tv The Place for Politics 2016 MSNBC April 16, 2016 8:00am-9:01am PDT
it works differently. when added to another alzheimer's treatment, it may improve overall function and cognition. and may slow the worsening of symptoms for a while. vo: namenda xr doesn't change how the disease progresses. it shouldn't be taken by anyone allergic to memantine, or who's had a bad reaction to namenda xr or its ingredients. before starting treatment, tell their doctor if they have, or ever had, a seizure disorder, difficulty passing urine, liver, kidney or bladder problems, and about medications they're taking. certain medications, changes in diet, or medical conditions may affect the amount of namenda xr in the body and may increase side effects. the most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, and dizziness. all my life, she's been there for me. now i am giving back. ask their doctor about once-daily namenda xr and learn about a free trial offer at namendaxr.com.
good morning, everyone. i'm joy reid here at msnbc, world headquarters in new york. we are just three days away from a make or break primary. a primary where donald trump's own children won't be able to vote for their front runner dad. well, i'm an independent and i've always voted based on the candidate as opposed to based on a party. and it was actually a very interesting experience. we're not a family of politicians where we haven't been in politics very long. new york has one of the most onerous rules in terms of registration. and it required us to register a long time ago. almost close to a year ago. and we didn't do that. >>y ivanka and eric trump are not alone and those, quote, onerous rules impact far more than your average rich kid procrastinator. new york's notoriously restrictive voting laws are keeping many first time voters, party-switchers and independents from picking their candidate of choice. new york is the first in a
series of upcoming closed primaries which only allow registered democrats and republicans to vote for each party's presidential nominally. independents and members of third parties who want to vote as democrats and republicans had to change their party registration by october. and the deadline for new voters in new york to register was march 25th. also in the empire state, there is no same-day registration and no early voting. the registration rules may hurt bernie sanders the most. independent first time voters are a key voting block for the vermont senator. but trump could be hurt too with reagan democrats who also can't vote for him. and while voter restrictions in republican-controlled states like arizona and wisconsin have sparked national outrage in recent months for keeping voters away from the polls, turns out that right here too in the empire state in deep blue new york, many voters will also be turned away come tuesday. and joining me now, tara dowdel, josh barrow of business insider. come to you first, dale.
new york, a blue, blue, blue state and which you think of as a liberal state actually is quite restrictive when it comes to voting. is that unfair, and how many people could theoretically be disenfranchised? >> well, a large number of people might not be able participate in the primaries. we know that close to 30% of voters in new york are independents, so they're not registered with either of the two major parties, and therefore won't be able to participate on tuesday. this is a complicated issue. because the parties and their members do have certain rights to structure their internal processes free from government interference, within certain limits. as a general matter, though, i think most people would agree that rules that make it easier for people to participate rather than harder, what we need in this country, given what are not the best turnout rates in the western world. >> indeed. by far. and at the same time, to dale's -- one of his points. these are parties. parties are a thing, right? they're actually a private entity.
