tv Washington This Week CSPAN May 22, 2016 12:21pm-2:21pm EDT
>> have you talked to any of the people that might help you get your message out? >> no. really nice if it first of all we have to get nominated next weekend and that libertarian party convention. second i want to make sure we have the building blocks of the national campaign all set up before we go around asking others. i think a little bit of fundraising will probably be the first order of business is to make sure we can stack of this out. i would not ask another politician to endorse our ticket until i thought i had a winning proposition for them. even if you didn't win, a third-party candidate can have a huge impact on the outcome of
the presidential race. some people for instance believe that ross nader played a role in helping her to al gore and elected george w. bush. as a former public and governor, that a concern? would you be comfortable with the process of possibly being blamed for tipping the election to the democrats? no. it's not a concern at all. i think we have our physicians. we are going to press them. i would like to ideally not to the economic center. get them away from excessive spending. i would like to nudge the republicans to get away from their antiabortion stance. the queasiness with gays and lesbians being able to live openly married and peaceably. the unbelievable proposals that up and made an immigration area to round up and deport 11 million people. this is why not prime time. we don't mind saying so. i think the reason that we will
ason the remaining states the democratic party is going to open up in a way to hasn't to working people, to young people, to low-income people were sick and tired of establishment politics and establishment economics. we need an election coming up that has two candidates are really very strongly. i don't want to see the american people voting for the lesser of two evils. i want them to be voting for a vision of economic justice or social justice, environmental justice, racial justice. that is the campaign we are running. that is why we are getting the support we are. is that how you would describe whether clinton against donald trump? i would describe it. that's with the american people are saying. if you look at the favorability rating of donald trump and hillary clinton, both of them have very very high unfavorables.
you're not going to disagree with you on that. >> no question about that. absolutely. >> we want to welcome daniel litman. his associate editor and editor for politico. for some news on the sunday morning and reporting from your college and carney saying that the democrats now turning to new york senator chuck schumer to try to bridge what is a deepening divide between senator bernie sanders and hillary clinton. what is going on. inst: chuck schumer is next line to be the journey leader in the u.s. senate. inwants to play a role unifying the party. he knows -- he has the bridge between the moderate democrats and the liberal democrats. so he's going to distract you talk to senator sanders and discuss a way forward and not to be donald trump. -- how to beat donald trump.
sanders is brought millions of voters into the process. if hillary is going to prevail in november, she really needs all of his grassroots support that he is electrified. host: senator schumer has supported hillary clinton. what he beat you does a fair arbitrary in terms of the bernie sanders campaign? guest: i bet some sanders supporters would not think so. but i think you'll see a lot of people see that schumer has not been -- he doesn't have the reputation of debbie wasserman schultz in terms of standards land. sanders has really come out against her. saying she has shifted the rules. and not been a fair arbiter. schumer is a credible person to make the case to sanders.
host: new survey out this morning from abc news and the washington post and it shows high negatives for both hillary clinton and bernie sanders. this is going to be one of the campaigns andts one of the most negative that we've seen in our lifetime. guest: in the case of u.s. history, we've not seen such a negative campaign. the funny thing about that, without the negative campaign really help donald trump since he knows how to play dirty. that would not be good for hillary clinton. hillaryamericans view and trump unfavorably. is really not going to be a positive election. you're not going to really feel great as an american after going through months of fighting between the sides. how much negative campaigning as well trump run? that is a real question because
he's not getting a lot of donor support from the gop side. which you really needs to put ads on television. he said he didn't want to run a conventional race, but now he shipped into more of a conventional lineup with ads and fundraisers, and meetings. confrontsmething he red hat is a raise of this money, given he is not willing billion dollars on this race. host: the gop elite lining up behind donald trump. you are referring to those established republicans are now beginning to support them including former senator bob dole. this morning new york times reporting there is a huge donor of version which is going to cloud donald trump's big fundraising goal to raise a going dollars. -- a billion dollars. guest: they are not comfortable with truck. so they are willing to put their own principles in their own
ward.s for some even want to support hillary comments are you're the big gop donors for hillary that you would never seen the past. that is a real thing that trump has to overcome. when gop donors wanting to do is shift completely and have a new campaign, it bunch of new ideas away from his very controversial writer. his would really undermine appeal to lots of his voters who don't want them to just become -- to do a 180. back to this poll. just looking at a favorable-unfavorable ratings. this is what it looks like inside the washington post.
41% of voters have a favorable view of kelly clinton. unfavorable. among those, 46% strongly in favor of old. compare that to donald trump. 40% favorable rating. 57% unfavorable rating. 45% strongly unfavorable. one interesting thing about that is that they looked at also the issues. which candidates to americans prefer on issues. trump one on taxes. trump has made a lot of headlights on what immigration and trade. hillary clinton has an advantage on immigration. a slight advantage for it i saw that, as little surprise for you and i think, she has a really talk at that issue very much. those favorable numbers are
probably only going to get worse. because there will be so many ads. and more controversies. they'll be interesting to see how that plays out. host: calling that unprecedented. both major party nominees have been viewed so harshly. guest: it is unique to these candidates. is it not standard issue, democrats and republicans. demonized by so many people. in the past 20 years, she is been a favorite punching bag for things she has done and people -- think people perceive trusting. that is not going to change overnight. trump is built on the reputation of the last couple years and especially during this campaign of saying things that a lot of americans find offensive. that has really dragged on his approval rating. back when he was there to the
asrentice, it was more seen this eccentric billionaire. now because he is really touching a lot of policy issues worries said things that people find unbearable. people might have said year to now because he is in the media new cycle every day saying things that are kind of -- that people can agree with, and other things that rile a base that is not been good for his favorability. a lot of people made this point where bunnies says the things that are wild and not there. it doesn't bring down his ratings. that's what his fans want to hear. they don't want a candidate who is infected with the politically correct thing to say.
he has said that he is not going to follow those rules. those are out of place. i'm going to say what is on my mind of what i think by voters support. host: our guest is daniel lehman. among his other assignments at political in playbook. it is a must read. what is it essentially. guest: it is a daily news were letter that my boss has put together. we find theut -- best stuff online and we also do our own original reporting. as a daily digest of what to read indeed say -- in washington dc and what to read to know what is going on in politics today. it comes out every day, seven days a week. you can find it at /playbook.om pickingn the process of others which would be like a team playbook.
