tv Robert Thompson and Gerard Baker Discuss Global Reaction to the 2016... CSPAN November 19, 2016 10:00am-11:46am EST
visit ncicap.org] host: we also discuss u.s. transatlantic relationships with dr. francis burwell of the atlantic council. we will see back here tomorrow morning. ♪ >> on c-span this morning we hear from two people familiar with the truck presidential transition process. former new york city mayor rudy conway. and kellyanne then senator bernie sanders talks about the election result and his new role in senate
democratic leadership. and the defense department's dealing with security threats. later this afternoon we take you live to peru where president obama is speaking to students at a town hall as part of his final overseas trip before he leaves office. >> this weekend on american history tv on c-span3, lectures and histories -- >> the only essential difference between the nazi mob hunting down juice in central europe and in central europe and an american mob burning black men at the stake in mississippi is that one is actually encouraged by the national government and one is just tolerated. professorurg college on world war ii and its impact on civil rights. america, a00 on reel film on the black panthers found in 50 years ago. >> it is very apparent that the
police are not here for our security but for the security of the business owners in the community and also to see that the state flow is kept in tack. >> archaeologist dean snell on his findings while excavating saratoga in new york and the inspiration for his book "1777: tipping point at saratoga." >> what was this little only the doing out there? she was five feet tall and 60 years old and was a battle casualty at saratoga. what is going on here? >> and un-american artifacts. and on the american artifacts. andhey give you more wing you would literally hop up and down the field. then when you're ready for the big day you talk to your instructor who was talking to you on the ground all the time and would pat you on the
shoulder and you get in the airplane and make your first real solo flight all by yourself. tour of the military aviation museum in virginia, home to one of the largest private collection to world war i and two aircraft's. to learn about those advances during those wars. for our complete american history tv schedule go to www.c-span.org. >> next, former new york city mayor rudy giuliani and former trump presidency campaign manager kellyanne conway talk about the transition process in the issues presidential trump is likely to focus on what he takes office. this is from the wall street journals annual ceo meeting in washington, d.c.. [applause] >> thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. hope you enjoyed the dinner.
>> we will get straight into the real meat of the evening. i can't imagine a better way to start than to have someone who is very familiar to all of you, someone who has played an extraordinarily important role in this world's -- this nations history, america's mayor, someone playing an extreme -- an extremely and increasingly important role in the trump campaign. please welcome senior adviser to trump campaign and vice chairman of the transition team for president-elect trump mayor rudolph giuliani. [applause] >> so to start, mr. mayor -- i can still call you mr. mayor. mr. giuliani: yes. forever, i can still do weddings. [laughter] >> and a few more weeks we have to change the title.
>> one never knows. >> i want to come on to that in some of the possibilities in the trump administration. i want you to give us your sense of what the immediate agenda is for the trump presidency. particularly this fascinating election campaign in which president-elect trump won in large part by tapping into this very populist sentiment that is out there in the country. republican, and you got a republican congress, house and senate. how is that going to play itself out? how is the populist moment, the populist insurgency, how is that going to work out? what kind of policies are we going to see?
mayor giuliani: you're going to see what he talked about. i analogize this election to the election of 1824, when andrew jackson defeated what was basically the almost emerging nobility of america, which were the revolutionary americans right down to adams junior. and all of a sudden, the american people had had enough of this elite core and decided we needed somebody who represented us, meaning the people. i think that's what happened here. i think the people revolted against what was the elite that was trying to force down on them a group of policies, a group of decisions that either they did not agree with her wasn't doing enough to help them or did not
address what they were concerned about. and donald trump, from the very beginning, had an instinct. his campaign helped with it, but a lot of it was his own instinct about what was troubling the american people. that is the revolution that is going to happened now. now you have to institutionalize that. when i was the election as mayor, i won by 3%. the head of the republican party in new york, bill powers, came to see me the next day and he laid out for me -- he said, next time, we don't want to have an ulcer while waiting for the election returns. we want to win by 10%. so here is how you're going to do it. here's how you're going to consolidate power and we can take it through eight years instead of four. that is part of what he has to do. he's got to take his agenda. we are a three-part government.
the other parts of congress, right now. you've got to get a through the congress. it is no good to have all of these ideas if you can't get them past. >> for what are those key elements? throughout the campaign, donald trump channeled this populism, talked about -- he thought free -- fought free trade -- he opposed nafta and the proposed tpp. he talked about tariffs coming in from certain other countries. they talked about limiting immigration, aggressive moves on immigration, channeled this nationalist populism. he said things in the final week about imposing taxes on companies that lay off workers. this is a populist message. at the same time, he seems to stand for a very conventional republican position, deregulation, lower taxes,
something a lot of people in this room would favor. but there is a tension between this populism and this traditional conservative, pro-business strategy. how is that going to resolve itself? mayor giuliani: i hate to go too much back to jackson, but jackson's election led to the beginning of the democratic party. so he turned it into -- he actually turned it into a first vital political party. now what he's got to do is accomplish most of his agenda and turn it into something core the republican party becomes the majority party. i think we already are the majority party in this country. but the majority party at the presidential level, which we haven't been really since reagan. we haven't been the majority
party at the presidential level. i think it's going to mean a combination of both of those things, being practical. there are certain things she has to deliver on because he promised them. sort of the way bush said "read my lips." gerard gerard: which she famously did not deliver on. mayor giuliani: that's right. and that cost him the presidency. he has to deliver on securing the borders. three years from now, we have to be a country that doesn't have wide-open borders, dangerous people, criminals who are kept here committing crimes. he's got to show tremendous progress in that area. i think he has to lower taxes. he has to lower taxes on everybody, so everybody gets a little bit more money in a pocket, so they can spend it. he particularly has to lower the corporate tax, which i think could be one of the biggest things he can do to really ignite our economy, get it down from 35% to 15%.
and then i think he has to work on repatriation of money by having a low bar of 10%. you do that and, within two or three years, you see an economy that is growing at numbers where we can sustain all the other things we have to do. and i think on trade, part of it could be the rhetoric of the campaign, part of it the misinterpretation of the media, but i take you are not talking about a man who is against free trade. i think you're talking a man who is against unfair deals, which i think he regards as the deal with mexico, nafta as unfair. gerard: do you think that would address the concerns of people in ohio and pennsylvania and wisconsin? they are upset and angry as what they see as the loss of jobs because of trade in mexico? mayor giuliani: readjusting
nafta so you don't have things like we build a car in michigan, send it to mexico, and they put an 18% tax on it. they build a car and mexico and they send it back to america and we put nothing on it. that's a one-way deal. so how about we even out a little bit? i think that's what he's tried to do. he's trying to make these deals, fair deals, so we can both make progress on either side of the border. i think if you combine that with his general tax cut, his corporate tax cut, his repatriation tax cut, and fairer free trade deals, i think you're going to see a large increase in jobs in those places where he won, like michigan, like ohio, like wisconsin, what we call unfortunately the rust belt. gerard: so that tension between the populism, the anti-wall
street, anti-corporate sentiment, what trump tapped into, and the pro-business and deregulation sentiment, his two first apartments for the administration, reince priebus as chief of staff and chief -- steve bannon as chief strategist. you know them well. mayor giuliani: i know them really well. gerard: you know what different views they have. bannon is an agressive, populist flamethrower. he would like to see a administration take on these entities. traditional more
republican. who was going to win that fight? mayor giuliani: donald trump. i love that. that's exactly what i did when i became the -- mayor of new york. i surrounded myself with people who disagreed with each other. il's thought it was a really bad idea to surround myself with people who completely agreed with each other because i would never hear the other side of the argument. donald trump is an extraordinarily smart man. exposing him to different viewpoints is the best thing we can do. it's exactly what obama didn't do, although he said he was going to do it because he had read "team of rivals." all he did was put in a bunch of people who never had a job before and got no advice from business. i know some of the people in his business council who used to complain to me we only met once. we met one time. and they quit.