they have a right to say that our members should choose our nominee, not outsiders. why would that not be true? >> i want to make a point first. i think this is extremely ironic, given the fact that republicans across this country are putting in place even stricter voting requirements and then someone like donald trump is not speaking out against it. he's speaking out when it reflects his own self interests. but we have the parties working very hard to disenfranchise voters across this country with even stricter voting regulations. so i just wanted to point that out. >> while you're point -- >> should be making it easier -- >> while our pointing to that irony, when you say irony, i say ben carson. and so i'm going to play ben carson speaking to what he says is the unfairness of the system in a rather interesting way. take a listen. >> sean spicer, communications director for the rnc, wrote in this memo, the rules surrounding the delegate selection have been clearly let out in every state and territory, and while each state is different, each process is easy to understand for those
willing to learn it. take note, donald trump is the ps, unspoken. >> yeah, well, you know, during the jim crow era, those were the rules too. they were written, everybody knew about them. didn't make them right. i'm not saying this is the same, but, you know, i think you get the point. >> the hyperbole of ben carson's point, josh. he was talking about delegate selection, but could not the same complaint be made about this idea of picking and choosing voters, rather than voters picking and choosing the candidates in terms of closing primaries? >> if you strip away the hyperbole, ben carson is right there. jim crow is a bad example to use, because of the gravity being so much greater than making you register to vote too early. his broader point that just because a rule is explicitly laid out, doesn't mean the rule is fair or acceptable. and i think he was talking about colorado where republicans did not have a primary or a caucus. nobody in colorado got to vote
explicitly for who they wanted their republican nominee for president. ultimately, a state convention. a process designed to empower the sorts of people hugely active in the party and will spend their days getting involved in that process. incidentally, not put in place to stop donald trump. trump likes to say it was about him. it was to stop people like jeb bush and marco rubio, conservative activists around ted cruz wanted those rules. the broader point is correct. this is a system designed to be anti democratic and i think it's perfectly valid to object to that. even if you were told last august those would be the rules. >> and i think doesn't that apply also to individuals? it's easy to laugh at the trump kids and say, ha, they should have known dad was running for president. i actually ran into two kinds of voters that this could impact as well who are not spoiled rich kids. so you had -- i ran into reagan democrats, democrats in staten island who like trump and were surprised to learn they would not be given a ballot with donald trump's name on it and passionate bernie sanders
supporters who missed the deadline. whose responsibility is it, the voters, as reince priebus is saying it's your own fault or is it in an unfair way against them? >> i think we need to look at registration cutoff deadlines as a general matter, for general elections. back in the old days it made sense when registrations were submitted on paper. they went to some big, you know, large filing cabinet somewhere. you needed to do that well in advance of an election to make sure you knew who people were when they registered to vote today. with modern technology, there is no reason why people shouldn't be able to register to vote on the same day. >> isn't the reason because parties really do want to restrict the number of people who vote. >> yeah, and i think they especially want to do that in primaries. you see on both sides a desire to control who the party is, and who gets to make these decisions. and i think very few people approach this from a truly principled perspective. you see a lot of bernie sanders supporters, people who are the progressive left upset about voter i.d. laws, celebrating caucus states even though
caucuses are designed to make it difficult to turn out to vote. in a lot of local elections, scheduled to be on the regular days in the spring. and public employee unions like that because they can turn out people who support their positions. republicans complain in that situation that it's too hard to vote. so i think mostly people approach this from a perspective of which voting rules will produce the outcome. >> and for the parties, there is no literally incentive for the democratic party, for instance, to change its processes in a way that would allow another independent to come and be the nominee rather than democrat and the same is true for republicans, right? >> right. you're absolutely right. it's a sad scenario. because they really are the parties -- particularly they local level. we're talking about the residential election. it could be even worse. the parties want to be able to control who gets to run. and the problem with that is, that it limits the amount of voices. it limits the amount of opportunities for people to come, who are members of that party, who may not have, you know -- pay their dues, which is a big thing with both parties to be able to participate in a
meaningful way. and this deck is literally stacked against you if you're not someone who is sort of in lockstep with the party. >> yeah. and what would be the most meaningful change nationally that if we could -- if you could pick one thing, dale, you want to see changed that would make voting access better, what would it be? >> absolutely no reason we can't have same-day registration in all 50 states with the technology we have today. the states that have same-day participation have participation rates, ten percentage points higher. it makes a really big difference and there's absolutely no reason we can't do that today. >> we're going to send that one up to -- well, i was going to say up to the food chain to the federal people, but they don't actually take votes in congress. so i guess that's not going to happen. tara, josh, will be back later in the program. thank you very much for being here. when we come back, the latest on the controversy surrounding the new hbo film "confirmation" about anita hill's testimony against justice clarence thomas. you won't want to miss that. 73% of americans try...
