tv 2016 Presidential Race and U.S. History CSPAN November 26, 2015 7:00pm-8:01pm EST
community of visitors and new yorkers we serve. and our first 10 years we shared new york's rich role in the invention of america, a sweep of history from the indigenous people to the beginnings of the dutch colony, from the revolutionary war to america's first seat of government. gratified to have the support of the new york trust. shall be white and leon lead leedy foundation, funded the last two volumes of the documentary history of the first federal congress. a comprehensive forty-year project we call the bible of federal hall. tonight their scholars are with us.
we will illuminate ideas and ideals, and the contradictions of american democracy forged here between 1789 and 1790. the pipelineiams company for their annual support of the harbor conservancy. we thank easter national for their contribution for the great debate and for opening their store, and making available the books of the panelists after the program. we welcome c-span who will share the evening with viewers across america. the challenge posed to our moderator is to probe the election race through the prism of federal hall's rich political history.
since 1992, he has hosted the new york times close-up, and interview series. he is the author of several noteworthy books. only in new york, a collection of essays taking aim at our city and the illustrious and not so illustrious residents. central, and the history of new york in 101 objects. ladies and gentlemen, join me in welcoming sam roberts. [applause] sam: thank you to all of you for
coming. thank you to our panel for agreeing to participate. this is less of a debate than it is a conversation. probeated challenge is to the presidential race through the prism of federal hall's rich history. notwithstanding the popularity of hamilton on broadway, new yorkers mostly don't care about history. we are consumed by the president. we are infatuated with the future. , places that wallow in their past because nothing much happened there next.
no offense as he points out where jamestown sank into the mud, and the first written reference to the pilgrims landing on a rock came 121 years after they landed. i have been covering new york for nearly 50 years. ken jackson says something else that may be i took for granted. america begins in new york. here at thisright site. no site in new york city embodies that beginning more than federal hall. what distinguished new york from the rest of the america was its dutch roots. they did not come here to escape religious persecution. they didn't come here to proselytize. they came to make money. if you did not get in their way you were welcome.
you can call it tolerance, indifference. it defined new york and america. here, peter, right .inger was acquitted of rivalry they called the morningstar of liberty which subsequently revolutionized america. in 1765 thes later stamp act, 250 years ago this the stamp act congress convened. john kruger was the mayor of new york and drafted a declaration of rights a decade before that other declaration in
philadelphia. it demanded no taxation without representation. not even most new yorkers know this. for 18 months beginning in 1789 new york was the nation's first capital. washington was inaugurated here ,t this site on this stone gripping the railing that you can see in that empty room. holding the bible you can also see there. stormed out of the chamber one day when senators postpone their debate on a treaty. they did not object to the treaty. they could not hear over the noise of the new york traffic. washington never returned to the senate after that. some things don't change. andress has debated slavery
immigration at this site. fleshed out the body of laws and the government from the bare bones of the constitution. amendmentsproves 12 to the constitution. signal their priorities, congressional pay and representation. if that had been ratified we would have 6000 congress members now. the remaining 10 which for ratified became the bill of rights. then we were lucky. allks to hamilton, they packed up and departed for a southern marsh. it was not a swamp, it was a marsh. looking ahead to life in philadelphia, abigail adams lamented it will not be broadway.