instead, you are going to see a president who exposes himself, in the case of reince priebus and steve bannon. of course i have different viewpoints. i saw them for three-month and were complete teammates. they had different point of use. they talked them out. and in the matter of a disagreement, you know who decides it. the president of the united states. i worked for ronald reagan. i sat in a lot of cabinet meetings in which there were very big debates between caspar weinberger and haig, caspar weinberger and scholz, defense, state. there was only one vote. [laughter] it's like abraham lincoln, when the cabinet voted against him and he voted for it. and one of the cabinet member said i thought this was majority rule. he said, it is. the president has a majority.
[laughter] gerard: reminds me of thatcher. about steve bannon. there is a lot of concern expressed today about his association with breitbart. the organization he runs is -- has a reputation for a slightly robust approach to news and in a way that people frankly find offensive. he's been accused racism and of anti-semitism. you are mayor of new york city. you had to deal with the issues of racial tension. mayor giuliani: i haven't seen any of that in steve in the time i have dealt with him. i have seen a very smart, a very worldly man. i also think something happens to you when the election is over. you saw it happen to donald trump happened to me when i
became mayor. i woke up the next day and realized, i have to do this now. there is a weight that falls on your shoulder and you start to think in a different way. it's not that you change your positions, but you begin to realize, i have to bring in more people, i have to listen to more opinions, i have to broaden my horizons. i don't think that just have us -- happens to the president. i think it happens to the chief of staff, the communications director, the secretary of defense, secretary-general, secretary of state. when you are out there just criticizing, it is one thing. when you get on the inside, there is a certain weight of responsibility to the american people on your shoulders. i think steve bannon is the kind of guy who gets that. he is a patriot. he may have a different view of americans than you do, but he
loves america as much as you or i do. i think he will give donald trump his best advise and ultimately, it is the president who makes the decisions. gerard: that change, that realization, have you seen that in donald trump? mr. giuliani: i think the whole world has seen it. gerard: in what way has he changed? mr. giuliani: from the moment he went to see barack obama, the way they dealt with each other, the way he is conducting himself on his attempt to bring america together. i think all these protests, i don't take them as seriously as some people do. i think they will go away. they're going to happen for a while because some people are disappointed and angry and a little bit is organized. some is soros driven. i think that will go away and i think we're going to find a much
more worldly and expansive president than we ever realize d we were electing. gerard: let me ask you about some corporate things and then i want to get to foreign-policy issues, which are of increasing interest to you, if i may say so. [laughter] gerard: not that you haven't always been interested. one of the things i've heard a lot, and i've spent some time with president-elect trump and steve bannon and others, there is this concern about big business. it is channeling this populist interest. this is the mother load of big companies. is there going to be an assumption that this will be an administration that will take on big business?
there's been a merger that has been announced, at&t and time warner. it could come up on your ledger. with these mergers be opposed by the trump administration? mr. giuliani: first of all, i won't be attorney general. i won't have to decide that one, thank god. i can escape that one. gerard: i should ask jeff session that one. mr. giuliani: i have no idea, but i won't be attorney general. i was the third ranking official in the justice department for ronald reagan, i ran the criminal side of the justice department, although i have litigated three or four antitrust cases for at&t. way back when there was the big, big at&t. i think you will see pretty much
a conservative approach to antitrust law. if it is predatory pricing, if it is predatory pricing where there are alternatives, you'll probably see a challenge to it. if it is a situation in which there is no alternative but a large conglomerate, i think you will see the justice department passing on that. i think what you will see is pretty much the traditional republican approach to the antitrust division like we had under reagan and bush. gerard: that is pretty accommodating. mr. giuliani: the last thing in the world you're going to see is an antibusiness administration. donald trump realizes that he got elected to a very large extent on something he said in so many speeches, jobs, jobs, jobs. i understand this as the mayor of new york. the only way i have jobs is to have businesses. if i throw businesses out of my
country, i will not have jobs. being pro-business is being pro-jobs. i think one of the big changes that will happen immediately, instead of it happening in washington, instead of being antibusiness, which the obama administration was, you're going to have one that is aggressively pro-business. that doesn't mean there won't be a necessary level of regulation. i will tell you one thing that president-elect trump told me, he said one of the things i learned about running for president -- when i began, i thought the biggest concern businesses had was taxes. it is true they are concerned about taxes, particularly our highest tax rate in the world, 35% and ireland only being 12%. what i learned that their biggest concern is regulation, and i will cut those regulations
in half. i bet you that within three months you will see that regulatory burden cut. being a lawyer in private practice, that is not good for law firms. we love those regulations because we made money on them. the reality is that that was killing job production in america more than anything else. epa pretending it was congress. other agencies of government legislating rules, and dodd-frank. we are now allowed to talk and politically incorrect terms? that is part of the revolution. dodd-frank doesn't have anything to do with the recession. it has to do with a bunch of
liberal ideas that two of the guys that created the problem in the first place. frank was the guy that was protecting fanny and freddie when clinton was trying to reform it. frank stopped bush from reforming it. and dodd got a sweetheart loan from them. i think it is irony that we called the legislation to solve the crash after the two people that have the most to do with it. everything in it is largely irrelevant to why it took place. gerard: we have elizabeth warren coming to speak with us tomorrow. mr. giuliani: we will be happy to run against her in four years. gerard: that's an interesting tip. a couple quick
questions, during the campaign, trump said he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate and possibly prosecute hillary clinton over the e-mails and clinton foundation stuff. is he going to? mr. giuliani: i think that is a decision he makes when he appoints and attorney general. the attorney general should sit down and study it and give him a reasoned balance of things. they are both important. we don't want to become a country where we have political vindictiveness after an election. we also don't want to be a country of unequal protection in the law. a lot of that has to do with what i don't know, which is how bad are the things involved in the clinton foundation investigation? how beyond the pale are they? i think that is going to fall to a large extent on the attorney general.
if they decided that if it is not that beyond the pale, maybe put it behind us. if there is something there, it should be an independent counsel that investigates it. i think that should be a detailed, reasoned study of the fbi investigation that i believe is in the new york office of the fbi. gerard: foreign policy. familiar, "the wall street journal" reported that the choice of secretary of state is between rudy giuliani and john bolton. we don't have john bolton here am going to talk with you. mr. giuliani: john would be a very good choice. gerard: is there anybody better?