...to cook healthy meals. yet up to 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more... ...add one a day men's 50+. complete with key nutrients we may need. plus it helps support healthy blood pressure with vitamin d and magnesium. it's how i try to live... how i stay active. so i need nutrition... that won't weigh me down. for the nutrition you want without the calories you don't... try boost® 100 calories. each delicious snack size drink gives you... 25 vitamins and minerals and 10 grams of protein.
and it's available in two new flavors, vanilla caramel and double chocolate fudge. i'm not about to swim in the slow lane. stay strong. stay active with boost®. ♪ ♪ (laughing) there's nothing like making their day. except making sure their tomorrow is taken care of too. financial guidance while you're mastering life. from chase. so you can.
you pressed me to justify my reasons for saying no to him. these incidents took place in his office or mine. my working relationship became even more strained when judge thomas began to use work situations to discuss sex. i felt that i had to tell the truth. i could not keep silent. >> she called herself the reluctant witness. nearly 25 years ago. anita hill, who appeared before the senate judiciary committee and laid out allegations of sexual harassment against then supreme court nominee, clarence thomas. the hearings opened up a brand-new chapter in race and gender politics in this country, catapulting the issue of workplace sexual harassment the into the headlines and beyond. the controversy is being retold in the hbo film "confirmation"
which premiers tonight. thomas described the hearings as a high-tech lynching and denied the allegations. his nomination ultimately was approved by a narrow margin and continues to hold a seat today. joining me is those who ushered help clarence thomas through the supreme court nomination 25 years ago. thank you both for being here. mark, i want to start with you. you've read a script of the film. and your thoughts are? >> my thoughts are that the script is an agenda-driven script to take out all of the problematic parts of anita hill's testimony to rewrite history to make her more believable. this is a he said/she said and at the end of the day when people watch the hearings, unfiltered. they judge by a 2-1 margin that thomas was telling the truth. they got to watch anita hill's story. they got to look at the witnesses supporting her. anita hill's witnesses were
extremely partly clou extremely weak. and that's what this movie is all about. >> let me quickly first -- i want to -- this is hbo's statement. they said we're proud of our film "confirmation." we took enormous time in researching the production. many of those in the film and from all assets were part of the performance. we look forward no those watching the film and their conclusions. >> lonnie, your response to what mark said. >> i knew both clarence thomas -- he and i had gone to law school together. i have met anita hill. i didn't know her at the time. but she was pretty -- she was very much supported by other witnesses and by the people who were helping her, especially charles ogletree, who is a law professor. and also -- i was in university
of pennsylvania law school at the time. and he and i were communicating over the phone rather than in person. >> yeah. and wasn't part of the support that clarence thomas got at the time partly because he was replacing thurgood marshall on the court. and i want us to take a look at the poll at the time. and this will shock some people who don't remember it. african-americans 70% in favor of clarence thomas. white americans half and half. part of this was a desire to see an african-american on the court. i remember having epic fights with even over this. black people wanted him on the court. the reality is, at the time, we were in a different times in terms of gender and women, whether or not they are believed when they make these allegations. you can't just say she was not credible. there was more to it. >> i don't believe she was credible. look, there were 12 women who testified for clarence thomas. former co-workers, right? none of them supported anita hill. five or six specifically said they didn't believe her allegations. so not a single co-worker supported anita hill. clarence thomas had been through
four fbi background checks. there had never been a hint of this kind of conduct. and, in fact, nobody to this day under oath has said anything remotely support to what anita hill has said. >> there are actually witnesses who didn't tough. one come woman came forward and joe biden and others prevented her from testifying. and isn't it the case -- part of the issue is women fearing they won't be believed. because a co-worker doesn't believe you that doesn't mean you are not telling the truth. >> and especially when we're talking about 1990 -- the 1990s rather than the 2010s. people have become much more aware of the way in which some women have been treated for a long period of time. >> and you -- you know anita hill. you are friends with her, had dinner with her not long ago. what are her thoughts, looking back, and the fact there is now an hbo movie about it? >> well, it's not so much what she thinks about it. i think a lot of women are very proud of her. and that she -- for her, the