tonight at the site where history happened we are pleased to be joined by journalists who bring historical context and diverse perspectives to their work. the first woman to hold that position, she is now an op-ed columnist, author of america's .omen she is in the midst of writing a fromon older women, not personal experience. peggy noonan, for president author of seven books, her book the time of our lives will be published in november. wilkerson, the first black woman to win the pulitzer
prize, the author of the warmth of other suns, the epic story of america great migration. convenedf historians concluded that the founding ,athers were improvisers inventors, and compromisers. i would like to ask the panel, given the way the government is working these days, if the founding fathers came back and were sitting with us tonight, would they think they had gotten it right? the idea they would come back, and there would be all of these
women running around. i would love to envision thomas seeing hillary clinton. is hard to put them in a context like that. they were extraordinary people gettheir time but i don't into the founding fathers were the best and we can never do it again. >> many came here to mary as they did. >> can i tell you one thing about the marrying. they asked woman to come over from england and cap saying things like anyone of good disposition under the age of 55 years old with make a wonderful wife. it is the last time that came up. >> you know that from your next one. >> with a think that the
government we have now was working the way they envision? >> i think that some of the notding generation, insignificant number of them who walked these halls were not at all certain united states of america, which they were busy investing, would endure the democracy, still be a republic. 230 years later i think they might think, that worked. but after that i think they would see all my goodness, the rampant dysfunction, discord and very often incoherent of washington and they would be completely confused by it. 2016ey look at the
election they would see things that astound them. they would see a number of leading candidates who actually experience in elective office. running for president of the united states and being leaders. they would see other candidates who are something that the founders in a general sense of , professionalrred politicians, not citizens who afternto politics working some years in some profession, in some honest work and as good citizens deciding to leave the fields, go to washington and do actual public service by representing their state or their congressional delegation, sir for a limited
time and then go home. they will be shocked by the idea that politics is a profession that can last 50 years if you are lucky. they would be shocked by the professional consultants, shocked by super pac, by billionaires. all that alexander hamilton would say is what is a billionaire? so obviously it is more than two centuries later. so much would be startling for them. maybe the biggest would be our continuance as a democracy and the republic. of ouruld say given most founding fathers were also slaveholders, they would be knowed and speechless to
who was in the white house right now. i think that would be -- [applause] they would not have been able to comprehend the possibility of the people who had been brought here against their will by , our first thousands slaveholder, he actually believed in gradual ism, that people of african dissent could be mainstreamed into the society as a whole. it would have been incomprehensible that at any time in our country's history they could have imagined a person of african descent in the white house. >> let me ask you, what they have been surprised that it took so long, or would they be thinking he is now that he
finally got there, being held to a different or higher standard as president because he is black? >> it would be hard. i think they could not comprehend the day when it would happen. if you understand how they would have thought, it reminds us of a fact that this is hallowed ground for our country's history but reminds us how intertwined the issue in the economics, and urgency of and save -- enslavement was to the country in new york. we are on wall street. it was named after a wall, a wall built by enslaved africans. a lot of people don't realize that. wason this street, the wall people, byenslaved
.he 1700s this was a market a market in which the things were sold bu were not commoditis but human beings. entwined and a part of the foundation of the city, part of the foundation of our country. new york was on par with the charleston, south carolina as a port of arrival of goods being sold out of the slave trade but also those arriving to be sold and rented on this very space. >> we talk about the founding fathers as being compromisers. whatever happened to compromise? thatcantor wrote recently he never heard of a football team that won by throwing only hail mary passes. what happened to the ability to
solve problems incrementally, to take baby steps, to make small compromises to go forward, and to do it in a non-vitriolic way? wrote scorpion tongues, have things gotten worse in her ability to talk civilly to each ?ther and deal with each other >> when john quincy adams was running for president they kept saying he had affairs with his made when he was ambassador to russia, his wife was an illegitimate child -- on and on. it is not that bad right now. if they have the internet god
only knows what they would have done. it is bad enough as it was. i don't know that in terms of character there was any difference. we have a moment right now -- a man was hit in the head with a cane. it is always south carolina. it has always been this crazy street. we are in a moment with a crazy streak. what is going to have to happen is that people who are doing this will have to realize you are going to lose. then things will calm down. >> you work for a person known for being civil. what happened? >> may be in the past 25 years, certainly the past 10-15 a number of things came together.
everyone and politics got maximalist. no one could put forward a modest bill and save this modest bill will do something. let's agree on it. it is small. we are in agreement on the essentials. nobody wanted to do that anymore. there was no legacy or fame and it. you cannot have a piece by piece immigration bill that will take maybe five years to pass. you can start with small pieces. no, it has to be comprehensive and huge, earthshaking and famous. time thating in a more and more candidates are and will be somewhat charismatic. charismatic characters are interesting but they are not necessarily legislators. that is part of what is going on
in washington now. legislative inability on the part of leaders to move things forward. another thing i have seen happen , there is so many people making so much money on the divisions that drive us crazy. left-wing people, right are always, they going to their own bases and getting them mad. getting them frustrated. you write that congressman and you tell them he better not dare back a, b, c. america has been undergoing geographically something of a big sort. people who are like-minded are more likely to be living together in places like new york and texas. people who are culturally like-minded navigate toward
media that will comfort or inspire, or back up their biases. all of these things have the effect of putting daggers in the idea of compromise and going forward together a, and taking a chance on the other guy. >> the speed with which people idea, aesce around an would a preconceived idea be easier now than at any time in our country's history. we have these silos where people can find comfort, and social media and cable television with like-minded people. that can swell up and create its own energy. there are studies now among technological and sociological colleagues looking at confirmation bias, some that
drives everybody crazy. it is the idea of that instead of ever being convinced of absorbg, when we information we are looking to confirm what we already believe. it can build up because people are only listening for the things they actually believe already. you work so hard to convince someone else of our ideas when in fact what we're doing is creating even more of a confirmation bias as people get deeper and deeper into what they know. it is something in which when we are exposed to new data, new studies, new information on one side, now you must believe what we are saying because here is a study. the response is that we look for the aspect of it, the one thing that confirms we already knew. >> i'm so sorry.