it is hard to just replace one person. it is such a brand that we want to continue with. we will continue to serve our readers with a new team who will be writing it. been aike allen has longtime friend of this wreck network. we appreciate all that he does. let's get your phone calls. our numbers on the bottom of your screen. caller: thank you. i want to make a comment. if the american people get donald trump for president, they can thank the media and bernie sanders. media haso way -- given so much recovered. -- free coverage.
i was going to mention that it is an irresistible story for the media. a lot of people criticized the media for giving him so much coverage, but he is hard to ignore when he was republican ,ront-runner since he declared and the fact that he has dominated the conversation. copy.vides is great in the media we don't take sides, but we do cover the top story today. we cover the candidates who are doing the best politically. lean on theng to scales and say just because a lot of people don't like him, then that means are going to stop covering them. we are providing critical coverage of both candidates. hillary and donald trump. and sanders for that matter. media isow i run the
not to tip the scale. media,f people in the they distrust of the voters of make the right choice. we want to give them the facts. guest: what did the picture donald trump. behind him as a photograph of donald trump next to john wayne. and ronald reagan. and one of the posters, it is time for another real president. at some of his key aides. he has a relatively small staff. if you look at sec 1/10gs, he has only one -- of the staff of hillary. he is about 70 page staffers. hillary has 700.
it shows that he doesn't have to follow the rules. what is interesting about that, it has been mostly a team of rivals. have showntical in rh the conflict between corey .ewandowski end of person upon metaphor with someone with a limited amount of decision-making. both parties are trying to pay nice, but also obtain decision-making power. the piece is called -- host: the piece is called this is fun, right?
you can follow the road to the white house on her website. jackie in philadelphia. you are calling on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to make a reference between mother angelica and donald trump. i read this on a long time ago, but i can't find a paper. i will try to save from memory. i'm 80 years old. i love donald trump. and i love mother angelica. i watched her occasionally. she is a smart woman. someone would call into her i mother called and said that her daughter had brought a boyfriend to live in the house and the mother did not like it. said to mother angelica, i don't know what to do, how do i get them out? and all of a sudden she says and she pointed
downwards, she said while, since they are headed that way anyhow, ell. them to go to h i found the contrast interesting. what would people say? oh donald trump said this, well, he's terrible. look what he says. the curry curses, whatever. that is what i just said this morning. i would like to know people think of that. .ost: jackie, thank you guest: the color makes a point. it's interesting to see the really strong opinions on both sides. i each of supporters are so loyal to their candidate. they feel like he is speaking to them. and they feel like the republican and democratic establishment at least in d.c.
and not listen to their concerns. and as hedge fund managers in new york and the watch a class do really well, they think to themselves, wise and their people in d.c. who are well?enting aus they are willing to look past something. they might not agree with trump. why don't we just try new candidate that might actually get something done for us? there is a backlash in both his party and the democratic party. a lot of people view hillary ran negatively to. they think she's corrupt. they have some of the same feelings that mother angelica has about trump in reference to 30. -- in reference to hillary. has written for the wall street journal. now at political. let's talk about this democratic race.
the final primary for the democrats here in washington dc and senator sanders this past week with this tweet with regards to the upcoming convention in philadelphia. it reads in part, the democratic party has to make an important decision, and i say to them, open up the doors. let the people in. jeff weaver is senator sanders campaign manager. he was on cnn this past week. this is what he had to say about the state of the democratic party and its current chair. jeff weaver: we can have a long conversation just about every -- debbie wasserman schultz. mother is a debate schedule, that was very few and far between and set it on weekends or would be watching. weather was when they shut off the sanders access to his own data, meant to sue in a federal court to get it back. weather was a joint fundraising agreement to the hillary clinton campaign which are taking money away from state parties and sending it to the dnc. up to thesay it's dnc. by march come the dnc has been
very good to us. every wasserman schultz is really the exception. guest: this is become personal. they feel like debbie wasserman schultz has known as a hillary clinton for years. they've been allies. the sanders campaign is not happy with how she's been running the. even though jeff weaver says the dnc is fine, they look at some of the things that happen with conventions we saw nevada and california, and they think they are trying -- they feel like the dnc try to push them out of the race early. with those supporters support them just following along. so you saul centers support publicly say last night to jake tapper that he is debbie -- supporting debbie wasserman schultz primary opponent in florida.
the democratic establishment has mostly lined up for hillary. so when you are senator sanders, you feel like why are all these people against me given that i brought in millions of voters into the political process. really reignited the left. it's kind of the howard dean of the cycle. like -- you know we saw with obama a lot of energy in 2008 for him. and there is not a ton of energy on hillary's side. many loyal party supporters. they feel like those people should not be looked down upon by debbie wasserman schultz and through the fields used to study in at least until california primary or until all the primaries are done in about a month and then reevaluate where he stands.
hillary clinton in 2008 did not sure about of the race until after the primaries concluded in early june. you mention the primary challenge that debbie wasserman schultz is facing a photo. senator sanders supporting her opponent in that race. and -- that interview with jake tapper by the way is one of five bargains that we are on c-span radio beginning at new niece in time. -- noon eastern time. #smh.response to that is as regular talk about that comment about throwing shade. we need to focus on one thing. andthrough this primary work to prepare for the general election, and make sure that we can continue to draw the contrast between either one of our really find candidates who are focused on helping people reach similar class and make sure that we get equal pay for equal work and create jobs and not at the republicans take health care around -- away from
20 million americans are and do everything we can to make sure donald trump ever becomes president of the united states the united states. that is what i'm focused on. and it is why president obama has asked me to take on a full for term after we reelected in a 20 jumping on singular focus on that. host: in this tree. weet, the burning supporters are passionate. the two get ugly. guest: that is funny. , makingioned the #smh this appeal to young people here and i was a lot her point is that there is a lot of fear in the democratic party that as long as his race between senator -- sanders and clinton goes forward, it makes it hard to bring in center supporters at the end of the primary, in terms of all the disagreement of they feel like some center supporters could be at risk for voting for donald trump.