burden is not on what she thinks, but the fact that there's an enormous group of people that support her and agree with her. >> and, in fact, you had after that, carol mosely braun elected to the united states senate. a lot of women galvanized by the way they felt anita hill was mistreated, dragged through the mud in order to elevate this man to the supreme court. >> i don't think she was dragged through the mud. she was asked tough questions. here's the thing, joy. 1992, we elect bill clinton to the white house. in 1998, anita hill goes on tv and writes op-eds defending bill clinton against sexual assault, sexual harassment allegations by kathleen willie, monica lewinsky, who the president settled with. i find it hollow, actually, we made this great stride and a year later we have a guy in office who has an affair with an intern, and destroys her reputation. >> i think i have to be honest with you. i think a consensual affair, no matter how young monica lewinsky
was, is problematic. we're talking about unwanted sexual harassment charges. and let me also talk about what this meant for clarence thomas. >> can i go back to the second witness? the second witness, angela wright, the biggest lie in this movie, she was vented from testifying. the back story is she was fired several times and at the state department, the job before she went to eeoc, to work for clarence thomas, where she was fired, she was going to get let go. she made baseless racism allegations against her supervisor. >> she is not here to answer for herself so we're not schlagging her on the air that she can't be here -- >> hbo leaves out the back story. >> from your point of view. she's not here to defend herself. i don't think it's fair to make allegations. when she isn't here. isn't this also the issue, that women come forward, and this is what happens, essentially. >> well, i can't say that it happens all of the time. but in her case, i did recommend to her lawyer that she take a -- to take one of those -- >> a lie detector. >> a lie detector.
and she passed through it. what she was saying was not a lie. >> yeah. and do you think in the end, looking back now -- we've had sort of a lot of time to process these kinds of allegations the way they played out, whether it's for clarence thomas or bill cosby, kobe bryant. in the end, does it wind up hurting women who make the allegations more than it hurts the men who are accused? >> well, i don't think it's a yes/no kind of situation. i think that there's a cultural shift that needs to happen, not an individual shift. you know, not where you point out one person and say, oh, we're no longer going to hire you. but that we're creating a re -- a new understanding of what the responsibilities are of women and men when they are friends or when they are working together. and that there needs to be mutual respect. >> yeah. >> and that i think a lot of what's happening or was happening was not -- was the opposite of mutual respect. >> and for clarence thomas.
i mean, the outcome, it did damage his reputation in quite a significant way. if you look now at the public policy poll about your least favorite -- supreme court justice, clarence thomas, right at the top of the list. so it did end up doing lasting damage to his reputation. >> let's go back when you listen to the women, in terms of respect and, you know -- and office environment that was a mutual respect, every single woman who testified -- there's not a single woman outside of anita hill who made those types of allegations against clarence thomas under oath. >> but that doesn't prima faira maybe it's not true. i understand you were his advocate and i appreciate you coming today. thank you so much. and wonderful to have you both. up next, our own steve car dakky will tell us what hillary clinton's path to the white house looks like without the super delegates. this is msnbc, the place for politics. the nissan rogue
every auto insurance policy has a number. but not every insurance company understands the life behind it. those who have served our nation. have earned the very best service in return. ♪ usaa. we know what it means to serve. get an auto insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life. if you misplace your you can use freeze it to prevent new purchases on your account in seconds. and once you find it, you can switch it right on again. you're back! freeze it from discover. get it at discover.com. the call just came in. she's about to arrive. and with her, a flood of potential patients.
