tv British House of Commons Question Time CSPAN November 8, 2015 9:00pm-10:01pm EST
failing to report for relocation, mr. korematsu took his case all the way to the supreme court. cases, week on landmark we will discuss the historic supreme court case of korematsu versus the united states. after the attack on pearl harbor, president roosevelt issued an evacuation order sending 120,000 people of japanese origin to internment camps throughout the united states. >> this is a re-creation of one of that there asked -- that . eir x -- the barracks they did not have ceilings or the masonite on the floor. it was freezing, even in the daytime. the only heating they would have had would have been a stove. this would not have been able to keep the entire room and a comfortable way.
>> challenging the evacuation order, fred korematsu divide the order and was arrested and his case went to the supreme court. find out how the court ruled in view of the war powers of congress. karen korematsu will join us. we will explore the mood of america and the united states government policies during world war ii. will follow mr. korematsu's life before, during, and after the court's decision. eastern.e at 9:00 for background, order your copy .f the book it is available for a dollars and $.95 plus shipping.
next, british cut -- british prime minister david cameron takes questions. then, a look at the 2016 candidates. >> on wednesday, british prime ministers david cameron answered questions from members of parliament on the military and veterans. remembranceerves day on november 11. he also discussed domestic issues. this is just over 35 minutes. >> order. questions for the prime minister. question number one.
>> i know the whole house will join me in paying tribute to those who gave their lives so we could live ours and freedom. we reflect every year on armistice day. pm cameron: thank you mr. speaker. joining therward to armistice day parade in my constituency. on the point of the military, speaking for constituents, the government commitment of gdp spending was very welcome. what the prime minister agree that it is more important that ever that we maintain that commitment and give our troops the support, resources, and equipment available?
pm cameron: i think my friend is absolutely right. we live in a dangerous and uncertain world. the key commitments that we have made, the 2% on defense spending, the spending on aid, which up security as well as making sure we are a generous and world nation, and also having the ultimate insurance policy as a replacement for our -- >> thank you. i concur. i concur with the prime minister's remarks concerning remembrance day. we mourn all of those who have died in all of the wars, and we also resolved to try and build a peaceful future where the next generation does not suffer from the wars of past generations.
last week, i asked him the same question six times and he could not answer. he's had a week to think about it. i want to ask him one more time nextn he guarantee that april, nobody is going to be worse off as a result to cuts to working tax credit? pm cameron: let me be absolutely clear. what i can guarantee next april as that there will be an $11,000 -- an 11,000 personal allowance before tax. there will be a national living wage of seven pounds 20, giving the lowest paid and our country a 20 pound a week pay rise compared to election next year. we have suffered the defeat in the house of lords who have taken the proposals away, we are looking at them. we will come forward with new proposals and the statement at that point, and three weeks, i
will be able to answer his question. now, if he wants to spend the next five questions asking it all over again, i'm sure that he will find that. how is this for the new politics, i am not quite sure? over to you. mr. speaker, this is not about entertainment. this is not funny for people who are desperately worried about what is going to happen next april. if the prime minister will not listen to the questions that i have put or that are put by the , then perhaps the prime minister will listen to a question that was raised by his honorable friend, who last week concerning tax credit changes said, "changes cannot go ahead
mitigationunless any should be full mitigation." what is the prime minister's answer to his friend? very much the same answer that i gave to him. time,eron: in three weeks we will announce our proposals and he will be able to see what we will do to deliver the high pay, low tax, lower welfare economy that we want to see. that is will he need in our country. we're cutting people's taxes and increasing pay, but we also believe it is right to reform welfare. he will have his answer in three weeks time, but in the meantime, he has to think about this -- if we do not reform welfare, how we going to fund the police service that we are talking about today? how we going to fund the health service that we are talking about today? how we pay for the defense forces that we are talking about today?