mr. giuliani: maybe me. [laughter] gerard: let's start with iran. president elect, said that it was the worst deal he'd ever seen in his life. what should the -- he is going to be president on january 20, this deal is still in place, iran continues to do what it is doing, what would you do about that? mr. giuliani: the president has a lot of options because president obama did not do what he should have done really under the constitution. he should have submitted that to the united states senate. that is a treaty. there is no way of escaping the fact that is a treaty. if you would like to go to sleep early tonight, get the federalist papers and read federalist papers 75, written by hamilton, who is now a broadway
star. if you want the quintessential definition of a treaty, it is the iran agreement. it binds us for more than one president, it binds us are more than one year, it deals with an area of national security. nuclear power. it should of been submitted to the senate and he never did it. what that means is, that deal is over with with the present president. the next president can disavow it as a matter of law. gerard: should he? mr. giuliani: he should or he should use that power to renegotiate it, or let them know that i don't have to abide by it. he never got the votes. obama had a second way he could've done it. he could've done it as an agreement, in which case he would've only had to get a majority vote of the house and senate, and he knew he could not get it.
gerard: it was negotiated not only with iranians, but russians and chinese. you fancy spending your first two years as secretary of state renegotiating? mr. giuliani: i think you have to set priorities. if the priority is to eliminate isis, maybe you put that off a little bit and you get rid of isis first and then you go back to that. because isis short-term, i believe, is our greatest danger. not because of isis in iraq and syria, but because they did something al qaeda never did. they were able to spread themselves around the world. there are 32 countries that have isis cells. the director of the fbi says there are 1000 investigations in
the u.s. they have created a danger that al qaeda never presented to us in terms of their ability to strike, smallee -- smaller strikes, but still very devastating like orlando and paris and san bernardino and the priest whose head was chopped off in nice. that is that is one that i can't even think about. gerard: they are on the run in the region. mr. giuliani: i think if you eliminate them where they are, they lose a lot of power in their ability -- one of the values and there were a lot of disadvantages, but one of the values to our having a lot of troops in iraq and afghanistan was we kept them on the run. if you notice, from september 11 until the attack on mount hood,
there was no extremist attack -- extremist domestic attack in the united states. one of the reasons for that is it is hard to plan an attack when you are being shot at and you are in a cave. computers don't work well in a cave and al qaeda was not particular good at using computers. this new group, isis, is different. a lot of them are recruited from us. they come from england, from germany, from france, from america. they understand us and understand how to use the internet as well as our children do. in that sense, that has to be priority number we have to one. eliminate that threat, because we don't want to live with the threat as we have under obama of what is the next city they will hit? will they hit st. louis, are they going to hit st. louis, are they going to hit chicago, are they going to go back to paris? i think once you get that under control, you can start working on the second, which may be a long-term problem in a great
fear of mine, which is an iranian-shiite kingdom. because now, to be honest, you would have to say that iraq is a client state of iran. we delivered it to them. it could be the worst mistake in american -- no, you're probably the worst mistake. >> i think the way we exited -- exitedink the way we iraq was the worst decision made in american history which meant we turned them over to iran and then we turned syria over to iran and then we were not there when isis began to develop and what you have -- if you are not careful, what you have developing is -- i would call it almost a north-south middle east. you have iran, iraq, syria with
the backing of russia, yemen right below saudi arabia, not quite north-south. then you have saudi arabia, the emirates, qatar, oman, egypt, israel, jordan, sunni to the south. that is a war that is going to happen if we don't figure out how to contain iran and stop them from being nuclear. gerard: russia is playing an important role in there's been a lot of focus on russia, president-elect trump's views on russia. simply in your view, is russia a friend or adversary? mr. giuliani: both. it is both. could be both. right now it is adversary because we made it that way. it could be both just like china . i would like to see china to be
an economic competitor as opposed to a military competitor. russia thinks it is a military competitor, but it really isn't. if you compare the size of our military and theirs, it is our unwillingness under obama to even threaten the use of our military that makes russia so powerful. gerard: would that change with a of doneo in crimea? mr.giuliani: i believe it could contain them, if we do what donald trump talked about in his military agenda, which is we take our military up to 550,000 troops, we were going down to 420,000. we take our navy up to 350 ships, we were going down to 247. that is critical, even for china.
at 247, we cannot fight a two ocean war. we gave up the pacific. at 350, china cannot match us in the pacific and it becomes very different. he is going to take our marines from about 28 battalions to 36. he's going to take our air force from about 900 fighters that need parts we have to get for -- from museums. gerard: he was against the iraq war, he says he is against the u.s. did in libya. what are you going to do? mr. giuliani: he used the phrase he borrowed from ronald reagan and which ronald reagan probably borrowed from george washington, which is called peace through strength. if you face them with a military
that is modern, gigantic, overwhelming, and unbelievably good at conventional and asymmetrical warfare, they may challenge you, but i doubt it. gorbachev gave donald trump the answer to how to win. gorbachev wrote in one of his memoirs that ronald reagan spent us into oblivion, and i am a big advocate of military spending. gerard: you think you cando the same with china? mr. giuliani: i will say what has happened with china. i believe you have in china, and a lot of people here know china -- i think you have in china a tension not unlike what we have between, let's call them the hawks and doves. the hawks military power help us doves sayarily, the
we are so powerful and big and we have so many poor people that we have to bring out of poverty, 700 million that, let's become an economic competitor and not a military competitor. so if our navy is that much doves than there's, the win that war because the hawks can't get the money they need to come and catch us, but if obama takes our navy down here and you can kind of catch us, encourage them, now if we take our navy up here they are not going to be of and here is what i believe and know about the chinese. whatever else you think, they are enormously practical people. they also realize they have to -- things to overcome that stand two in the way of being a great world power. one is the enormous amount of poverty that they have.
they are a first world country and a third world country combined. half one half the other. that second part, someday, if it is not already come i could be a big problem for them. second, they have developed such a large middle class, you cannot sustain the oppression, you cannot sustain the authoritarianism that they presently have. that will crack at some point. the chinese are great on all kinds of plans except innovative ones. they haven't thought their way through that yet. gerard: a couple of questions please? put your hand up if you have a question. there is someone over there. i think we have a microphone right next to you. could you identify yourself? >> alexandra lebenthal. mayor giuliani i hope you recall my family for nine decades this month has been helping to
finance our city and state through municipal bonds. i have been the ceo for 15 years and i have dozens of employees in new york and atlanta and chicago and i have always taken care of them. they are my family. so many of them have expressed to me over the last week how scared they are. there is a point at which as a ceo i cannot take care of them anymore, i cannot tell them everything will be ok. my question to you and i say it with great respect, is when will donald -- president-elect trump come out and say some thing about the scary things that already happening? i need to go back to them tomorrow and tell them that everything is going to be ok. mr. giuliani: what are they afraid of? >> they are afraid of having swastikas painted on the wall. i have african-american employees who are truly afraid
to be african-american. they are all scared, they have seen what has gone on in the last week and they are terrified. i'm terrified for them because i cannot take care of them. i can't tell them is going to be ok. it can't come from me as ceo. mr. giuliani: you can tell them they're going to be ok. >> how? >> -- mr. giuliani: they're going to be ok because number one, they have a president of the united states that not only doesn't have a prejudice bone in his body -- he doesn't, i've known him for 28 years -- but has a real commitment to help the african american community. a did not begin saying for four straight months in every single speech he gave that he is very concerned about the condition of the african-american community in the inner cities and that he believes they should take a look at another alternative to their success than what democrats of done for them.