because the ds from supporters for their number two choices, the sanders. if yes some center supporters, it is trump. what percentage of voters for sanders and his supporters will come home and actually come home to the democratic party in november and vote for hillary if she is the nominee. host: i wonder if this is more reminiscent of what we saw a 1980. a very deeply divided democratic party and incumbent president in that case jimmy carter and the challenge from the left by senator ted kennedy. guest: i wasn't born then. and i can kind of -- you see the cycles when in both the democratic and republican party, you have insurgents on the rise, and yet establishment and they're staying in power. so often times, these movements arise when there's economic uncertainty and frustration. and there's a lot of inequality in the country.
this is a natural response on trends in to the america. someone made the point to me disruptedw over transportation and airbnb disrupted hotels, this is kind of the uber movement and politics. but the combination of sanders and trump. this frustration is only natural where it would happen. to al in newo york. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. to touchike to have -- on three candidates. first of object to save anybody believes that they can trust any candidate, any politician, they are like a fulool. that is with the processor to do
to always keep an eye on the politicians. and protect america and the american people. i'm an independent. i do plan on voting for hillary clinton. because i believe in all honesty, she is modern enough and she has the experience, and she is the best of the worst. bernie sanders is a socialist. he is not a democrat. he reminds me of that old fairytale about the pied piper. lot, he plays a sweet song, and he takes the children out of town and they disappear. no future with bernie sanders as far as i could. 75 and it is a killer job. he will be a one termer. his whole mantra is the political revolution. whatever the hell that crop is.
donald trump, i grew up in westchester. i know about donald trump. he knows how to play the press. he's very narcissistic. he knows what plays well. i will vote for hillary clinton. i believe that she is probably the best of the worst. i believe that if we remember well, under the clinton by the yearon, 1999, we were all doing very well. in fact, i read a book of the agenda. very dry reading, but a good reading. she was basically the ramrod that more or less made bill what he was. a successful president. --t: with regard to that liar in chief. in her essay this morning,
hillary clinton is not a politician, she is lied on a number of issues that she does play within the goal posts. something that donald trump is never done. colleagues we actually watch for enough hours of trump during his campaign speeches and rallies a couple of months ago in march. and the fact checked everything he says over four at heart. we found more than 60 different lies untruthful things that were just wrong. there was one every five minutes. they didn't really respond the right that story. but it indicates that he -- he just says what's in his head. is not even holding himself to the standards of fact checking as we the media trying to do. has comegh hillary
under criticism for the same -- for saying things that are also not true. trumps her on that. we actually look at the wine spectator magazine emmy caught up the winery, and trump winery was not the biggest one. it was not well rated. that is small things like that lead a lot of americans to think, is he going to say the truth of these elected in november? you one honesty from your president. that is one reason that bill clinton became a little unpopular. people that they can trust them. felt that they could not trust them.
the democrats are really going to push the point that bill clinton is a guy that helped create 22 million jobs in the 1990's. bill clinton did not have everything to do with that. create use the term help . but a lot of americans feel like he has a magic touch. and will help their economic situation. pushemocrats are going to this hard. saying with a cleanser back in office, they can revive some of that magic that they saw happened during the 90's. host: how likely is it that bernie sanders would run as an independent? guest: not very likely it all. he has said he will work every day to defeat entrepreneur he knows of an independent run
would lead to trump being elected. it would draw so many supporters to vote for sanders as an independent and it would not give enough votes for hillary. especially the electoral college, it would hurt or two. you're not going to see him take that. a reminder from another viewer saying that a mini identity crisis and the gop produced a john anderson canada in 1980 as well. host: thank you for that reminder. by the way john anderson is 94 years old and still living here in washington dc. caller: hi. i'm just relocated to california. i just wanted to pivot the conversation away from donald trump and note that from electoral perspective, we have 270 electoral votes come in with the general election. and from a democratic perspective versus a republican perspective, there's former democrats that are elected --
excuse me far more democrats that are registered developers republican. this idea that donald trump is somehow going to garner both the democratic and republican gameation and the ground is ridiculous. if you you could just comment that in this idea that donald trump actually has a chance to win the presidential election. in my mind, he does not. hillary rodham clinton as you are supporting and i see her as gaining the election. this poll out again this morning showing essentially a dead heat. donald trump lopsided by two percentage points. but within the margin of air between trump and clinton. as i will speak to the colors point about how he doesn't see a path for donald trump. but, a lot of democrats and
people on the hillary campaign. if they just waltz into november, that is not going to be a winning strategy. because trump has brought in some new voters into the process. even though he is not brought in the maybe millions that is there arest because more registered democrats, that does not mean that all of them show up to vote in november. of the 310 million or so votecans, not all of them in november. he only has to be well in a couple of states. he can open up the map a little bit in terms of rust belt states in ohio and wisconsin. that could provide a path to victory. he does have a lot of uphill battles he is going to face in the general election. but, hillary is not proved herself to be a particularly skilled campaigner.
trump, whatever people say that income is very good at campaigning, doing rallies. he has so much passion that he is trying to bring forward. talkingary is more about policies and things that she would do if she is elected. sometimes americans don't really care about that. than ae are covered more hundred campaign rallies with donald trump in the last year this campaign. all available on her website at c-span.org. good morning. is obvious this are that minutes for hillary. host: why do you say that? caller: for all the things you said. let's face it. is the things he says
that people find offensive. even now, and many things he is telling the truth. he's telling it like it is. while hillary has a lot of baggage. they talk about bringing back the 90's with clinton. but you don't mention that a 1994 he lost the senate and the house to republicans. in 1996, he had no choice but to go along with what they wanted. retired1998, i'm a senator worker. when the whole thing about minute, whence he came out, i've would because my office saying over hillary. she's going to have to be -- i said are you people kidding? she's not going to divorce him. that woman wants power.
host: we'll get a response. thank you ray much for the company the response i make is that the caller does have a point in that because of president clinton's failed attempt to get health care costs in the early 90's is first couple years in office, he did really help please the congress to republicans in 1994 with newt gingrich's contract of america. i would also make the point that a lot of republicans are fearful and a lot of democrats gleeful that trump could have negative consequences. you've covered this in the past about how and a lot of senate candidates in house candidates, there is a worry that because trump's brand is toxic to some modern voters that senators like richard
von one november because a lot of democrats will turn out just to vote against rep. they may not really like hillary, but they're thinking that they want to vote against donald trump.