gree are agreeing to much. >> let's have a faux fight to make him happy. there is a little bit of a -- i don't have this fully thought out but in american now there is a slow motion low-key french revolution going on where everybody hates every establishment. everybody hates leaders of every profession, the political establishment, throw the bums out. they hate the media establishment such as it is. establishments about the u.s. military and their own doctor. [laughter] everybody who is trying in their a way to make america
run no c is constantly under threat. >> if we are all interested in what each of us believe, and only want to hear what we already believe then, what do we says ofcolumbia who donald trump, a first in american politics, a candidate with no believe system other than the certainty that anything he says is right? how do we account for this phenomenon? punishmentrump is a for having two-year long presidential races. i truly believe it. i want to go back to something peggy says. so we can have a debate. when i was growing up, and we were the new left, doing all of that stuff, i belonged to the
nuns -- students for decent styles. strapless dresses. [laughter] we didn't believe anyone who was could beity trusted. we didn't think anyone in authority except our parents if we like them. it evolved into the politics of that era. crazy time of politics in which the democrats, the left would be unwilling to compromise, unwilling to work the way things used to work. i remember when bill clinton was running, the first time talking to one of the super left politicians in new york city and saying how can you be for bill clinton, he is a compromiser. she said i am so tired of
losing. we are not going to do this anymore. and the democratic party changed at that point. right now the thing we have got is not a political problem, it is a republican problem. we hate everything, we hate everybody. .e're not going to compromise it is not the two parties being crazy. it is one party right now. [indiscernible] >> i am of two minds on the. -- that. there is a lot of feeling on the republican side that they have been trying to compromise for 20-40 years and at the end of the day they look back and they
always got worse. spending got higher, taxation got higher, regulation got higher. the power of the government and its ability to intrude in your life always became bigger. they think where did we get this? by compromising. this is the time america is in serious problems, i understand those in the tea party who say look, now is the time where you just have to start getting tough . at the same time, i looked at a speaker of the house who navigated his way as well i think as a human being could the past few years who has such a conservative voting record, who led the republicans in congress to a great victory in 2010 and continued in 2014.
and he essentially is leaving handling, is tired of or no longer handling his feisty , rambunctious and in some cases destructive and ignorant base. i don't know how to balance these two thoughts. i have great sympathy for how republicans, conservatives feel way, but to lose a man who was so legislatively capable of making a deal, it feels not good at all. i rue it. >> you have written the gap between those who run the government and those who are --erned has now grown [inaudible]
>> you were talking in the context of immigration and how it was easy to say it let more immigrants in or let them stay. what about people who were looking for these jobs wa?s all ? >> i shouldn't put you on the spot. i thought you would last. laugh. america's leaders, political leaders, the people who have populated the government, they used to live normal lives. xperience thee normal life in america. they worked jobs. they had a normal paycheck.