in every city you can mention except maybe mine that had the intervention of a republican or somewhat republican mayor for a while -- that is michael bloomberg -- those cities have deteriorated under democrats. democratic policy to the african-american community is make them dependent, make them dependent on welfare and food stamps and don't do a damn thing for them. donald trump said let me give you the latter to success -- ladder to success. number one is a safe community. you can't live in a community like a lot of chicago. >> can you answer my question? mr. giuliani: i'm answering your question. >> when is he going to address what has been going on? when is he going to denounce what has happened.
to be fair, do you mean. he went on "60 minutes" last night and said "stop it." he told people to stop it. mr. giuliani: he told people to stop doing what they are doing. he has no more control over them than president obama or hillary clinton have over the goons and thugs in my city destroying property that are taking over streets and yelling and screaming at donald trump. so go after president obama. when is he going to tell them to stop it and when is that going to be effective? he is no more control over the goons and thugs in los angeles who are destroying property because donald trump was elected. let's be fair about things.
if there are crazy people who have come to crazy conclusions about donald trump's election, all i can do is tell them to stop it. at least he is done that. i haven't heard barack obama say cut it out, stop demonstrating, stop taking over fifth avenue on the streets, it doesn't belong to you. when i was mayor of new york, nobody took my streets. you got to take my sidewalks, you condemn and straight all you want on my sidewalks, but the mayor now allows people to block fifth avenue. that is dangerous. if you block fifth avenue, people die. you cannot get them to the hospital on time to get them safe from heart attacks. you can i get to a fire on time. if you want to say donald trump should stop the crazy people from doing the stupid things they are doing, you have to say
to barack obama and hillary clinton, will you stop the much larger group of people who are doing crazy things in los angeles, in chicago, and in new york that are doing serious damage. gerard: let's move to another question. please tell me the president is going to live in washington. as someone who lives in new york, is fifth avenue going to be a traffic nightmare for the next four years? mr. giuliani: the president is going to live in washington and new york hopefully will have a new mayor next year. who learns how to keep it a civil city. >> i am nick from snap-on tools. congratulations on winning the factory workers in algona and people in shops and fewer you and places like that. you like to see the experts con confounded.
it is the american underdog in terms of elections. i think this is a reasonable question and has to do with where he is going to live. if you watched donald trump in the campaign, at least from a distance, it seems like he was hands-on, shaping the message himself, working on it on a regular basis. in fact, defining what his message would be. when you become president, it generally said that you have a constant barrage of questions that cannot be decided on the facts. do you believe he is going to handle that the same way he did his campaign? in other words, immersed himself in it or delegate. that is one question, can he actually immerse himself as other presidents have? secondly, when he confronts those questions that cannot be decided on the facts, where you cannot just look at the arithmetic, what will be his guiding stars? will it be jobs?
mr. giuliani: he probably discounts somewhat -- you don't know him and maybe a bit of this is his style, just how reflective and how much he can delve into issues and things. the things he talked about were things he thought a lot about. they are just things that -- he spent a great deal of time thinking about the policies he felt were necessary for the american people. that is the reason he won. relitigate the election, but hillary clinton gave very little attention to the policies she would put into effect when she was president. he gave a great deal of attention to the policies he would put into effect when he became president. he talked about immigration and taxes, trade, he talked about
foreign relations, the ukrainian -- iranian agreement here it she did not talk about any of that. i think you are giving him a little less credit for the amount of thought that went into what he was saying and what he was doing. i have seen him in many meetings with four-eight people, whether we are talking about foreign or mystic policy or military policy, absorb what people are saying. i told you about his change of opinion about what was more important to american businesses, taxes or regulations, and he came to the conclusion regulation was more important. i think you're going to find an extraordinarily intelligent man who enjoys public policy as issues. he has even admitted to me about halfway through the campaign he enjoys it even more than real estate, plus it's a lot more challenging and then i think you can see him surround himself with highly intelligent people because he is not afraid of
highly intelligent people. i think you'll see him surround himself with people of much higher intellect than we have had during the last eight years. >> does he have any folks in mind? >> we are really running out of time. >> people who challenge him and are willing to challenge him, because he is not afraid to be challenged. >> one more question. there is a lady over there with her hand up. one more, i'm sorry. >> it is nice to see you. so, i think you mentioned something a couple minutes ago that would raise the spirits of a lot of people in this room. you spoke about tariffs. you talk about other countries ratherg their tariffs than the united states increasing theirs to some sort of trade war scenario. could you talk more about the framework and would it indeed be
something that could lead to a global lowering of trade tariffs? >> you want me to talk about trade? >> yes, please. >> i think what you are going to find is that, probably, gosh, probably any present and we had in a long time, we have a president who spent his time traveling the world and doing business all over the world, right? our last president traveled out of the united states maybe three times, four times. >> well, he lived in indonesia. >> well, yeah. was he in europe ?george bush, >> not much. >> george bush, not much. so, we have somebody who has done business all over the world. he understands the world. he got a terrific understanding of the fact that we are a global economy. that doesn't mean that we are
not also our own economy, that we have to protect first. our own economy we have to make consistent with the global economy so we can get our fair share of the advantages of the global economy. as he has said many times, but it has never been reported properly, he is not a protectionist. he is a free trader. >> he is talking about imposing 45 cents tariffs on goods from china. mr. giuliani: let me leave you with the final thought. if donald trump was going to sell the hotel he just bought in washington. which may be the best hotel in washington. >> you are staying there. >> i don't know how much it is worth. he would ask for double the price to start with. then he would probably take less than that. you are dealing with a negotiator. i worked for ronald reagan. ronald reagan passed one of the
largest tax cuts in american history. the one he presented to tip o'neill was twice the size of the one that he got. so, we are dealing with a man who knows how to negotiate. it is like, when he said he wants everybody to pay their fair share in nato, they interpreted that as we are going to pull out of nato. we are not going to pull out of nato, but believe me, he will get them to pay their fair share of it. maybe he will do it by, we will put a few more troops in. and in exchange, they have to get up to the 2%. we cannot subsidize you any longer because we have a big debt. i think what you will find is somebody negotiating for us for once. i will give you an example of the difference. when barack obama and hillary clinton came into office, they gave away the nuclear defense of
poland and the czech republic to reset the relationship with russia. i was on a panel, much like this, about six months ago with secretary gates who was the defense secretary. i said something to him that has always troubled me. i said to him, when do we get a return for that? and he said, the spanish word, nada. he was opposed to it. now, that is a stupid negotiation. i don't know if we ever should have given away the nuclear defense of poland and the czech republic to start with. but if we were going to do it, we had to get something in return for it. donald trump will probably go to congress and he will go to the world with an agenda that is a little beyond what he needs so he has room to negotiate. just like everyone of you do in business. you don't put your house up for sale if it is a $2 million house
and you want to million dollars for it, at $2 million. you put it up at $2.5 million or $2.6 million. you understand business, if you understand how to negotiate, if you understand how to do farm relations, if you have no experience in doing that, you do they things, like give away nuclear defense of poland and the czech republic for nothing and then putin concludes from day one, i can push you all over the world because you are not too smart. i think when you listen to what donald trump said during the election and when you listen to some of the things he proposes, please, as intelligent leaders of business, understand he is doing the same thing you are doing in a deal you want to make. you do not start at your lowest number. if you do, you will not be running a business very long. you start somewhere higher with
a plan b and a plan b andc and a a a plan b and a plan c and plan d. and that is the complexity with which he thinks. i have only worked for one president my entire life, ronald reagan. ronald reagan was always underestimated. ronald reagan always had a plan, a plan b, and a plan c, and if things got to the worst-case, a plan d. he never really got what he wanted. gerard: mayor giuliani it sounds like you have a very busy time. please join me in thanking him. [applause] thank you very much, indeed, mayor giuliani. that was fascinating. we will be hearing more on these topics. moving right along, we are a little bit delayed.