releaseds is a new ad which is the super pac supporting hillary clinton. watch. [video clip] >> ibaka were not my daughter, perhaps i would be dating her. gohink you can tell them to -- themselves. does donald trump really speak for you? host: they live in. the words of donald trump. doesn't matter -- does it matter? guest: it feels a good thing
that would have led to the downfall of them is any candidate has not applied to trump. those rules, further about the window. host: there is still this issue about whether or not --\/ hillary clinton will be some of more vulnerable that pose a headache for her going into the general election if that happens between now and then. but in terms of that ad, you're going to see tens of millions of dollars using trump's own words in negative ads on the air. but look at all the ads that were run in the g.o.p. primary by jeb bush and right to rise, ted cruz. did they take down donald trump? no. so -- and a lot of americans kind of know what those words and their ads meant but they
also feel like that -- if the campaign is defined by what trump is saying, every day, and if he is the headlines, that's bad news for hillary because she has to put herself in the game. and everyone has to be talking about her for at least some days. or that she is -- she's being defined by donald trump right this summer and so she needs to really come out. what would she do? and so what would she do if she's president. so that ad shows that they're not talking about that right now. i'm sure you'll see positive messages about her plans and her efforts to kind of help america. but if you're stuck in an alley doing a fight hand to hand combat against trump that's not good news because then you'll get blood on you -- you'll get mud on yourself. host: our guest is dan litman.
connecticut, democrat's line. good morning. caller: good morning gentlemen. i was wondering if mr. litman had read i'm not sure if it's an article or essay written by dam stop nick. the dangerous acceptance of donald trump. if so what was his opinion of it. and also to talk to the people who are voting for bernie and say they won't vote for hillary if he doesn't get the nomination. i recommend that they read this very carefully. have a great day, gentlemen. host: thank you. guest: well, i haven't read that specific piece. it's on my reading list so thank you for the reminder. but a lot of -- the point i would make is that both -- any time there's the primary election is over and then the general election starts, you can look at every two years every four years and people are always worried about will republicans who supported other
candidates than the actual winner, will they come home to vote for trump in this case? and for bernie supporters will they come home to vote for hillary? and usually it's kind of like those nine stages of grief. first you're in denial. and then you're accepting. and then a lot of people will just come home to vote for hillary in november. and trumple for that matter. so he -- trump as you pointed out, the republican lead which has long said never trump. no trump. but they're not -- that's not the conventional wisdom in this town any more. they're really coming down to support a lot of those people in kind of the d.c. class. not all the big donors because if you're a big republican fund raiser, who has spent millions in the past to support candidates you're not under any obligation to spend money to trump this time to support him so they can kind of sit on the sidelines which would hurt
trump. but then he could say i'm not backed by the billionaires. so americans don't worry about that. i'm going to do my own fund raising and i'm going to have my supporters contribute. and i will fund my own campaign. i'm not going to be beholden to the wall street interests who are actually a lot of them are backing hillary because they find her she's from new york now. she wasn't born there but that's her home state. and so when she was the senator from the great state of new york, a lot of the money she was raising was from wall street. that's where the money is in new york. so goldman sachs, $250,000 speeches that she gave, that will be definitely an issue where trump will bring up why isn't she releasing the transcripts of what she said? what does she have to hide and dakotas will come back and say why aren't you releasing your tax returns? that's you can't make that
charge saying hillary's not releasing transcripts when you're not releasing tax returns which may show that you actually pay a lot of taxes? and also how much are you actually worth. so you will see candidates when they're not listing something people are wondering why not? if you're so transparent if you want to be elected to the highest office in the land why aren't you releasing speech transcripts and tax returns? host: is the piece about inside those speeches, check it out. last story from the "washington post." how is this impacting the democratic race? guest: it helps hillary. because once the democratic primary between her and bernie finish assuming that she is the
nominee you will see president obama on the stump almost day in and day out for september and october rallying behind hillary and trying to get as many votes for her. and besides the obvious point that they're both democrats he also wants to protect his legacy. so all the things that he has done in office, we had a great piece in politico magazine which is the ration that obama built. so very slowly and steadily. behind the scenes he made all these rules changes and he really shifted how the government works even from making lightbulbs more efficient. and so to obamacare. so he doesn't want to see that legacy overturned or rolled back if a person like donald trump gets in office. so he needs to protect what he did if he wants to have a successful post presidency. you don't want to the be -- if you built a big house, you don't want the next owner to
really dismantle it. so that is not on his -- that is not on his wish list. so you're going to see him and obably bernie sanders out on canvasing raising money to help hillary in november. host: how can people sign up for playbook? guest: go to politico.com/playbook and in the top corner there's a big blue but wrn you put in your email and follow steps. and we come out around 7:00 every morning. and it's a great thing to check out. there's a lot of -- kind of what the d.c. insider class and people in washington people just interested in what's going on in politics. that's what they real in the morning. host: dan litman first appearance. will you come back? guest: of course. any time. this was fun. host: ch
on iteris to eliminate abuse and taxes him. the otago about the recent early fun u.s. treasury department, a list of the top countries that hold u.s. debt, including saudi arabia. be sure to watch washington journal beginning live at 7 a.m. eastern. and --nce, business, engineers discussed space travel. talk about leaders
what commercial space travel will look like. and ceos of twitch and reddit discuss how their site has changed and how people have communicated online. this is an hour 20 minutes. >> a decade out of landing a man to the moon and returning him safely here. >> five, four, three, two, one, zero. we have a lift off. >> the space race inspired a generation of science and innovators. it has contributed to immeasurable technological advances that have improved her our health, well-being, satellite navigation to water purification, to medical engineering. exploration will once again
inspire wonder in a new generation. and launching careers. >> my name is chris davenport a reporter at the washington post. our next panel is about commercial space. it's a really interesting time right now where to many people when the shuttle retired in 2011 they thought there is not that much going on, in fact there's so much going on at nasa and at the commercial sector, no enough to fill a book for one of our panelists here. let me introduce everyone here. next to me is charles philbin, a nasa administrator, julie, from air jet to, next to her is andy we're of the martian and finally we have george ceo of virgin galactic and spaceship company. all of these people are involved in space in various ways.