the honorable gentleman has been completely consistent. he has opposed every single reform to welfare that has ever come forward. if we listen to him, he will stop families in london getting 100,000 pounds a year. the answer to the question is, you'll find out in three weeks time. carry on. >> thank you mr. speaker. the reality is that the prime minister makes choices and he has been a choice concerning working tax credits which have not worked very well so far. he must be aware -- i will give an example -- a serving soldier, a private in the army with two children and a partner, would lose over 2000 pounds next april. -- k a question questions will be heard.
the answers will be heard. >> simple as that. mr. jeremy corbyn. >> thank you. that is surely the point of our whole parliament. that we able to put questions to those in authority. question. karen, aquestion from veteran of the first gulf war, his family is set to lose, and he writes, it is a worry to the family, this fear and trepidation about whether we are going to be able to get by. he asks if this is how the government treats veterans of the armed services? pm cameron: let me take the case of the serving soldier. many soldiers, indeed, i think all soldiers, well benefit from the 11,000 pound personal allowance next year. they'll be able to earn more money before they even start paying taxes.
serving soldiers that have children will benefit from the 30 hours of childcare. of course, serving soldiers and others will be able to see our proposals on tax credits and exactly three weeks time. what i would say to the serving soldier, is that he is now dealing with an opposition party , the leader of which said he could not see any use for u.k. 40's at anywhere in the world at any time. that serving soldier would not have a job if the honorable gentleman ever got anywhere near power. >> jeremy corbyn. thank you mr. speaker. can i invite the prime minister to cast his mind to another aria of public service that is causing acute concern at the present time. i know he's tried to dig himself the offerole with this morning, which we await the detail of.
there is a question that i want to put to him, and i quote the president of the row college of emergency medicine, who said, "this winter, will be worse than last winter. and last winter was the worst enter we have ever had in the nhs." can the prime minister guarantee there will be no winter crisis and the nhs this year? pm cameron: first of all, when it comes to the row college of emergency medicine, they actually support what we are saying about a seven day nhs and the junior doctors contract. he says wait for the detail, i would urge everyone in this house and all actors are watching this to go to the department of health website and look at the pay calculator, because you'll be able to see their that no one working legal hours without in any way at all. pay rise, 11% basic and what it will deliver is a
stronger and safer nhs. it is benefiting from 10 billion pounds that we put in, money that the labour party at the last election said they did not support. i believe the nhs has the resources that it needs, and that is why we are seeing a treating more patients with more treatment, more drugs been delivered, more tests in carried out, is a much stronger nhs or it the reason is simple: because we have a strong economy supporting our strong nhs. >> thank you mr. speaker. i noted that the prime minister has not offered any comments whatsoever about the windsor crisis of last year will happen this year. there is --
mr. speaker. >> order. they are entitled to ask questions without a barrage of noise, and the prime minister is entitled to answer questions without a barrage of noise. that means that the public is entitled to inspect. mr. germy corbyn -- mr. jeremy corbyn. >> is a answer questions that i put, then i close to him the renowned king's fund, which has nhsmous expertise and funding and administration, and i quote, the national health service cannot continue to maintain standards of care and balance the books. a rapid and serious decline in patient care is inevitable, unless something is done. can i ask the prime minister, which is rising faster, nhs waiting list or nhs deficit?
pm cameron: let me deal directly with the keying's fund. what we have done on the side of the house is up -- is appointed a new chief executive of the nhs. he produced the stevens plan that he said required at least 8 billion pounds of government funding. we are putting in 10 billion pounds behind that plan. that is the plan that we are producing, and the result you can see, is that we have 1.3 million more operations, 7.8 million more outpatient limits, 7.4 million more diagnostic tests during what is going up as the number of treatments and successful outcomes. if you want to know who is heading for a winter crisis, i would predict it is the labour party that is heading for a winter crisis. look at his appointments. his media advisor is a stalinist. his new policy advisor is a
trotskyist. and his new economic advisor is a communist. he is trying to move the labour party to the left, i give him full marks. the issue that i raised to the prime minister was the national health service, in case you have forgotten. i would just like to remind him that since he took office in 2010, the english waiting list is that by one third. peoplere now 3.5 million waiting for treatment in the nhs. match itsrty cannot actions by its worth, then i put this to him, will he just get real? the nhs is a problem. it is in a problem of deficits too many hospitals.