they had no great status. i am being very general. we can all see exceptions to what i am saying. --ey going to go government and work normally. but now we have people who go from the upper middle class who go into government for the rest of their lives and build a career within this thing. they are leading lives that are detached from normal people. have not been in touch with the fears and anxieties of normal people. they aren't protected. bill clinton once said, and not to pick on bill clinton, in the 1990's, he told the new yorker
he had come to understand in some new way that crime in 1994,a, this is in 1993, crime was a daily anxiety and harassment of americans. why wouldn't he have known this in the past 20 years, living a normal life? it's because for the last 20 years he had been living in a limousine as governor. he had not experienced normal life for 20 years by the time he got to be president. this is bad. if i could change it, i would. but we all would. sorry i answered so long. i was looking for my point. it takes time sometimes. sam: this is the place, as we said earlier, where race was
first debated. as isabel has written in her book, and wrote in the new york times last year, if events in the last year have taught us anything, it's that is much progress has been made over generations, the challenges of color are not locked away in another country or confined to a region, but persist as a national problem and require the commitment of an entire nation to resolve. if bill clinton or barack obama couldn't get the nation to honestly confront race, who can? isabel: i think it takes more than one person. this is something that goes back to 1619 with the arrival of people of african descent in jamestown and the creation of the system of enslavement that had not existed anywhere in the world until that time. this is the foundation on which our country was built, and we
are still dealing with it. i often say, just remind people, enslavement lasted for far, far longer than the time that african-americans have been free. none of us alive today will see the moment at which we reach neutrality, at which we are equal, because it was 246 years of enslavement and so many far fewer years of freedom. that enslavement went on for 12 generations. how many greats do we have to add to grandparents to get to that generation? that's a very long time. it is so much bigger than one person. often the first question i will get from europeans is well,
there is an african-american president, why is this going on? this is much more than one person. it is an american challenge, not just one person's responsibility. sam: we have held barack obama to a higher standard. what about a woman in the white house? gail, you have written about women in politics, obviously. margaret sullivan, the public editor of "the new york times" pointed out that we have assigned a full-time reporter to cover the clintons while other candidates, she says the sea shall he, have been spared that particular blessing -- she says facetiously, have been spared the particular blessing. are we treating hillary clinton differently? isabel: yes -- gail: yes, we are, in part
because she might be the first woman president, but also because she is hillary clinton. she had a life in the white house. she left the white house and became a senator. she has been secretary of state. she was married to the president. it's natural that you would look at her differently. it doesn't mean you judge her politics differently. i think we will once we start having debates and things quiet down a little bit. right now -- i love this. i have to tell you. this has been so interesting over the past few months, but i think she will be judged as a candidate like everybody else. people will be trying to decide -- they are not going to elect her because she is a woman. never vote for women because they are women. women vote for women because they agree with their positions. she will be judged but i think it will be ok.
sam: will people not to vote for her because she is a woman? gail: more women vote than men. but donald trump is ahead in the polls. obviously, there are people out there that are not making reasonable decisions right now. i think partly that is because it's summer, they are bored, and they like entertainment. in the end, people chose barack obama not because he was black, but because they thought he would be better. they thought the stuff he would be doing would be better than the stuff that had been going on in washington. peggy: can i ask a question? sam: sure. peggy: this is an unanswered political question of our time, and it is something i have pondered. i will throw it out you and see if you have an opinion.
in 1988, i was working for george h w bush when he was running for president. his pollster was a really talented, professional, sober person. he was telling me -- we were in his office. we had been there to talk about something, and the conversation alighted in two recent polling he had done. he told me a bunch of interesting, offkilter stuff that for some reason i will never forget, such as -- i asked him, what countries do americans really like and not like. i was just curious. and he said americans still don't like the japanese, but they like the germans. go figure. but that's a degree in. he told me about his polling on bush and mike to caucus, and he said women are going more
democratic -- mike dukakis, and he said that women are going more democratic and men are going more republican. that was something that was sort of cliche by then. and i said why it that? why do women vote for democratic and men more republican? and he said we don't know. then he said he thought it had something to do with the price of things, shopping. women are concrete. they are in the stores. they are seeing what happening in the stores and they are worried about prices and the economy. and they are more interested in security. that was his guests. -- guess. he didn't know the answer. women have been voting more democratic and men more republican in our lifetimes. do you have an opinion why? gail: studies suggest it tends to be because they like the stuff that democrats do. they like more federal spending
on education. they like social security. they like obama. they like the idea that the country is providing a safety net for everybody, including their families and everybody else's families. they don't tend to like people they think are going to get us into wars. they prefer people that won't get us into wars. peggy: but they were running democratic when democrats were involved in wars. but anyway, security. do you have any opinion? isabel: no, i don't. gail: i don't have a good opinion either. sam: what do you think? peggy: i just don't know if it is sexist and i am going to get myself in trouble, but it seems to me that women have a greater sense of the essentials of life,
of living in brooklyn, and it is more likely a man who will say let's build the brooklyn bridge. the women make it meaningful to live there and make life possible. they want stability. they want the essentials of life. and they want to build from there. but its power that says let's -- but it's roebling and powell that says let's build the bridge. peggy: 16 republican candidates for president debated for something like five hours. i looked through the transcript of the federal news service and could not find a single mention of the words "urban," "inequality," "housing," or "crime."