something extraordinary extraordinary is going to happen in a year or two and i went to to talk to us about. you're. -- talk to us about it. we are going to have a launch center inennedy space cape canaveral. were going to launch nasa astronauts to the international space station, but they're going to be launched on a commercial vehicle. this is a very big deal. >> is a huge deal and it started in 2003 after we lost columbia. long story short, a decision was recommended to the present at the time to phase out the space shuttle for a number of reasons. number one as we wanted to explore. the shuttle was a orbiting vehicle. we felt that nasa had worked with our industry partners long enough and that they fully capable of providing transportation and cargo so we
struck out. we did not invest in commercial crew initially and then president obama said were going to do it. when he and i came into office we started in earnest and now we are year or year and have away from launching an american astronaut from the u.s. soil. >> can you take us back to the early point. even cargo and to rely on the commercial sector inhat way, that's a really bold, do people tell you your crazy? >> yes. but that's okay. i get told i'm crazy all the time. andy may not know this, we talked about mars when i first came in and that was not very popular in 2009. that was sort of a topic in washington d.c. for reasons beyond my belief. it was not until the president actually said okay, this is what we are going to do. he did it in what i consider to be a major space policy addressed to the world at the kennedy space center in april, 2010.
nobody paid attention to it but that is when he gave us two challenges. one was to put humans on an asteroid by 2025, and put humans -- marsin the 20 30's by 2030. we are well on the way to doing both of those things. >> i want to jump to george for a minute. at emerging galactic and that sort of different this a entrepreneurial adventure and you have this new space. what he wants to do is create the world's first commercial space line for you and i just -- space line. it's amazing. talk to us a little about what the vision is and what you're going to be doing. >> what we want to do is open space up to the rest of us.
i think that is an inspiring thing. how many people have ever been to space? >> 600? >> you can't answer. [laughter] >> nobody upstage can answer, the answers about 550. i'm sure you're about to say that which seems like a remarkably small number given that we have been going to space for 50 years. what we want to do is break that open provide the opportunity to travel into space for people and to also give rise to this new category of satellites, small satellites. that's an interesting area. we think by opening up that experience to more people and more satellites, the benefit of spates can accrue down to earth and that's were hoping to do. >> can you talk as a leader in this entrepreneurial space that we're seeing, i wonder for going -- i wonder if we are going to look back on this time in ten or
20 years from now say this was really an extraordinary time all of -- time when all of the space flight that nasa and the government leaned over into the private sector. >> i think it is an extraordinary time. i think it a lot of credit goes to administrator bolden and the president, but also the congress and others for taking smart moves to open up innovation in the american launch industry. the reason why it's important is we are getting started on the cycle of innovation that should feed on itself over time. that that is to say hopefully we can get the price lower but then it leads to more activity in space which then drives a lower cost and we start getting on this wheel of innovation. that is what is so excited about , withiting about this reasonable launches and all these things we want to do, hopefully it will have a cycle to them that tries innovation so
-- that drives innovation so that we end up in a place ten times cheaper, 100 times cheaper in the future than where we are now. >> i should look to the business side of this panel and that is to provide andy with material for his next book. >> i did an analysis once and presented it at a convention in the bay area. basically i said what if the commercial space industry have the same overhead as the modern commercial airline industry. so commercial space industry is in its infancy getting started. it's an extremely expensive to work out these technologies. what if it ended up having the same efficiency is the modern commercial airline industry which has decades and decades of competition and refinement stuff like that. i said i needed some numbers to
work with so i said well let's say they have the same fuel overhead ratio. what percentage of all the money that the commercial airlines makes, how much do they spend on fuel, and how much do they spend on everything else. it works out to be across the board every commercial airline company spends between 16 and 17% of all the money they make on fuel. so you map that forward and say okay let's say that was the same for the commercial space industry then you start to get down to freight cost in the range of like 30-$50 per kilogram which is unthinkable to us today. >> tell everybody what it is today. >> it's thousands. thousands of dollars per kilogram. the falcon nine is i think less than 10000 per kilogram. but if the falcon heavy is successful then that'll be the
most efficient, non- subsidize priced at about $1600 per kilogram. >> i have heard you say before that i think you started writing the martian before this new movement really took off. if you are going to write the book again, you might include some of that, is that true? 100% sure, because when i wrote the martian -- >> that's my guide. -- that my guy. it doesn't have to be 100% .ealistic i shamelessly took advantage of people's feelings during the apollo era.
i'm sure our first man mission marr -- mission to mars. be a largewill multinational effort. it won't look like anything it did in the movie. >> you guys are pushing the engine and innovation, things like solar electric propulsion . give us a sense of what you are working on. said we support , government and propulsion and engines in anything with power but today we have ion for
-- ion propulsion which is a , form of electric propulsion and talk about bringing the cost down everything now has to go on a rocket so the smaller you make it cheaper it gets some of the electric propulsion on the next mission. we are working the technology on that. be one-tenth the size . you remember that glow from the old "star trek" it looks like . -- looks like that. so we are printing rockets now 3d printing of zero rockets. >> does that mean i can legally download a rocket? [laughter] >> we shouldn't talk about that. [laughter] but it does get to that end you -- does get to that. you get a model for you can certainly do the smaller ones
. you can print a whole propulsion system in one pass not just bringing down the cost of a product. more efficient. it is a transformative time. now we can actually take that next step. >> talk about what you thought the martian would be like with commercial space look at what nasa is doing today. my -- is growing international partners for nontraditional partners countries that want to be a part of the space program but don't have the technical knowledge . they have a for things they can contribute. working in partnership with commercial space, commercial entities has been incredible. nasa has never built a rocket
. that is a misconception. they were held under contract. we own the rocket. that is what george is talking about. if i want to send my astronauts to space, say i want to send for astronauts and i talked to space , competitiontoday is absolutely critical. what george in his community is competitioning us to drive the price down. it will allow us to do what we did two years ago. we lost three vehicles. we lost a spacex vehicle. we lost a russian cargo vehicle. north -- under ordinary circumstances that would put us that in the water.