it is in a problem of waiting lists. it is a problem of financial crisis faced by semi-others. can he now addressed that issue and it sure that everyone in this country can rely on the nhs, which is the jewel in all of our crowns? since i became the prime minister, let me tell you about what has happened in the nhs and the number of doctors are up by 10,000. the number of nurses are up 5800. your patients are waiting more than 52 weeks to start treatment been under labor. and we have also introduced a funds. we have seen rates of m rsa and hospital infection come down. that is what has happened and it is happened for a reason, because we had a strong economy. because we have unemployment coming down. because of inflation on the floor. where able to fund nhs.
whereas, the countries he admires all over the world, with their crazy socialist plans, cut their health service and hurt the people that they would need the help the most. >> thank you. thank you mr. speaker. the u.k. internet economy is by far the largest. 12.4% of our gdp. but if consumers move online, said to criminals. does the prime minister agreed that the investigator he powers give our security services the powers they need to keep a safe, whilst ensuring the proper control of how we use those powers? pm cameron: i think his right to raise this. i think it is one of the most important bills this house will discuss. it is going through pre-legislative scrutiny first.
they will set out very clearly what this bill is about, white is necessary. let me make one simple point. communications data, the who calls who and when a telecommunications is absolutely vital and catching rapists, child abductors, and solving other crimes. the question before us is do we need that data when people are using social media to commit those crimes rather than just a fixed or mobile phone? my answer is yes. we must help keep us safe. thank you very much mr. speaker. at this weeks or membranes of events, we remember all of the sacrifices from past and present conflicts. we also show our respects to veterans and to service families. does the prime minister agreed that everything must be done to deliver on the military government, both the spirit and the letter? pm cameron: i certainly agree with both parts of his question.
these services are very important right up and down our country. the military covenant is one of the most important things that we have where we make a promise to our military that because of the sacrifices they make on our behalf, they should not have less good treatment than other good people in our country, and indeed, we can, we should provide extra support. this is the first government to put the military covenant properly into law and to deliver almost every year, big improvements in the military covenant, whether it is hospital treatment, free transport, canceled tactics count, and report on it every year. >> if the prime -- is the prime mr. aware that many service widows continue to be deprived of their pensions and there is a change in their personal circumstances? does he agree that this is a clear breach in the spirit of the military covenant, and what will he do to rectify this? pm cameron: we made a big change
i think it was last year at around the time of armistice day to make sure that many people who had remarried were able to get their pensions. that was a very big step forward, welcomed by the british legion. as there are further steps that we need to take our look at, i'm very happy to look at them and see what can be done. i also remember that in the last budget that we looked at the case of police widows and we tried to put right their situation. >> thank you mr. speaker. while the prime minister join me in congratulating the town in my constituency which is a finalist in the great british awards? can you confirm whether the u.k. government will hold discussions with a nether counsel and well so that other people in our constituency have a better opportunity to regenerate? pm cameron: i join him in
congratulating his constituency. been -- wn has also when i would say to him is that obviously and well -- in wales business rates are an issue. we are devolving that business rate directly to local councils. local councils will have a better connection between the moneys that they raise and the decisions that they make to attract business and investment in industry to their aria. >> the prime minister -- those schools which invest heavily an excellent teaching and facilities are music, dance, art, drama -- while he is been prime minister, this goals allocate -- they have cut
teachers in those subjects. will his legacy be that britain stopped seeing a world leader in cultural industries. pm cameron: i don't accept that. if you look at what is happened with school funding, it has been protected under the government. we want to continue protecting school funding. what i make no apology for is the very clear focus that we have on getting the basics right in our school. i think it is essential that we get more children learning the basic subject and getting the basic qualifications, and on top of that, it is then possible, i argue, to put arts, dance, drama that i want my children to have as they go to their schools. >> these are major pieces of national infrastructure. it causes chaos. as the government completes its final work on the spending