a deluge of digital records. x-rays, mris. all on account...of penelope. but with the help of at&t, and a network that scales up and down on-demand, this hospital can be ready. giving them the agility to be flexible & reliable. because no one knows & like at&t. you don't think that hillary clinton will have the northbound
number of pledge delegates going into the convention? >> i think she'll be just short and we'll hopeful be just short and we'll have a discussion. i don't think anybody is going to get the amount of pledged delegates they need when we walk into the convention. and if that happens, then i would expect that people would be looking and saying who is the stronger candidate. >> that was jane sanders, wife of senator bernie sanders on "morning joe" thursday, explaining how delegate math may provide her husband a path to the nomination. here now with hillary clinton's potential path to victory is msnbc political reporter, steve kornacki. >> joy, so the clinton path to victory, big picture. what it basically involves, it involves taking away the big argument the sanders campaign wants to be able to make at the end of this primary season. the sanders campaign wants to be able to say we had primaries and caucuses all around the country, and i, bernie sanders, got the most delegates in those
primaries. and the sanders campaign thinks if they're able to make that argument, then the super delegates you hear about, a lot say they're for hillary clinton, they would have to change their minds, respond to what they saw in the results. so from that standpoint, the pledged delegate standpoint, hillary clinton now is about 210 ahead of bernie sanders. so hillary clinton wants to take away that potential sanders talking point. she's got to keep that lead the rest of the way. the good news, look where we start. we start in new york on tuesday. bernie sanders has made this thing a fight in new york. and yet, every single poll over last two weeks has had hillary clinton winning by double digits in new york. our new nbc poll, in fact, has her ahead by 17 points. that could tighten, bernie sanders could pull an upset. we saw something like that in michigan. if the result is anything like that in new york, a double digit hillary clinton win, hillary clinton is going to gain delegates. she is going to add to that 210. she could add 20, 30, more than that. and that's going to do two
things for bernie sanders. one, it's going to make that number grow, so it's tougher for him to catch up to her. two, it's going to take one of the biggest single pockets of delegates left on the board. 247. you only see one state out there left. california is bigger. it's going to take that off the board. so there's fewer areas for him to make up ground, and he would have more ground to make up. and the challenge for sanders, when you look ahead to next week, pennsylvania votes. look at that giant chunk of delegates there. sanders has been competitive in the polls there. but he's been losing. new jersey, the polls, he's been losing there. maryland, almost 100 delegates. 95 delegates there. this state democrat graphically doesn't look like a good fit for bernie sanders. so basically what you're seeing here, hillary clinton has an opportunity in new york, in the mid atlantic states. she has an opportunity to run that number. that 210 number a lot higher potentially. and then you start looking where sanders could do better. you go out to states that look, wyoming why -- wyoming already
voted. north dakota, montana. you look at these sorts of states. he could win these, but look at the ground he has to make up delegate wise. so for bernie sanders to win that pledge delegate argument, he really does need to win new york. he needs to win pennsylvania, needs to win new jersey. maybe he could lose maryland. got to keep it close in maryland. otherwise, that 210 or somewhere around there looking pretty solid for hillary clinton. >> all right. thank you to msnbc's steve kornacki. and up next, the candidates were hot fire about social security in the debate. check it out. >> if that is the case, welcome on board. i'm glad you're here. thank you errol lewis. >> we are going -- we are goi going -- >> secretary -- >> as he said -- i have said the same thing for years. i didn't say anything different tonight. we are going to extend the social security trust fund.
i. >> i will show you why they were fired up, next. ur heating and cooling systems so reliable. if there's a breaking point, we'll find it. it's hard to stop a trane. really hard. trane. the most reliable for a reason. don't let dust and allergies get and life's beautiful moments. with flonase allergy relief, they wont. most allergy pills only control one inflammatory substance. flonase controls six. and six is greater than one.
flonase changes everything. do you have the courage to stay up all night? because this is our time! the greatest tv week of our lives! ladies and gentlemen, in the business of binge-watching, sleep is for the week! so i want you ready to order takeout, every single night! now are you with me? to awesomeness! to watchathon!! big is back. xfinity watchathon week starts april 18.