the japanese had a vehicle, the europeans had a vehicle. in the time that they were flying, our american partner was getting on their feet. >> when you stood up those programs they are now flying to , leo. these entrepreneurs, you want us talking about going to mars. does that put the lawn in competition with nasa? -- put elon musk in competition with nasa? >> it does not mean competition at all. spacex recently announced they were in a partnership with us. what he is looking at that we want. we look at him coming back and landing on a barge. that is what we call hypersonic.
we are not investing in that, but we don't need to. we are talking about reducing the cost of the taxpayer. if they can land a vehicle on mars, that is what most critical challenges. how do you get big masses on the surface? that is all good information that we need. >> the trucking analogy just keeps coming up over and over again. hostess makes twinkies, but every grocery store in america, they need to deliver to every grocery store in america, so clearly hostess should get to work inventing a truck? no, you let other people invent the truck. >> the complexity of going to
mars, you are going to need a lot of tracks. lotta stuff to take. no single entity is likely to do it. i think it is going to take all that to achieve that. >> or you could send one -- you could send people you don't like. his crew didn't land on mars havell of a sudden -- they been building about up over a period of a decade. there are things we need to do. communications, relay, landers .hat can go out and survey all that stuff has been going on
from last 40 years. >> was at this year where they select 50 potential human landing sites? >> there was a big forum where we came up with potential landing sites. you can't make that determination if you don't have orbiting images. when you talk about nontraditional partners, they were incredible. we work with them, we felt we contributed to their success, and that is really important. >> mars over to mission.
>> administrator, you have been doing this -- nasa has been doing this for a long time. you have this new entrance, new innovation, new money. you worked as chief of staff come, and if you could talk about the cultural differences between the defense at a place like virgin or blue origin -- between the east those -- at a place ethos like virgin or blue origin or space x? arehat the new companies doing are trying to do one or two things well. i think it is an exciting time
to be a young aerospace engineer in decades. there are so many different opportunities. the reason i say that if there are so many different opportunities. younger and middle-aged engineers can come on board and get involved with real hardware that gets else. -- gets built quickly. we have some of these new machines as well. what they can do is spectacular. you can work inside some company boat for five years. now you can build the systems really quickly. we are hiring, it is something i am required to say. >> so are we. >> we are saving money for the taxpayer. [laughter] >> i think the key thing is that
sense of innovation and that no matter where you are, you have to move quickly. that is a great thing to have in our community now. i think charlie said it really well. competition and innovation is what america is great. it is not easy to design the entry conditions from a policies from a policy perspective. i'm hoping we can maintain that spirit going forward. >> sandy, i wonder from your standpoint, because you are somewhat of an outsider, if you have charlie's job, what would you do differently? >> first off, probably drive nasa into the ground. if i were king of nasa, if i
-- charlie has to work with a lot of people. but if i could have things go the way i wanted, i would concentrate on commercial spaceflight and get as much of my money, nasa, me into the , commercial site as possible because they will quickly drive down the price which makes the rather than having to go to the hill and asked for more money. i would go a little nontraditional. the biggest benefit to having an astronaut on the surface is the astronaut has a brain.
an astronaut does not have a five-20 minute latency in communicating from mars. the very first humans to mars is area mission will be a whole bunch of rovers on the surface of mars and then humans in orbit controlling them. >> you talk about envisioning. and we don't talk about a lot of stuff. if you go too far ahead, you are not organized. we are. we have got to be thinking 30-50 years out. i come people all the time. the very first beings on the surface of mars are going to be robots. think about what we do for american forces around the world. we don't send marines into a hot area first. we try to make fit environment safer for them.
i imagine there is going to be a fleet of robots that are going to establish the habitat. they are going to go in with 3-d printing. we may find based on what we know that we want to go underground rather than have cuts on the surface. with the wind that does not exist. i tell my wife it is a movie. it is a very important part. there are prefab structures. that is what we are going to do on mars.
>> to give you a zero latency communication. it is like driving a remote control car. if the robot reaches some issue, it has to stop. now it is going to be like this. >> you want to be able to have a human on board. some people do not even think we have people in space or. we are building the systems. there is a lot of different ways to do it. it is within our reach. this is a habitat that has
expanded out. they have plans for bigger ones. do you see the day where the international space station is replaced? >> i don't see the day. it is inevitable. it is a human made structure and today we are working feverishly to help george and others build this structure that is commercial. so that nasa does not have to use taxpayer dollars to maintain the structure. that should not be nasa. commercial entities have full capabilities to do that today.
that is what we are looking at. we are asking for bids and ideas. >> the inflatable habitat is absolutely critical because for the first time now we will be old to escape the tierney of the launch vehicle diameter. that is what it comes down to. everything that is in space has to fit inside of the launch vehicle. if you have a big inflatable thing, you can have a lot of volume for your service area. >> we talk about habitats, one of the biggest things that is happening now is the cube sat revolution. now they are developing satellites inside of a shoebox. >> we are actually printing entire subsystems.
we're using propellants that people can be around all the time. it is revolutionary. you have to get it to be necessary. it is an interesting time. i have been in this industry. it is been under a different kind of model. many of these are mature enough right now. it is part of things that are transporting. nasa can support the really hard stuff that you're trying to
migrate over. nasa pioneered the technology back in the 90's. it is amazing what he is doing there. >> it was the first element is called to send a spacecraft into space. it was launched off the international space station. it was sent to the station on an orbital or spacex vehicle. there is an elementary school that can now brag about my spacecraft is up there doing stuff. i did science fairs.
i never look back. i can guarantee you that they are never going to be told that you can't do that. this is where nasa does not get enough credit. >> it is really pushed the ball forward. through iss, it has been heating the small set market. you cannot launch there you can. interesting is that the u.s. is leading a new era, the small satellite sector.
we are going to see tremendous growth. the number of geostationary satellites is not really growing right now. you're going to see this huge growth in constellations over the next few years which will establish a new information skin for planet earth. it helps us with navigation and weather. i think it will be a permanent skin around the planet. we have a customer called one web. they aspired to do the initial deployment. >> just a note, we keep using
different terms. they're basically an idea of whose time has come. the reason they are possible is because of your cell phone. the miniaturization of computer technology because of the market demand for will have these. now these can absolutely be the brains of a cube sat. go back in time 15 years. before mobile phones, even the smallest most compact computers were these clunky laptops. it is great to take and develop. you don't have to reinvent the wheel.