review, or the prime minister give special consideration to the need for a solution to these operations? pm cameron: i recognize the serious problems. when it becomes necessary to put into place these things, we have that in short-term measures to reduce the impact. there is a contingency measure. i know that he met this morning with a chancellor and we are happy to try and build on this work. anderson the pressures and we will do everything we can to relieve them. that thousands of people who have served in the 1987y be who served before are not entitled to full compensation, this means that people carbon exposed to asbestos and contracted a
-- ase stand to lose to the extent that someone who is been exposed to get 150,000 pounds in compensation and it is probable that a service person will get 31,000 pounds. pm cameron: i am very grateful for him raising this issue. the defense secretary is looking at it. since putting in place the military covenant into law, we have tried every year to make progress whether on the issue of widows, whether on the issue of particular groups have been disadvantaged in some way, and i very happy to go away and that the points that he has made. thank you mr. speaker. as the role society has identified the need for one million scientists, engineers by 2020, one way to bridge the high quality a
apprenticeship increase. one placeor every available, 20 people apply. will he redouble his efforts to make a commitment to 3 million new apprentices? pm cameron: he is right, it is essential. i believe we can achieve it. one of the ways we will achieve it is making sure that more of our young people have the qualifications necessary to apply for an apprenticeship. what many firms find is that many people apply, but when you look at the people who do not have the qualifications in english and math, the number comes down. i'm delighted to announce today that in terms of my advisor on partnerships to try and make sure that we really work with businesses to get the 3 million. they're going to take the place of another honorable member and he will help me to make sure we
get businesses to deliver on this agenda. >> thank you mr. speaker. does the prime minister realize that my constituents and black while face a double whammy? i asked them -- they're all saying that this process is flawed. how many blue lights must you have before we had meltdown? pm cameron: let me say that the reforms to the police funding formula is a consultation on which no decisions have been taken. can i congratulate the lancaster police because crime is down by 5% over the parliament. funding for the police is 180 million pounds, which is the same as 2003. found that him that
they are exceptionally well-prepared to face its future financial requirements. that is the view. crime have remeasurement has fallen significantly since this government took office. thank you mr. speaker. constituents want to take one of the leading firm specialists, went on a monday to help a medical team dealing with the disaster. i understand that there are some patients in need of critical burn care, and there are only 25 beds. we consider offering practical unitarian medical assistance to these burn victims? i think you're right to raise this tragic event that took place last friday.
all our thoughts are with the victims and their families. i'm happy to her about her visit and herself was worked out. i think it is a very good suggestion to look whether we can offer specialist help and support. >> thank you mr. speaker. the prime minister will understand the heartbreak of the death of a child. two parents, they are not to know what happens to the ashes of that child. ands the case with a family --in hull. we will discuss why we need a national and local inquiry into what happened in that case around baby ashes. pm cameron: of course i completely understand how her constituents feel. this must've been a tragic event. it was only made worse by not knowing what is happened to their child. i'm very happy to arrange that meeting. i'm not aware of this case. i've never heard of it before. let me see what i can do.
i was delighted that they chose the city of york to launch the new commission. could the prime minister confirm that this is the start of a new era where important investment decisions such as roads and railways to the great cities in the north will help bring prosperity to our region? pm cameron: my honorable friend is right to raise this. people in yorkshire have long felt that there has not been a fair enough deal in terms of transport funding on roads and on real. people can now see that there are 13 billion pounds being spent on transport in the north as part of our plan to rebalance the british economy. we have committed 4.8 million to road improvements. we will go on looking at what more we can do to make sure that is vital part of the economy has the transport that it needs.