we have an equally fascinating conversation to come. every successful presidential campaign has an architect, famously president obama had david axelrod and george w. bush had how -- karl rove. i think it is fair to say most people believe that our next guest was very much the architect of the recent presidential election's success of donald trump. so, we are looking forward to a very interesting conversation about that and also about the next four years. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome kellyanne conway, the campaign manager for donald trump and now a special advisor to the transition team and my colleague from the "wall street journal." [applause] >> thank you. >> thank you. we almost did not make it because there was a transition meeting going on backstage.
sorry, mayor, we had to break it up. kellyanne, thank you for being here. this is proof that if you hang around long enough, amazing things happen. kellyanne and i first knew each other years ago. you were working and i was a young reporter and here we are. so, who knew? life rolls on in interesting ways. you went through an experience i suspect you had not planned on in the last six months. and we all lived through a night tuesday night that was different than most of us expected. mrs. conway -- not all of us. >> ok, i will take your word for that. i want to look more for them -- forward rather than backward. what was the message? what was the mandate? what was the voice of the voters as you read it now that the dust
has settled from last tuesday night? >> first off, thank you for having me. i appreciate the opportunity. the message on tuesday night is that there is more of them than us. i think the cues and clues of the election were hiding in plain sight. everything donald trump said about the populist uprising, about rick that people really just wanting fairness and an opportunity and a voice ended up being true. and we can talk about it being an anti-elitist election. think that is fine and has some merit, but at the core people were talking about security, security from terrorism, national security but there is , also health care security, economic security, there is also social security. donald trump is going to states
like pennsylvania and new hampshire, talking about opiate use, and in ohio, talking about opiate use. that is a different kind of insecurity fairly new to the community. people are also talking about everyday affordability. i have been a longtime critic of republican politicians who talk about job creation, you did not build that, and i am a job creator, an entrepreneur. i think that is wonderful. i have been a job greater for 21 years. however, about 7% of the country fancy themselves as entrepreneurs. there is another 7% that are the job seekers, the unemployed. 7% or so. but the vast majority of households are neither job creators or job seekers. they are job holders and donald trump gave voice to the job holders. the people in this country who say, gosh, when my grandfather had a job it was enough to support the entire family. we have two to three jobs in the
household and we are white knuckled trying to figure out how to pay the rent or the mortgage or the tuition or the student loan payment, the food and the fuel. i think he gave vote -- voice to those folks who are just trying to meet every day needs and have a fair shake. people are also talking about fairness. i think hillary clinton's campaign was about equality. and a lot of this country, of course, we cherish the quality. it is enshrined in our constitution. most people are talking about fairness, which is different. fairness is about equality of opportunity and not equality of outcome. when you listen closely, there views toward education reform like school choice, or opening a more technical opportunities for kids who may be are not just college material, and that is fine.
when talking about immigration policy, when talking about tax reform, when talking about in, theyyrian refuges are really talking about what is fair. i think donald trump put issues on the map that nobody was giving voice to like trade and illegal immigration. illegal immigration, he articulated it through an economic lens, so we were not only asking what is fair to the illegal immigrant. all of a sudden, we were asking, what is fair to the american worker? what is fair to ask employers to do? is it enough to just an role in e-verify and wash your hands clean or should we ask them to do more? what's fair to local communities? what is fair to folks, they would do the job others are doing, but they cannot do it for six dollars under the table.
i think he gave voice to issues that were more part of the social and cultural zeitgeist than the garden-variety political set of ideas. the other thing is, i read with rapt attention, but no surprise, that hillary clinton had tested up to 84 slogans years in advance of the presidential race. that is just remarkable. i certainly hope her pollsters got paid by the slogan, but donald trump basically started and ended with make america great again. some people criticize that, but in its very essence, it was about patriotism and aspirations, and opportunity, and freedom, and frankly, fairness. the other thing i would take from all of this, gerry, you said, what is the message? one, ethics and veracity are a qualification for president of the united states.
i think that folks in hillary clinton's campaign, which is filled with brilliant, savvy strategists, including the candidate herself, but the idea that temperament or what you said 20 years ago is an affirmative criteria and trustworthiness are not is not going to be true. you are not going to convince voters otherwise. also fair to is say he tapped into an anger in the country and it produced, i think a somewhat divisive campaign, and angry campaign. i think it was reflected in the first question we heard tonight. one of the things i wanted to ask you is what can be done now to heal the divisions and what would you say to a hispanic family that is worried about the tone or a muslim family worried about the tone? what is the message to them and what can i will donald trump say to those people in the weeks ahead to clamp down on the
concerns? ms. conway: you went back to 1994 when you met me in the word anger was used in 1994 to -- there was an op-ed in "the wall street journal" before election day and he said, saying people -- to say the electorate is angry is like saying the ocean is wet. i think that has merit, but i also think anger -- angry as a way to describe the electorate is a little bit of an excuse. it was an excuse not to listen to voters. i think many people who were honestly, who their day jobs are to listen to voters, to get to know what america was trying to tell us, i think they fell down on the job and they just said they are angry, they are scary, they are peddling hate and divisiveness, when really, many were just frustrated and
fearful. legitimately fearful and legitimately frustrated that they can't pay the bills, that they just can't get ahead. there is nothing else they can do. they have a job, they have a good life, they pay their taxes, they pay their dues, and yet, they always feel like they are in the quicksand of everyday affordability. so, i wanted to say, there is a frustration and not just anger. to answer your question, i would hearken back to what president-elect trump said when he was elected on tuesday night into wednesday morning. he wrote this speech, i was there. he said, i will be the president of all americans, even those who did not support me. -- he meansquite it. let's begin there, he will be president to all americans. you asked specifically about the hispanic family and the muslim family and anybody who -- i hope
that they have heard him say he expressed regret for any pain he caused especially if it was done with words and did not intend to do that. he said that in august in a speech in north carolina. them to at least listen, at least acknowledge that he is their president and that is the same message i would have to the protesters. they have a right to air their grievances, but i also think they were caught unaware people people got the result they were not anticipating and all the talk about who is angry and who will not accept the election results in who is not appreciating the natural organs and processes of democracy are asking the right questions, but about the wrong candidate in the wrong candidate supporters. so, give him a chance and see what he does as your president. i know he loves this country. i know he makes more sacrifices to run for president. a lot of politicians run for
power and prestige and status and money and fame. he had all of that and he and his family, who i have gotten to know very well and respect enormously, have made very big sacrifices to do this and it is for love of the country and they believe they can actually make a difference. >> so, if you were looking at trying now to move into washington and govern in a city, where i would argue that both parties are divided. you have got republicans, there is a populist strain, and gerry and mayor giuliani are talking about this earlier. there is a populist strain in the more conservative strain. the democrats have more traditional democratic politicians and bernie sanders politicians. how do you bring that mess together to make a consensus in washington? it seems very hard to me to be able to move from this campaign, as divisive as it has been in