the apollo program was the best and worst thing to ever happen to the space industry. >> i want to ask george, going back to space tourism for a minute. you have 700 people who have bought tickets. what do you see the demand? there is really a demand. >> i think the demand far outstrips the supply for the foreseeable future. it is going to be hard to fly these vehicles. i think it is going to be one of these markets. i think it is a good thing.
we will have a very profitable is next. they really help their trying to catalyze something and do something new. where does it go? that is an interesting question. that is one of the things we think about. it is frustrating to all of us that we are still going mach .8 in our commercial air travel. we've been going that speed. the average speed has even gone down slightly. it is inconceivable for us to go to transpacific. is that going to happen in a year or two? no.
the technology that we are working on will feed into that. how do you find people safely? those are all the nuts and bolts. those are all the questions that we will be dealing with. then we will be in a much closer place. >> we can take a couple of questions from the audience. >> i want to add one thing on the commercial side. the true and will happen when the price points are going in.
razor and if you can go into space and spend a week in the hotel for $10,000. we are working on it. >> i want to take advantage of the opening george gave me. in the president's budget proposal for the coming year, critical art of it is new aviation horizons. nasa is not going to build the supersonic airplanes in which people like george are going to fly. we are working on the regulatory in. today it is illegal to fly supersonic over the ground. instead of supersonic boom you get this. it is because you change the shape.
sound is nothing but energy. it comes off a big spike. that is a part of the new aviation horizons. we awarded a contract to lockheed. you have companies like boeing who have plans on the drawing board. they just need the regulation to change. the game is on. nasa has done its job. do we have any questions in the audience? >> the world is also depending
on space with communications. who is going to manage all the satellites and microsatellites going up? >> george mentioned the critical role that congress is laying. one of them has mandated that nasa will come together and decide how we put into place the instruments for management. we are going to work. it won't happen this year but by the time we do it,. >> that affects the hundreds of satellites. >> where there is a profit motive, there is a way.
the planes manage to not crash into each other. you have a bunch of independent international countries flying their own planes over international waters but they still cooperate to not have anything bad happen. because the brains from the telephone and camera that came out of his telephone. it is going to have a micro jet. they are going to be able to maneuver around and most importantly, they are going to comply with the law. where it will not harm anyone on the ground. >> time for another quick one.
>> nasa has been a driver for education. will that continue? we need a lot of help in some areas. >> they do immensely. nasa has a $19.3 billion budget that is focused on stem education. there is not a single thing that we do that we don't get into classrooms somehow. keep stats, that is getting kids interested in science and aerodynamics. does it promote an education? i don't care what the line is in the budget.
space again. this is the best time it has ever been. >> you are writing a new book. >> we are big into education. we just did that thing where we got all the sixth-graders in new mexico to do a thing with our engineers. it gets our employees excited. we have an organization called galactic unite. >> i want to hear about the next one. it takes place in the 2080's. it takes place in a city on the man. i came out with an economic reason for why there is a on the moon. the main character is a woman who is a low-level criminal
>> if we humans were to announce our existence in this universe, how would we do it? more importantly, what would you say? i would say say very likely. it is a human construct. it helps us to understand communication. if we are being frank, what is communication? is it the word, the syntax? to understand what communication is, we have all entered all our data into this thing named
watson. let's say that my mind wants to learn something. in this case, how to make an apple pie. what to do? i go find my favorite baker and ask how to do it. or july? in a post singularity word -- world, communicating may be unnecessary? in my people to be transferred immediately. increase the efficiency and decrease the chance of misunderstanding. much like this copy of beyonce's lemonade that i want, communication is brought with inaccuracies.
communication never achieves 100% efficiency. technology, our astronomer faces a problem. at the time the answer chosen was to employ the universal language, mathematics. if we encode the basics of language using mathematical constructs, we can imply a common town. how to send math? we have tried two methods. we send a thing with math or we send a math listing.
the biggest bang for our buck is to send light. it makes a lot of sense. our planet has been leaping are electromagnetism. you can get the message out all over the place. this comes at a cost. our light fades with time and distance. it becomes harder to hear within the cosmic forest. the light that we send will not be anymore detectable. ok, let's send a thing. now we want to send ourselves. water is heavy and it is expensive to send weight in space.
we have to hope that we are sending at the right way. he tried to send both. what to do? the problem is with the premise. math is a universal concept, not language. it is like light. mathematics -- it needs to be a language that is tangible. something stable. that thing is dna. it is the only thing that is tangible to a consummate language.
the internet's data can fit in a data form the size of the state of delaware. instead of sending ourselves on the cosmic fishing expedition, we can send fish with dynamite. we send our basic operating system increasing transfer efficiency. the transfer loss could be minimized. how? it is very stable and space is very empty. it could hold all representative life on the planet but also passed life and encoded in the strengths and cells, how to use it. dna sent in all cosmic directions could have a journey be unscathed.
synthetic dna could be encoded with our entire planetary history. as a genetic engineer, i must be honest. dna is not a great predictor. rather dna is a great language. we see ourselves be a dna and send a condensed message of this planet, this silent tangible language. dna is cosmic language. now if you excuse me, i have an apple high to bake. [applause]
>> how are we going to save the platform? all we need to do is build the platform. why are you asking me? i am not the ceo. say what you will about the chair but it never told me how to build a box. >> hello everyone. i am the post-digital culture critic. i am delighted to be on stage today of the executives who oversee the internet communities. i am talking about steve huffman of reddit and the founder of twitch.
first things first, i imagine we have maybe a couple of people who are not intimately familiar with reddit and twitch. i want to explain what it is you do. you are not social networks. you are not media companies. what is up? >> twitch was started originally as a platform for gamers to share their game streams. it was user generated. we not only became a video platform, we became a place
where users can connect with other gamers and form all of these micro-communities around each broadcaster. read it has a very similar story. we started off a little different. we were just one community. over the years, we have grown into many thousands of communities. now what we focus on now is where they can be themselves online. now we have it for sports, relationships and everything in between. we have thousands of communities where they can express
themselves. as representative of what is going on in the internet at any point in -- moment in time. >> it was in something you as the founder that intended. >> i would not say if it was controlled by users is the way to express it. we have thought that. i've always been uncomfortable -- we try not to screw it up.