thank you mr. speaker. there are no plans to sell channel four. can the prime minister confirm that remains the government's position, that no discussions are underway to privatize and thus in carol this much loved an important public institution? >> channel four was a conservative innovation and a number of factors helped bring this to our screen and i am a fan. i want to make sure it has a strong and secure future and i think that it is righteant into channel 4 could help for the future. let's have a look at all the options. let's not close our minds like
some on the opposition front-end. let's have a proper look to make sure this great channel goes on being great for many years to come. [shouting] >> thank you, mr. speaker. would the prime minister take action to speed up the adoption process so that more children can be put with the right families much more quickly? [shouting] >> we have seen a 72% increase in the number of children adopted. average waiting time like five months but still far too long.
in syria. civil war >> with respect, i suggest that, on armistice to day, we should put aside political questions putjust remember those who on a uniform and served to risk their lives on our behalf. let's make the day about that. >> thank you. >> the last week has been a good scrapping of the airport development and the in mainland europe. would they prime minister join me at the airport for the
excellent work with the economy? fan of the airport and a frequent user. indeed, kannan a europe is there. welcome. >> i want to hear this question. >> thank you, mr. speaker. can i think the prime minister for his welcome this week and the leaders from across society join the gentleman and me in calling for you quality for those who suffered. calling for quality for those who suffer from mental ill health or the truth is those who suffer from mental ill health to not have the same rights to
access treatment of the others enjoyed in our nhs. the moral and economic case for ending this historic injustice is overwhelming. will the prime minister do what it takes to ensure that this spending review delivers the investments, extra investment in mental health, to deliver general equality? >> let me say to the gentleman who did a lot of work in the last part of i very much welcome the campaign that has been launched and what they want to achieve. we set out in the nhs constitution parity between mental and physical health and we've taken steps towards that by introducing for the first time waiting times and proper targets for talking therapies. there are i think now twice as many people undergoing those talking therapist asked or five years ago. i accept is more to do in healing the divide between mental and physical health, and this government is committed to do that. >> further to the question from the right honorable gentleman for norfolk north, and i think
the prime minister for his support and emphasized this is indeed an all party campaign? does he agree there's a real opportunity to build on the work of the coalition over the last five years, and with widespread support across all parts of society and historic injustice between the treatments between mental health and physical illness? >> i think my our or friend is absolutely right. let me tell him what we are actually doing. we are investing more in mental health than ever before, spending 11.4 billion this financial year. and crucially we've asked every group to ensure real terms increases in their investment in mental health services. so it can't be treated as the cinderella service that is sometimes been the case in the past. i think if we do that and also deal with some of the other issues such as mental health patients being held in police cells inappropriately, we can have a better system for dealing with mental health in our country.