both parties, to a place where you can create policies that bring people together. >> first, i would note that we might want to look at that as a source of strength, not weakness. meaning, you just mentioned the two major political parties and you talked about the divisions, or the differences within them, but it is probably good for the country, and anybody who called himself or herself a democrat or republican, or an independent leaning to the other party, it is a source of strength and comfort for them that their party has different strains within it. so, you mention the democratic party. you said traditional democratic party and bernie sanders voters. well, the bernie sanders voters ended up being an incredibly potent force. this is not nothing. he won 22 states against a woman who we have been told for eight years at least now, maybe 10 or 12, is a shoe in fror the presidency and has now lost it twice. first in the primary to president obama and now of course, to president elect trump
in the general. bernie sanders got millions and millions of votes. i'm not sure, i am pretty sure his brand of -- you can call it socialism or democratic populism, but his message was never fully appreciated, respected and assimilated into , the larger hillary clinton message and campaign, which i think is a mistake. i was happy to see it as donald trump's can make that campaign manager, but it was a mistake. i am also not sure this is the democratic party anymore that i grew up in, or the second amendment is respected, where there are pro-life democrats, where they are democrats who would dare say, i think we can use a flat tax like the one jfk had, in essence. i don't see them. they are not there. as i sit before you, when senator ayotte lost her election, the republican party had six female united states
senators, but three were pro-life and three were pro-choice. you probably have never heard that before. the democratic party has many more female senators, but they all have one view on a pretty divisive issue in our country. the republican party to me, seems like the one it was going through, i would call welcome growing pains, it is the one expanding its constituencies and its ideological reach and we just found out, expanding the electoral map by going back into these so-called blue states that have not gone republican in decades. literally, about 1/3 of the population has been born since wisconsin went red, neither of the bush's won wisconsin. so, that is the sign of a growing party. i am one who is optimistic about having this large republican party where people feel welcome. it really depends. and we try to do this at the
trump campaign. i think in politics and media, we look too often of people just for these demographics, your gender, race, ethnicity. you have to look at them situationally as well. if you have been negatively affected by the afford a care act or obamacare, that is how you are voting this year and it is almost irrespective of your gender, or your ethnicity or your socioeconomic status. situationally, it's him but he close to you lost the job, that is the prism through which you look through the election and it is a part from your gender or ethnicity. >> there are a lot of things to do in a transition, obviously. i wonder if one of the things that president-elect trump feels somehow to do is to reach out to the country in a more formal way to address some
of these divisions and try to bring people together. have you talked about that? is there something planned to make that happen in the next two months before the inauguration? that is the point at which this traditionally occurs. >> it has been discussed and i think you see early signs of it, ensconced ine is thre trump tower right now. andave seen heads of state elected officials from either side of the aisle. he and mrs. trump coming here to washington less than 36 hours after being elected president of the united states and coming here to meet with president obama and first lady michelle obama and vice president biden and mitch mcconnell and speaker ryan, especially his meeting with president obama and first lady obama i think that was so incredibly important to show the country that the sitting president and the president elect, who had really battled it
out pretty viciously there for a while -- up until the last moment. >> a long while. >> somehow, they were able to lay down the muskets and love their country so much that they wanted to make sure there was a peaceful transition of power. i think that is the earliest and best and brightest sign you have about the president-elect donald trump wanting to address the entire country as one. the second thing is, frankly his interview with the "wall street journal" over the weekend. the readout i got from that and of course, what was published. i think his interview on "60 minutes" where he immediately denounced those who say they support him who are peddling hate and divisiveness and told them "cut it out" and he means it. i think you will see that and you will hear a lot of personal
flourish in his inaugural address that touches on that. there was a lot of hurt and pain when he won for many people not expecting it, but if you go back and read what he said in his words of that night. he was already moving in that direction. having said that, the man is not going to become a walking hallmark card, nor should he. [laughter] he is a tough guy and he is a tough leader and america decided it wanted a tough leader. it wants someone who speaks specifically about what he is going to do and does not back down and is pushing back against this culture of political correctness and is going to put america first, meaning he is going to renegotiate that trade -- bad trade deals he is going , to bring jobs back from mexico and china, all the things he talked about. at that night in his speech, he said he does i remember it, he said and to the world community
-- "and to the world community, i will always put america first, but i will work with you and be fair." >> i wrote a column at one point that said those people who wanted an independent presidential candidate for years now have one and his name is donald trump because he really did run as an independent. i guess the good news, if you are in the position of being the president-elect in his team, which you are, is you are not beholden to anybody, but you have a less solid core of support in this town than his normal. i guess the question becomes, does he work with republicans in congress, does he accept the republican party policy agenda that paul ryan spent a lot of time constructing in the house or do you start over at this point? this will be his presidency and the vision and he has been clear about his 100 day plan, anybody can pull it up here, you
can see what he is talking about and it is very specific. before that he talked about, through the help with great economic brilliant minds talked and tax reform plan creating 25 million jobs over the next 10 years, , independentergy energy sources, shale and: natural gas, he also talked about infrastructure investment, significantly educational reform, defeating radical islamic terrorism, these were not bumper stickers, they are wouldthat the policy enjoy. you can expect that to define -- he is already off to a good start of working with speaker ryan. we had a great meeting last week as did vice president elect and theyh speaker ryan
go way back. i believe he will have to find a way to knit together what was already being worked on and can really never be signed into law because they had a democratic president is president obama and what mr. trump has put forward his plan. the excuse of divided government is over and i think it is causation, not coincidence that americans gave a republican president a republican house and a republican senate and a majority of republican governors , 69 of the 99 state legislative chambers. i've -- i read somewhere that the democrats now control 26% of the legislative chambers. if they lose one or two more, they are lower than the threshold that you need to defeat a constitutional amendment. these are not squeakers. these are not close. it might be a divided country, but that was not a divided election in those terms. he has been very, very specific in what he plans to do. if people did not hear it, they did not want to because it is
there. >> so, if you are looking up the republican party you just described, there is the question of whether it is now a populist party or still a conservative party and i think for the ceo's in this room, it generates a bit feelings. there is probably some concern anti-freebig is bad, trade agreement, xm bank. those might cause heartburn. what would you say to the people in this room as they try to figure out what does this new version -- the trump version of the republican party stand for on issues that concern them? >> donald trump is very clear about his views. he would like to withdraw our participation in the ttp. to create 25 million jobs over 10 years is centered, in part in debt reduction.