6.2%. that's the percentage of your income uncle sam takes out of your paycheck to sunday social security. but here's the catch. americans only pay 6.2% on the first $118,000 of income. and that tax cap holds no matter how much income you earn. to put it another way. if you earn $118,500 a year or less, like 94% of american workers do, you pay 6.2% on every paycheck. all 12 months of the year. but if you're like bob here -- hi, bob! and you earn, say, $300,000 a year. then you've already taken home $118,000,500 a year by the end of may. and you still got seven more months of paychecks to go. but for the rest of the year,
there's no 6.2% coming out of your pay. for our hypothetical friend bob here, that means roughly more in every biweekly paycheck from june through december. and that's true whether you make $300,000 and it takes you five months to get to 118,5 or whether you make $1,422,000 and takes you only one month. or you make $6,162,000 and it takes you just one week to get to 118, 5. what democrats were debating thursday was bernie sanders' idea of making that 6.2% tax kick in at $250,000 again in earnings. so our friend bob here at $300,000 would still get a tax holiday, but only till november. and after that at $250,000, his paycheck would look basically like it did in january. that might make bob have a sad face, but some economists say it
could significantly extend social security's life span. joining me from washington, d.c. is radio host hugh hewitt. political strategist l. joy williams and josh barrow, senior editor at business insider. okay, while i -- okay. so hopefully, first of all, josh, did i explain that correctly? >> yeah, that's correct. >> and what is wrong with changing the tax cap? >> a couple things. first of all, the historic reason why the program is set up like this and why in other countries, europe and france and the uk, they have a somewhat similar structure, social security is called the old age survivors -- you would pay something in during your work life and get something out when you retire. social security benefits can only get so high. so the idea was there would be a cap on how much you can pay in. and overall, the program is progressive. they replace a smaller and smaller percentage of your paycheck as your income goes up. so poorer people get a higher percentage of their earning from their work life, in retirement
than people wealthier. now people think of this as payroll tax is a taxi pay and social security a benefit i get when i retire. now people are paying this tax at a lower rate than people with lower incomes. the thing about raising it now, really payroll tax is another tax on income. raising the payroll tax with people with higher incomes, you could do that. that's a perfectly plausible public policy. you have to add the income tax and payroll tax together. if you look at all the tax increases bernie sanders has proposed and add them on to state taxes, you would get up to tax rates typically around 73% for the highest income people in the average state. and when you ask economists, even liberal economists tend to say that's around where tax rates as they get higher actually cause revenues to go down. so you could do this, but if you then also want to raise the income tax 12 points like bernie sanders does, you eventually could start having bad economics. >> let's talk about in isolation. i get it, you're aggregating all of the tax ideas that bernie sanders is putting together.
but if you did just the payroll tax part of it, which a lot of people don't see as all that progressive, because you could make $10 billion or $10 million -- although people don't get that usually in a paycheck. you still only pay up to 118,5, no matter how much more you make. and if you look at the benefits in terms of scheduled benefits, right? if you did this, you would then extend the life of social security significantly. as it stands now, under the current system, we're going to be down to 73% of expected benefits being paid out in 2089. why not do this one thing to make sure social security lasts? >> well, joy, i'm going to make josh comfortable for agreeing a second time this morning. this actually has -- this was the comic book part of the debate on thursday night. they could have had the avengers come in. there is no social security trust fund. this is all made up. the national debt on the last day of george w. bush's presidency was $10.6 trillion. today it is $19.2 trillion.
there isn't any money. and so the more cow bell they keep asking for social security -- that was the more cow bell part of the debate as well. it doesn't make any sense, because josh is actually underestimating the amount of marginal income tax rate you have to get to. you could go above 73%, you're still not going to save social security, because we are flat out broke and $19 trillion in the hole. i have to say, the context matters, the national debt matters. and what senator sanders and secretary clinton were talking about was just hokum. you know i like you a lot, hugh hewitt. but this is money, and it is social security and it is a real thing, josh. >> i partly agree with you there. i think the social security trust fund is an accounting fiction. >> everything in our federal budget is an accounting fiction. >> no, social security trust fund basically holds government bonds. the government says we -- oh, the government owes money to itself. >> and they have never failed to pay those. >> where i disagree with you, we have a large national debt but also a large economy.