>> thank you, mr. speaker. with the announcement yesterday of a loss of 860 manufacturing jobs at the plant and one of the factors being high energy cost, with the prime minister undertake to work with executives to address both the short-term and medium-term issues as a matter of urgency, ever people are currently in work in northern ireland and who are extremely worried about the impact of cutting working tax credits, given that the tractor and the chancellor and the government are showing a surprising triplex build across a range of issues so currently will the prime minister reversed the thrust of that policy and remove the burden at threat against working families in northern ireland and across the country? >> first of all on the issue industries come if a company qualifies as part of the energy intensive industries it will see a reduction in its bill because of the action and out from the
dispatch box last week or the second point i would make specifically to northern ireland is we have passed in this house historic legislation to allow northern ireland to set its own rate of corporation tax. us when we can put together all of the elements of the agreement, then the sooner northern ireland will be able to take action to try and build a stronger private sector in northern ireland which is exactly what i want to see. on the issue of tax credits i give him the same answer he will know in three weeks time but he also knows people who work in a business or other businesses will be able to learn -- will be able to earn 11,000 pounds, get more help with childcare and have a higher which to start with. let's build an economy where you earn more, pay less taxes and we keep welfare costs under control so we can build great public se >> you have been watching question time every wednesday
and sunday night. find any time and you can video of past questions and other british affairs. >> on the communicators, we discuss cyber security threats and a center for strategic studies to talk about what the u.s. is doing to avoid china and russia. also, cyber security. >> it is a grand mission and it would be a good thing to change. if you think about 2012, wecture, in
>> good morning. i am a senior fellow and like to welcome to the first installment of the 2016 election watch program. as a number of you know, this is the longest running election program in washington and two of us on the panel were here when the program first began in 1982. i would like to begin by whoking the conference team always do a wonderful job of making sure everything is in order here. also, a special thanks to my s who have been extremely important in preparing the handouts you have and getting this conference organized. we invite you to join the usingsation on twitter
our handled follow for more insights into the 2016 election. continues, inon 367 days, 15 hours, and 16 minutes, the voters in new hampshire will go to the polls to vote at midnight. this morning, we are going to tell you what we are watching at this early stage in the 2016 campaign and why. it is a pleasure to my colleague, norm on the panel and we are delighted to be joined by the director of the policy center. henry olsen, you are here. wonderful. i am delighted you are here. i'm goingntroduction, to pose a question to each of the panelists. they will have five minutes for initial remarks. we will try to start a lightning round in which any of them can
answer any of the questions. last and not least, the mesh last but not least, we will turn to your questions. like all of you, i read the polls. i think we should treat what we are seeing now with substantial skepticism. here is why. politicalto scientists, polls conducted even 300 days before an election have virtually no predictive value. that is one of many reasons polls should not be used as the standard for debate participation. their predictive power comes later in the campaign, usually around the 100-day mark. another reason to caution at this stage of the campaign is the polls cannot simulate the electorate because of the arcane rules for awarding delegates each party has. in most important finding the new poll among republicans was not that trump ben carson were tied for the lead, but rather that 35% of republicans said they leaned to the g.o.p. and said their minds were made up.
in the nbc news-wall street journal poll released tuesday, only 28% of republicans said they had definitely decided. in the new poll of republicans in new hampshire released monday, only 20% of republicans said they had definitely decided. democrats are more sure of their choices, but a substantial number say they could still change their minds. traditional polling is beset by problems. all of the final polls in the kentucky gubernatorial contest show the democrat ahead by two percentage points. by 8%.won response rates for most polls today are below 10% for even the best-designed surveys. this year, gallup and pew have been sitting on the sidelines in terms of trial heat. in 2007 between january and november, gallup asked over 50
questions about the election looking at the candidates. we all know about the missed calls in great britain, israel, and argentina to name a few. i am not sure election polling has a future. it remains important. already, hillary has spent more than $1 million on pulling. last week, bernie sanders hired a pollster. this week, we saw another change in the polling business, again in part because of problems with the business overall. 48 years ago in 1968, cbs news conducted the first exit poll of voters leaving the polls and kentucky in that governor's grace. it has become harder for the consortium to conduct an exit poll because around one third of us vote either early or absentee. on tuesday in kentucky and mississippi, the associated press moved forward with an experiment to reinvent the exit poll by conducting an online voter poll.
in the 2014 election, they did online polling in georgia and illinois. there estimates were more accurate than the exit polls. i spoke to david pace yesterday of the a.p. and unfortunately they have not fully analyzed the results from kentucky or minute -- mississippi. online surveys cannot guarantee the people they have surveyed have voted. but a.p. is working with the national opinion research center to explore the possibility of using g.p.s. tracking on cellphones of online participants with their permission to verify they voted before asking them to participate in the online polls. candidates with high name recognition and star quality usually do better early. and then the fundamentals kick in. let me say a quick word about the fundamentals. the jobs report this morning was encouraging. the economy added far more jobs than predicted, 271,000.