it has taken of path over the years. there really is an evolution to these things. we are trying to build a platform where communities can grow and thrive. >> planning communities work as well as planned economies are planned cities. it is a bunch of people who were there voluntarily and your role is more of a gardener. you have to have the community thrive and grow. if you can forcibly make that, you are going to have a bad time. you cannot force people to want to engage in each other. you can only provide favorable
conditions and hope that it happens in a good way. like any garden, you wind up with issues like weeds. you put a lot of attention into what should be growing hair. what will make that likely? like any fertile environment, you are going to get a favorable environment for something you don't want. >> if you were to use pesticides, you might kill your plants. >> that is exactly what happens. you start playing the round up of having to heavy hand. then the whole thing dice. that happens to a lot of communities that get overzealous trying to stamp out and put too many hurdles in the way. you wind up eliminating a lot of interesting and good behavior. >> as much as i love the garden metaphor, i would like to talk
about how it works practically. if you have had some pretty profile incidents. with hate speech on reddit. i wonder if you can tell us a little bit about your philosophy of monitoring that type of speech and how it is changed. >> in the early days, when we were a very small team and just had one community, we do not think too hard about it. things like hate speech we didn't really talk about it. over the years reddit has grown to be much larger and encompass many more viewpoints that are not representative of my own for the companies. but now we also have moderators that did not exist in the early days.
these communities are created by our users. they can use it anyway they want to. these policies are only as good as that we can force it. we have to make sure to enforce the rules that we have. we have overwhelmingly good people. how do you make their an environment to grow and thrive? we think of ourselves as a platform where people can express themselves freely even if the things that they are expressing makes us very incomparable. this has become very complex over the years. we have done very good at
managing it. >> for twitch, i had the benefit of watching reddit go through some of this. this was before we started setting up our policies so we always had a justification for her -- removing anyone that doesn't relate to our values. what we have found problematic is we have to values: twitch is a platform for the creator. it is creator first. when there is a tension between the viewer and broadcaster, we go for the broadcaster because there needs to be a home online for them to have control and run
their own editorial policy. we give them powerful tools to manage their community. that works great as long as you're dealing with broadcasters who all have excellent taste and the problem that arises is we want good behavior over the whole site. we want to give broadcasters power. they don't control the community well enough and you a lot about action. -- bad action. the last thing we want to do to a creator is tell them that we know better than you how to run
your community. that makes the problem much harder than just jumping into it straight away. >> i like that you bring that up. you both have a model of moderation that is very old-school internet. obviously platforms like facebook and twitter have taken an opposite approach and do you have any pressure to take those moderation duties internally? >> it is something we think about but we would never do that. when you get on reddit that you don't get on facebook or twitter is a place where you can really be yourself. people come out on reddit all the time. when they are nervous about doing that, they can come to reddit for support. we think that is very important.
there is always a trade-off there, and intention there. where we focus our time is building the tools were you can thrive in that environment and not negatively affect others. we are very heavy-handed. we're seeing that more and more. i've seen that three times on reddit. we are very different viewpoints colliding. if they are not making others have about time.
>> we do have a lot of moderation in-house. we used to have all english-language moderators. but we now have realized we need all kinds of language moderators. most countries have big internet populations. the problem is, when you have something on the order of 2.5 million people a day publicly posting messages to each other, employing staff to moderate that, these are real time messages. the entire weekend of impact is the 30 seconds after it is sent.
we wound up going to the distribution moderator route. there is no other way to moderate a real-time chat community. we view our role in that as going to build excellent tools that amplify the effect. identify the people that are being a force for moderation. empower them with tools that amplify what their actions are. giving them more powerful tools to moderate all at once. >> you spend a lot of time, our
focus is on using systemic issues. groups of users who are harassing other users, spam. we have built tools and teams to identify these bad actors who without them, everyone would be fine. where we are heavy-handed is identifying those people and trying to get them out. hopefully everyone else can flourish. we believe that people on reddit and the real world for fundamentally good. they have a fundamental desire to share and to grow. that is low we are really trying to protect. >> steve, i am curious, you took over as ceo 10 months ago.
there was a headline at the time that you were trying to save reddit from itself. have you done that? >> to provide some back story, my number one value at reddit is evolve. the company was in disarray. i was watching that it goes this difficult time. when i came back, it was a big push to looking towards the future. that meant reminding folks that there was libertarian free speech route.
we do not know how we fell in the early days of opposition. coming back and, there were these large groups in open revolt. there were communities that were stirring a lot of stuff. i try to squash that group of users who were stirring the set. there has been a lot of culture rebuilding. bringing in new values and reminding everyone what our purpose is. to answer your question, are we done? no. have we made great strides? yes. >> as an editor, i would agree with you.
>> it is hard to see from the outside when you look at a community site, there is no when you can bring in that is allowed to change the direction other than a founder. it is only the founder that has the moral authority to say that this is what the website is about. there has been a bunch of things that reddit has done over the past 10 months. i have a lot of sympathy for people that come in as a ceo and not the founder.
it is very hard. >> something unique to the area of the internet you are you, it is quite possible for the company to develop a myth about itself. to diverge in a direction that is not maybe the one you plan. it is maybe not profitable. had he do with this issues? >> reddit was the first thing i did out of college. to summarize, it has been an incredible learning experience. we started the company at the same time. we have made a lot of mistakes over the years. we keep using this lessons.
it would grow in a direction that we didn't intend. we have gotten a lot more savvy at learning how to steer these. when i returned to nine months ago, i said what reddit needed was a clear line. we went rather publicly. i wish i could go back and tell myself that it is impossible to draw a line. wherever you draw that line, there will be someone, that is looking for the loophole.
i have people who did work for facebook and twitter and said that you need to be specifically vague. you need to give yourself some wiggle room. an example is those lessons that could have been taught. i had to learn the hard way. i am forever thankful for this. >> the thing i noticed at twitch was we had to deal with a poor an issue -- porn issue. we did that mistake. we tried to define it. you just try writing down a