,centered in energy and infrastructure, but also centered in the economic growth over 3%, not the growth we have now. let's try. just anybody think the growth rates we have are the best we can do? he doesn't. vice president elect pence doesn't. the whole plan is there. the other thing is he was not say all trade deals are bad. he believes nafta was a bad deal for the american worker. critical mass a of private union household and non-college-educated households in places like wisconsin and michigan, pennsylvania and ohio and all the people i grew up with, they agreed. it was a remarkable route among that group. in large part, because he said, i am going to renegotiate trade -- bad trade deals.
he is not saying he will not have trade deals, but is pointing out that some of them have not worked for the people they intended to benefit. in his 100 day plan he wants china to be declared a currency manipulator. having said that, he spoke with the leader of china today. >> how did that go? >> it was fine. i think there is a readout that has been made public. that is all i will say about that. event, he has made it that washington has wanted for 30 years at least. i have been in polling for 28. they wanted an outsider, toebody who owes nothing nobody in washington to come the rot fromn out the inside out. it is important that they got that chance. it was an open question whether
72% of americans that tell the pollsters i want the country in a new direction. some of them questioned whether they were actually going to vote for somebody who has never done this before. >> public opinion is your business. did the donald trump movement and bernie sanders movement proceed from the same headwater ?proceed from the same war? -- same headwater? >> yes, in many ways, it did. along with the barack obama movement in 2008, which hillary never saw coming. that is a problem and i am not picking on the loser here. i am saying, if you misread america, you really cannot govern america. the idea that they did not see senator obama coming in 2008. a woman at the dinner party remarked to a big clinton advisor, you know, what about the senator barack obama running? i really enjoyed him during the 2004 convention, i thought he was terrific.
and they just said, flash in a pan. two term presidential flash in a pan. they never saw barack obama coming and i think they never saw bernie sanders coming. i believe hillary clinton would have been a much stronger democratic nominee had they not cleared the field for her because if there had been four or five she would have risen. they never saw her come back coming. >> would you have been in worse shape if you had had to run against joe biden, the guy from scranton? >> maybe, but he did not run. it is like the lottery. you can't win if you don't play. vice president biden -- i grew up in the delaware valley where he is legendary. maybe, maybe not. -- a rebukeld trump to everybody in a position of
power and represents some type of lobbyists, consultant, politician, axis. and vice president biden would have been -- he could have done owned thet obama-biden residency. -- presidency. that would've been difficult because the majority of americans have major questions and reservations about the affordable care act. it has not worked for a lot of folks. realize premiums would be increased or their quality or choices would be diminished or that they had been lied to two dozen times. >> i think the president's job approval rating is that 54% now. >> i think they were comparing him to the nominee.
i would expect that for him. i think he is popular, but that popularity is not transferable to hillary clinton. >> one last question and then i will turn to the audience. one of the brilliant economic thinkers -- i will ask him to kick it off. let me ask you one final thing. when you have a campaign pledging to drain the swamp and you arrive at the swamp, how can you work with the swamp? i do not mean you, of course. >> that's all right, you can. for years i have had this infection, my way of describing the consultancy. i feel like candidates often lose and consultants often win. when i say consultants it is the lobbyists and opinion elites and they make this excuse of bob dole just seemed too old and stiff andy seemed too
john mccain, people thought he could not do it. the only thing they had in common was you and please do not come back a third time. they got purged from the system early and i think the public, the voters particularly in the primary electorate were rebalancing against them and not us. there's a lot more of us than them and i cannot tell you how much credibility and legitimacy donald j trump has to come and say he will drain the swamp because he is not part of the swamp and nobody got rich off of his campaign. nobody got rich off his campaign, which i think is fitting for who he is. out saying hecles spent less than half what hillary clinton spent. if you surround yourself with a small, core team you have the credibility to say, i am going
to come here now and not need all these extra people to tell us what is going on. his dream of swamp land is online. --talks about lobbying bands lobbying bans. seeingfor years has been how things are doing, getting on an airplane as a focus group moderator. the american people are way ahead of the political class in abuseng the waste and the and the nonresponsiveness, the byzantine, the last case of the government can be turned around. i think you can drain the swamp
and still have an effective government that works. steveant to start with moore who is one of the two co-authors of the obama tax cut plan. taxefinitely not the obama cut plan. that is an oxymoron. the author of the trump tax cut plan. >> the other guy. >> the president-elect. >> the president-elect. if you wouldn't mind standing up in describing in general terms what has been done and how it will work in -- and where it goes from here. steve: thank you. i was in florida this weekend and i saw a bumper sticker that one it explains why you said "vote for donald trump, nobody has to know."
that explains everything. >> i talked about the undercover trump voter four years ago -- four months ago and was criticized, but we are good. we are here. >> i worked on the tax plan and a quick story that emphasizes the point you made, mayor. when we met with donald trump four or five months ago we met in trump tower and he asked cnbc and he of asked us to be economic advisers to work with him on the tax plan and we look at each other and said donald, we cannot work for you. we believe in free trade. this the exact point you were making, mayor. he said, ok, we can agree to disagree on that. , you the tax plan summarized it very well, mayor,
the heart of the plan is a business tax cut and i think, llyanne, we can get this done in the first 50 days. i think we can get a lot of democrats to vote with a business tax plan that has infrastructure spending. basically, we want to take the highest business tax rate in the world. not just for corporations, but for smaller businesses. i have to tell you all, when we first met with donald trump on this, he said "when you do this tax plan, i do not just wanted to be for the corporations. for thei wanted to be 26 and half million small businesses in this country." that 15% tax cut rate is not just for boeing and microsoft and apple but every single small , business innovator will get that tax-cut.
i believe we can do this and you are exactly right, another big part of this is the 10% repatriation. money stored over seed -- werseas, about $2 trillion, believe we can bring a lot of that back in and raise about $100 billion. i think we could use that money for an infrastructure bill and put in a big package and we have a jobs bill, a corporate business tax cut with infrastructure spending back to be one of the biggest jobs ills and history and i would love to see it with 15-20 democrats in the senate. you mentioned ronald reagan, when you remember, he passed his tax cut and the first bill he many called the bull weavil democrats. when ronald reagan proposed to
cut the highest income tax rate to 28%, that bill passed the united states senate 97-3. so, i hope we can do it in a bipartisan way, kellyanne. congratulations to the two of you. you did such amazing work. the only other quick thing i would say, that energy component is so critical. we can be the leading -- we can be the energy superpower of the next century. we have more oil and gas and coal and we should use it. and i think this is a big distinction where the democrats and republicans were. democrats' philosophy has been keep it in the ground. and i hope that donald trump will put those coal miners back in their jobs because that's what they want. ok. i'll stop there. [applause] host: questions? one right there. audience member: thank you.
