy just isn't there. host: let me ask yous not only hillary clinton as the nominee. she would be 67 but the democratic leadership in the house and senate nancypel pelosi, do you think that poses an image problem for the democrats? caller: do i? yeah. host: steve mcmahon guest: i have a slightly different view. bob's question is a legitimate one. you can make the case that typically when you move on in politics from one generation to the next, it gets younger, not older. and that has been historically the case.
7:57 pm
i don't think so you have seen a candidate as well qualified as hillary clinton or joe biden despite their age in a long time. hillary clinton, as you mentioned will be 67 when she is nominated, assuming she is is going to probably live by the numbers another 25 years. i think she could serve the country treat quite well and joe biden is in exactly the same position. i am not as concerned about the age of the party, of the nominee or even the candidate or the president. i am more concerned about what it is they want to do and how it is they think they are going to detthat accomplished. host: let me conclude with this point from the from the ""l.a. times" times"" piece. the republicans said their convention would be sometime between late june and mid july so that the republicans will be july 18th, the 21st. the democrats, july 25th through the 29th. back to back conventions again.
7:58 pm
guest: yeah. what you are seeing are the conventions coming sooner. it used to be, you know conventions would actually creep later in the calendar they would be limited to $70 million. they opt out of that public financing. they can raise and spend as much as they want as long as it's within campaign laws. they want to get it settled sooner and raise the bill yon dollars they are going to need to run campaign effectively beginning as quickly as possible. i am not surprised they have moved it up. i am surprised it took this long to get here because it's been moving in this director quite some time. >> back to back conventions versus a week or two in between, what's the thinking behind that? guest: i don't think neither party wants the other to get a head start on the general election. they were nearly back to back. host: into early september.
7:59 pm
guest: not only back to back but back in july and it's just like the starting gun is going off sooner. votesers are probably going to be more disgusted than ever host: steve >> on the next washington journal, michelle flournoy talks about the issue of u.s. national security, and the need for bipartisan support. a taxpayer advocate discusses a report to congress that says budget cuts have produced problems with irs customer service. as always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal," live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. tonight on c-span, "you and they -- andrew keen talks about the
8:00 pm
overuse of technology in today's society. then, david cameron taking questions from members of the house of commons. >> this week on q1 day, our guest is andrew king -- andrew keen. he talks about the history of silicon valley and the tech world, the use of our personal data by internet sites, and what he thinks regular users of the web should note. -- should know. >> andrew keen,


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on