if you are moderating a presidential debate, what questions would you want to ask? isabel: moderating a five-hour debate? sam: or any length. peggy: i was at the reagan library debate. i am a sure i had ever seen a presidential debate before. it was so interesting when i saw. for one thing, the candidates have a way of finding out where the staff is and talking to the staff. i hadn't known that. during the commercials, they are desperate to drink water and hug somebody. they go into the audience, hug and touch, shake hands. they go very much to the family. it struck me for the first time -- i just saw them as a bunch of
individual operatives, and i thought they are lonelier and more insecure than you know, and they are all looking for support. ted cruz keeps his eyes on his wife and she gives him this. isabel: i think your observation is an example of the disconnect that is -- that we are seeing unfold even as recently as the last few days. the current discussion is about comments by jeb bush about we are not going to give free stuff to african-americans. that is a message to people who are willing to hear it.
just looking at it from an historical perspective, because the politics is really not my wheelhouse, but from an historical perspective, i wish everyone could think about the magnitude of that message, the magnitude of stating that african-americans might be looking for free stuff. historically, it's a stunning suggestion for anyone to make. and the reason is because african americans, as you know, have been enslaved and did nothing but work to help build the country for 246 years, followed by 100 years of jim crow segregation in which many african-americans in the self or working for the right to live on the land they were farming. they were sharecropping and not even being paid. so much of our history involves african-americans giving the country free stuff, meaning free labor, and that is the overarching history of our country when it comes to the exchange of goods, services,
blood, sweat, and tears on the part of americans who have not been and can respected as americans for much of our -- acknowledged and respected as americans for much of our history. if i were in a position to ask someone to speak about the statement and what that actually means -- and even to this day, the statistics show that african-americans, when they look for a job, an african-american with a clean record is less likely to be hired van a white american with a felony record. this is a study out of princeton. one of the reasons for the higher unemployment rate is because of unconscious bias.
these are some of the challenges the give the lie to a statement about free stuff. and no matter how high unemployment is in america, it's always higher for african-americans. historically, it has been, but as high as it may be, there are always more african-americans working than nonworking. so if there is 20% unemployment, 80% are working. so where is this trope coming from and why are we so quick to be deceived by these statements that misrepresent an entire group of people in our country? sam: you talk so much in your book about the migration to the north. we talk about immigrants and where they are coming from, now from asia, south america, instead of europe.
how long are blacks going to be the indelible immigrants in this country? isabel: i often talk about the fact that we live in a cast system, which is something that americans are not accustomed to speaking of ourselves in being in. a caste system is an artificial hierarchy. in our country, it is based on race. the caste system actually began in the north, in massachusetts, where enslavement began as well. it was an institution that was refined, you might say, or course and, in the south. as long as we have an artificial caste system in which people are presumed to have certain characteristics based on what they look like, we continue to see the situation -- 2014 was a stunning year of this unleashing
of attacks on african-americans. eric gardner was a metronome -- , there is aer metronome of names. we have literally, with our very eyes seen american citizens killed, beaten, shot before our very eyes. it's stunning. as i was preparing -- i have been out of the country talking about this, and people outside of the country will say i am terrified to go to the united states. there are guns everywhere. we see all these videos of americans being shot. we see all these videos of americans being shot. and it is stunning to see videos of people being killed. it is startling to think of the
regularity of these events happening. sam: gale, a question for a candidate? gail: i was thinking about the magic question idea. the idea that there is a magic question you can ask. i regret that i was not clear about explaining my great tax policy. it doesn't work anymore like that, and i am not sure it ever did. george washington had political issues. the first time a reporter wrote down what they said in congress and wrote down -- they were horrified. they were shocked. when people started following them around when they were giving speeches, they would stop talking because they were so horrified by the idea, because it was so unfair that somebody would write down what you said and put it in the newspaper. the idea that they were wildly better and it was a different
time and different ways, right now, you cannot ask him ask it -- you can't ask a magic question. you can't do it because they know how to answer all the magic questions. what i am looking forward to, and what works -- what we were talking about with jeb bush. if you could confront him with that statement, he knows what to say now and he would fix it. if you could surprise him the way donald trump was surprised -- once in a while they will get surprised by references to things they have actually done. and that's like an end to debate thing. it's like two or three people yelling at each other on the stage. it's not going to happen now. but my answer is there are no magic questions. sam: do you have one, isabel? you don't have to. isabel: no. peggy: i like surprise questions that can elicit thought. i asked a candidate -- it was
off the record, so i won't say his name -- sam: who are we going to tell? peggy: well, c-span is here. he may be watching. he probably is. i said to him -- he was telling me where he stands on isis and syria, and islam. i sent, can i ask the said -- i said, when you think about foreign affairs and geopolitical things, who do you read? who do you go to for guidance and information on a new thought, and what books on history do you go to? he was surprised and i was surprised because i was actually saying please tell me how you think and where your thoughts come from.