i'm an australian senator from the liberal party. i don't want to alarm you because the liberals are the conservatives. but having been an observer of this election for the last two months as i have been based in new york city. i have been acutely of the partisanship of the media like the broadcast and print media with one notable exception is the "wall street journal" and all credit to them, they have presented both campaign ideas and ideologies. how do you see the media as playing a role in your campaign strategy? in your assessment, did the
pile-on in favor of your candidate work for you or against you? anne: thank you for asking that complicated question. i am very pro-first amendment. like the idea that we restored all of the press credentials. media, how they got it so manner of the wrong methodology. the inability to listen to americans. if you look at the bylines, when they are flying the story, they will say muscatine, iowa, columbus, ohio. i say who did you talk to, because all around this country and especially at trump rallies, 20,000 strong, there were people that told you why they were there.
what did you learn about trump rallies? there were some idiot with some tee-shirt or someone saying a pa pathetic tomething a camera that does not reflect his campaign or vision for america. we learned why they were there. i am telling you, people should have listened instead of listening to each other on a tv set. they should have listened to americans. they would have learned a great deal. that's number one, number two, right. your instinchinge that the complete pile-on helped us in the end. that is different than media bias. that's sort -- that's just telling america what's important to them. and i have said publicly on tv many times. somebody would ask me a question for the 18th time and i would politely say, all right, let's try this again. i looked at your polling, cnn and "wall street journal" and i
don't see what you are asking me what america has told your pole lsters that was important to them. almost a rush to say this is what's important and going to cover it on the next five days. if you are saying the same thing for five days, we should take down the breaking news, just by definition. host: that benefited your candidate enormously. he was the running loop for three, four, five months. ms. conway: the idea was give him a lot of press coverage and hopefully destroys himself. host: maybe. conway: and then it was too
late. look, i think the "new york times" have put it best but august through september, there was a front-page piece and said this man forces me to suspend objective journalistic standards. i have to stop the mad man. i can't stop the journalists and -- i cannot be a journalist. and many people were following the suit. it is unfortunate because the media is filled with smart people who spend a lot of time on the road following the campaign living out of suitcases. it created sympathy for donald trump in the end because you had a couple of surprises on both campaigns, but i did not understand why the clinton with thestucco strategy they did where they made the campaign, in the end, what donald trump said about one or two different people.
they ran paid ads about it. in america, we move on like that. seriously? this is the 500th time in my living room. it was not important to them. if it was, they had already assimilated it into their voting score, if you will. i also didn't understand why in the end, but think about it in the shower and get back to me and tell me who ran the most aspirational uplifting campaign towards the end. our closing messages were uplifting and positive. rudy and i were there. a week ago tonight we were in manchester, new hampshire then we went backwards to grand rapids, michigan and when i was eating cheetos and oreos at 2:30 in the morning and said, this
man better when tomorrow. what was his closing message about the freedom and opportunity and job creation and hillary clinton's message was trump takes the wings off of butterflies. nobody wanted to hear that anymore. this country talks about what you are going to do for them. and there are people out there who are suffering and there are people out there who are not suffering, but think they cannot get a fair shake. wantedyou cut it, people a substantive aspirational uplifting message at the end. and so, yes, i think there's a lot of second guessing perhaps in the media in some places but i would say as a close adviser to president-elect trump that we certainly welcome a different approach while he's president and certainly welcome people to keep an open mind. but i already saw as yesterday when we announced our two senior staffers.
what were the stories? it was negative again, negative again. back to the same wells of negativity. in fairness to the american people, the coverage at least try to uncover some facts and not have conclusions in search of evidence. find the evidence and make the conclusion. host: we have time for one last question. ms. conway: i would add to that, the polling also because the media does it own polling, my polls will never see the light of day. they are seen for private clients. i have been doing it for decades . they are not public because you did not hire me to shout from rooftops, i am the secret keeper . i am telling someone in a crisis, or trying to sell a product, with the data says. not the world.
98% of the newsroom feels a certain way, your whole will reflect that. what do you tell america you l will reflect pol that invariably because of the questions you ask and what you share. horse mr. trump, these races and polls are one thing, but they are not asking about temperment but experience and qualification. polls in 2008 at avoided questions about experience because senator obama was running. now it was the gold standard, temperament and experience as qualifications. there is things like that in the news if you want to put that in your poll as opposed to having a businessman allowing nobody anything, i did not see those questions. there is a selectivity that way as well. host: one last question back there. audience member: much has been made about the data machine and
what drove this campaign and the influence of social media. as you think about the results and how you guys got there, how much does it play into modern marketing and the ultimate result? ms. conway: completely. despite the public criticism that we had no campaign, no digital, no ground game, we had excellent all of the above. and it was republican national committee in that the r.n.c. had been developing over the last 3.5 years or so, really sound models, great ground games, investments, field operations, and they came bearing gifts for the republican presidential nominee who happened to be donald trump. we were able to merge the two. our use of digital went from running ads to raising money and touching the voter. you have to find ways to touch the voter on where they live and
how they like to be marketted -- marketed to. we modeled off of the obama 2008 campaign where he mastered the ability to use social media and digital technology to reach voters. and it worked. obviously, the clinton campaign had lots of data and digital operations, but i think that candidates matter. i think the candidates matter. folks i talked to often publicly about the -- hillary clinton had a 47%. different than romney's 47%. her 47% problem was she could never get beyond it in any of the states that president obama had carried twice as well as over 50% of the vote. knowing that, we did a combination of digital media and traditional ad buys and the main
use of our operation looks at how we looked at the electorate. we did not presume the electorate was who we wanted it to be or the electorate from 2012 or 2008. we saw the messages shaping up more like 2010 and 2014, but we knew this would he a presidential year. we modeled the electorate knowing that secretary clinton was going to have a more difficult time keeping the obama coalition then president obama would. we also knew that trump was a different kind of messenger than romney or mccain. not better or worse, but just different. we put that elasticity into our digital modeling, which is the way corporate america uses it. i'll end on this.
beenof my business has nonpolitical. i like people who pay their know more i like to than the electorate is thinking. everyone eats or sleeps, but not everyone likes politics. this is important when it comes to data and electioneering. hired me andhpaste said we want more people to use crest next year, i would say i could do that. they do not want me to tell them 1,000,002 at a 46 892 million people want to use crest. they just want to know the margins. off to do what i did for corporate america in the past. colgate,sers of ultrabright, and aqua fresh, why they use those and not crest.
i would find the people that used to use crest, find the dorent crest users, and quantitative research purity can't do that with politics for simple reason. everybody uses toothpace but not everybody uses politics. the way you find consumers is not going in and grabbing the other side, the clinton voters, the obama voters, the bernie sanders voters, but you find those who didn't think they needed politics at all. it's not a product or service they fancy that they are going to seek or pay for. in that regard, that is a place where the donald trump phenomenon allowed us to find new customers. i have not been this excited since ronald reagan. i have not loaded in years. i am a registered democrat. we saw that and respected that. it wasn't that they were all
shy, they didn't look on paper, because they had never voted or voted democraticically. host: kellyanne, thanks for joining us. [applause] follow the transition of government on c-span as donald trump he comes the 45th president of the united states and republicans maintain control of the u.s. house and senate. we take you to key events without interruption. orch on c-span, c-span.org, listen on our free c-span radio app. the presidential transition process continues for donald trump. he is meeting with one of his biggest critics during the campaign, former massachusetts governor and 2012 presiden