the an employment rate ticked down to 5%. in part because the 2008 crash was such a powerful event in public opinion, americans have still not fully recovered. they are not confident the financial system has been fixed. while we have focused on divisions among republicans, dissatisfaction with both parties in washington runs deep. although the republicans lagged behind the democrats in terms of party favorability in virtually every survey, a new cnn opinion research poll shows slightly say they half, 52%, are angry with the way both parties have been dealing with the country's problems. said they were angry with neither. many americans share donald trumps critique that america is not great anymore. while americans are generally oriented to the future, this nostalgia impulse is a powerful occurrence in public opinion today.
this will be a major topic in our december report on virtually every question on one of the central issues in any modern election. there is a chasm between democrats and republicans on the proper role of government. what does all of this mean? nbc news and the wall street journal have asked adults six if it woulddecember be better for the country to have a democrat or republican for the nurse -- next president. people have been evenly divided. they conducted another poll in late october. they asked a separate question. 40% ind a democrat, republican. once again, the country was evenly divided. when asked in november of 2007 before our last open contest, people preferred a democrat by 10 percentage points. since 1960, we have had five of the eight closest elections in our nation's history.
now we will turn to the panelists. i will begin with michael barone. michael is one of the original authors of this 2000 page volume, one of the founders of it, the 1972 edition was the first. 1972.l barone: >> he has one of the introductory essays in the volume this year. in that essay, you say our politics are stuck in a rut. explain. michael barone: thank you. you have already explained we have had five of the closest elections in american history since 1960. one of the others was 1880. nobody remembers that in washington now that strom thurmond is not around. back over the last few years, the last half-century, what i see is we have been in an extended period of static
partisan alignments going back to the middle 1990's. it has persisted about as long as any such period in american history. voter attitudes, voter choices seem to be linked primarily more on cultural attitudes rather than economic status. the demographic factor most highly correlated with voting behavior is religion or degree of religiosity. that has resulted in a certain amount of polarization. we have had increasing numbers of people on the one hand identify as secular or nonreligious and on the other hand people who identify as evangelical, very strongly religious. this has been reflected in the degree of political polarization in attitudes. if you look back at the last six , and intial elections the 1990's allocate the perot
votes a second choices, both democrat and republicans have run between a narrow range. things,y in historical we have not seen anybody win anything like the landslide victories that when two candidates perceived as bringing peace and prosperity we saw for 19 56, 19es in 1936, 64, 1972, 1984. that has not happened. the highest percentage since 1984 in a presidential election went to george h.w. bush in 1988 , nearly equaled by barack obama in 2008. rounded off to 53%. had elections where the easiest way to predict which party is going to carry the states electoral votes is to look at the last map. switchedy three states
between parties from 2000. only two states switched between parties between 2008 and 2012. 2008,etween 2004 and which was the biggest swing, partisan swing, you get nine states out of 50 changing parties. we see the same thing in-house elections. popular vote for house of representatives, in nine of the 1994ection starting with when i think i was the first one to write there was a serious chance the republicans would win the house, the article appeared in july of the election year. almost nobody had any idea this was going to happen. we have had static numbers. republicans winning between 48-52%. democrats 42-44%, nearly overlapping numbers. you have two exceptions. 2006 and 2008 when george w. bush's numbers plummet.