i won't name him in part because his answer was poor. sam: imagine a question that requires a thought for an answer. speaking of which, we have time for about two thoughts from the audience, if anyone has a magic question, not a trick question. if not, i have more questions to ask. does anyone have one? >> when you are all discussing why women lean democratic, none of you brought up the right to have an abortion. don't you think that's essential? i mean, i know so many women that are conservative who lean democratic because of that one issue. peggy: i understand what you are saying and i think it is true,
but women leaning more democratic and men leaning more republican has been going on for longer than these current conversations. it has been an older political story. when we talk about why women do this, there is something in this, i think. women are dealing with the essentials of life, and when they see somebody come along with programs dealing with the essentials, they are more likely to be sympathetic. they can look at the other side sometimes and hear words like competition, competition. you know, it's all about competition. and they might be thinking to themselves, competition is good. it's part of american life. we like that. we are all playing sports. but first, take care of the essentials. i think that's part of what going on.
sam: anyone else have a question? yes ma'am? >> i would ask, what in your thoughts and in your plans that you are putting forth here for the american be oh is really going to benefit the lives of the children and your grandchildren and your great grandchildren? sam: that's a heavy responsibility. isabel? isabel: i think that's what most people believe they are actually doing. i think people are seeking to do that on all sides of our political spectrum. i don't think anyone is doing anything specifically because they do not want their children and grandchildren to do well. i think they just disagree on how to do that. gail: can i go back to the
abortion thing for a second? sam: sure. gail: what has fascinated me all along about the abortion issue is that it is so freighted with class. you can do all most to planned -- almost anything to planned parenthood or an abortion clinic, and middle-class women are going to be able to get abortions. the whole fight we are having now is actually a fight about the rights of poor women, and to that extent, it does tilt in one direction. i don't know that there are many conservative women, even the ones who believe in the right to abortion, who are quite as concerned about that class. maybe i am wrong. maybe i am underestimating them, but that has always been a thing.
this comes up in debates. the american people want abortion rights, but they are not crazy about tweaking it. you have candidates saying i know believe a woman who is -- i don't believe a woman who is raped should have an abortion. it's still the same principle. but that scares people. that will be a big deal as time goes on. peggy: we could get so much done if washington worked better in that area. public opinion is very much against third trimester abortion, late term abortion. i mean, france doesn't have late-term abortion.
other civilized nations don't. gail: but what we don't have, particularly in the republican party, are people who will say i don't believe in late-term abortion. i don't like abortion at all beyond the first trimester. so i want to get a whole fleet of family planning out there, get birth control to people so that this isn't an issue. sam: similar to finding common ground on mass incarceration and things like that. unless you are a resident of florida, ohio, virginia, or north carolina, you are all but an invisible voter in 2016. the swing states are where candidates are spending their time and money. what about the rest of us?
peggy: it's absurd. the last presidential election took place apparently in ohio and florida. nobody else's vote mattered. that is astonishing to me. virginia mattered a little. indiana mattered a little. there is something about this that is too strange and very unsatisfying. and you never see candidates go through our great cities anymore. i mean, they go through and shake them like an atm at fundraisers. you want believe this, but we -- you won't believe this, but we used to have real political rallies, huge campaign rallies in new york city in the garment district. my gosh, the first political rally i ever went to was in 1964 for lyndon johnson. as i remember, its buildout of -- it spilled out onto madison
square garden. he was talking about the issues and riling the crowd. it was exciting. it is astonishing to me that nobody who runs for president has to come here. we should make new york, we should surprise people now and then and start to show a little more republican support. just have an election and vote republican. then, they will start to think new york is in play and they will come here and treat us with respect and have a rally. we could all plan this. this is something we could compromise. [laughter] peggy: head-fake every presidential candidate. sam: thank you for joining us. [applause] sam: peggy noonan, isabel wilkerson, gail collins. books by the panelists are available in the bookstore as
you exit. for those of you with tickets to dinner, please join us on the second floor. use the stairs or the elevator. thank you so much. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] announcer: tonight on c-span, a discussion about congressional gold medals. recent ceremony for the monuments men at the capital. and david cameron discusses strategy against isis in syria. kochoke industries -- industries spokesman speaks about charles and david. the congressional gold medal along with the medal of freedom is the highest civilian honor in the u.s. at the museum of american