and then you have democrats republicans in%, the mid to low 40's. in 2010, we swung back to the 1994-2004 range and have been there ever since in the house popular vote. this has been accompanied by increased straight ticket voting. i remember when a political scientist produced a book called "ticket splitter." ticket splitters were the key to elections. that was then, this is now. had 26 of thely 435 congressional districts voting for president of one party and congressmen of another. that is the lowest number since 1920. warren g. harding was elected in a landslide. despite this, we have had divided government. even though you have closely divided electorate and partisan
-- straight ticket voting, you have had divided government. since the 1968, but for different reasons than earlier. part of the reason is demographics. democratic voters tend to be clustered in central cities, synthetic suburbs, and university towns. a very high percentage democratic in those constituencies. that helps in the electoral college. go to equaln you population districts. i have been looking for changes. we have seen huge viewership increases, particularly in the republican debates, maybe in the democratic debates. as i look at the results of the 2015 governor races, i see the same numbers. louisiana governor race, 56-42.ts -- it was
the president last time, 56-41. sounds similar. >> this gong reminds us elderly colleague introduced us to the election series to try to keep us on time. we remember him fondly. he passed away earlier this year. this is the centennial of the new hampshire primary. when did it become important? michael barone: 1952. it existed but the results were not associated with candidates. you were just electing delegates. 52, eisenhower backers in the republican party entryman opponents of the democratic party, people rebelling what was seen as party establishments, decided to put their candidates on the ballot and that becomes a referendum. we see that with caucuses evolving from a an old skins ring when antiwar
democrats started in the 1970's to emphasize caucuses that had been perfunctory before. >> thank you, michael. we will now turn to henry olsen. you tend to think of the g.o.p. contest in terms of the title of your forthcoming book. it is available for preorder on amazon. could you explain your theory of the republican party? henry olsen: if you look at the exit polls through the 1996 republican nomination contest, you find there are four phases or factions of the republican party. they are roughly the same in terms of what type of candidates they prefer, what type of issues they prioritize, and roughly the same as where they are concentrated in strength and weakness. those four factions are
moderates and liberals that dominate in the northeast and are strong in the midwest and in california. nationally, they are about 30% of the national electric. 35% and are well over in some cases up to 50% in the states i mentioned. there is the evangelical conservatives who are extremely conservative. they dominate in the south and midwestern caucus states like iowa. there is a fiscal conservative who is a secular, the sort of person who thought steve forbes ought to be the next president. they are about 10% of the electorate nationwide. and then the group that always wins is the group that no one pays much attention to. in the polls, they say they are somewhat conservative. i think the best way of thinking about them in washington terms is they are the sort of conservative that think john boehner is just fine. they are about 40% of the republican party.
they exist in equal numbers in virtually every state and at the state and national level, they always back the winner. track this group, and you know who the next nominee is going to be. insiders versus outsiders has not been a theme a very much import throughout the last few republican cycles. a lot ofd be the idea media representatives are pushing now based on a couple of polls saying republicans prefer somebody without elected experience. i think they are using that to interpret why ben carson or donald trump are rising in the national polls. but i would say two things about that. this far out on national levels do not have a good level of productiveness. and secondly, if you dive below the top lines, the aggregate numbers, and look at the crosstabs, the support among
subgroups, you find the factional theory i advance explains every bit as well what is going on as the insider versus outsider. i think what is going to happen that havee factors affected republican nominations going back for 20 years are going to affect the same ones here, which is the very conservative factions of the republican party, people who are highly ideological and highly ofive in their rhetoric, 2/3 the republican party that is either establishment conservative or moderate liberal do not want those things. what has typically happened is the moderates and liberals and establishment conservatives back somebody who is conservative enough and they win the nomination. the only time that has not happened was in 2000 when john mccain broke through. there, you saw the opposite. the inflammatory candidate came from the left and not be right.
the conservatives lined up behind george bush, who was the heavy favorite of the very conservative group. right now, it does not look like the candidate likely to come through is a very conservative favorite like ted cruz is going to have much support outside of that group. that suggests whoever consolidates the two larger factions is going to be the nominee. the only reason ben carson is running well now is because unlike every other candidate who has profiled highly to the right in the last 20 years, he also appeals to the g.o.p. center. when you see somebody who is basically extremely low-key and extremely self-assured on tv, that is the sort of personal characteristics the boehner conservative likes unlike ted cruz or mike huckabee or rick santorum. he is much more low-key. i don't think this is going to last. i think somebody who thinks the pyramids were built by joseph to conserve grain, there are too many of these things out there.