and the economy generates tax revenue, generates economic activity that can pay for future benefits. the gap between expected tax collections and social security and expected payouts from social security over the long run is somewhere around 1.5, 2% -- >> of gdp. >> which is a lot. we have to have meaningful tax increases or benefits cuts in the future -- >> the government is not going to fail on bonds. we can show the chart again. even at the current trajectory, if we do absolutely nothing, you're still looking at paying out 73% of the benefits, out in 2089. it's not a fiction. it will happen. joy, i have to let you in on this. despite whatever the math is, whoever you believe, hugh hewitt or josh. the politics of calling for anything that looks like a tax increase have always been difficult for democrats. is this one, in your view, a difficult sell for bernie sanders or if hillary clinton were to sign on to it? >> i think josh's points in terms of -- it ends up being where people -- there is more money taken out of my paycheck. and so when you're talking to
people about this change, whether it's -- people who are actually receiving social security and want to make sure that income is there -- i want to make sure i get a social security check as much as i've been paying in. but at the end of the day, people are just like, how much more are they going to take out of my paycheck? and then you're able to use the politics of fear in the course of a campaign and saying, they just want to raise your taxes, they just want to take more money out of your paycheck. and so it then becomes less about saving this institution of social security and becomes more about increased taxes. >> but it also becomes about the politics. aarp, the -- the lobbying group for the agd, the older folks in this country, has come out and attacked donald trump for not having a plan and demanding he release a detailed social security plan. and the irony of that -- i'll go to hugh on that. the irony is that donald trump is the only one of the republican candidates who has said no, i'll save social security. he's actually to the left of the other candidates when it comes to social security, right? >> none of the republicans actually have put forward a plan
on, quote, saving social security. donald trump and ted cruz have both got interesting proposals on how to change all the accounting fictions josh mentioned. but as of right now, no one has a real plan to save social security, other than speaker paul ryan, which includes raising a retirement age, changing the inflation adjustment, doing a whole mix of things. and even then it won't be saved, because of that $19.2 trillion debt. i go back to this, joy. if the democrats want to run on raising tax rates to 73%, as josh pointed out, i'm all for it. yesterday bill clinton said that bernie sanders comes down to saying just kill every third person on wall street and everything will be fine. that's where the democrats have ended up -- i'm happy with where they are. >> i've got to ask a philosophical question of you, who u. do you believe there should be a social security? >> i believe that people ought to be allowed to preserve tax-free part of their income. i would set up private accounts. i would also maintain the benefits of everyone who has paid in. but chris christie had a pretty good reform program.
look what it got him. >> and therein in-laws -- the idea of private advertising social security and handing it over as investment fodder, because that money will become real money if wall street loses. >> the social security trust fund is an accounting fiction. the idea was basically we can take this money out of the fund which gets low interest rates on government bonds and then we'll get a free fix to social security. the problem was, a., stocks return more money because they're risky. and you could have a situation where you put money in stocks. >> and lose it all. >> and then people who can't pay for retirement. the government is taking social security tax revenue in and spending it on other stuff. if you try to move that into accounts, you need to find another way to pay for other stuff. and if you impose new taxes on people, you're eliminating all the savings you were giving them by letting them keep the money in their own private accounts. >> and for democrats -- i'll let you get in. does this become a salient issue in the campaign? the republicans who want to
essentially private eyes social security? >> i think it becomes an issue still during the primary and bernie sanders being able to push it and say here's another issue of inequality. here's another issue of if republicans want to privatize it, imagine what that would look like if we had the financial crisis. but then going into the general, then you have this fight back and forth from an economics standpoint between what the republicans want to do and whoever the democratic nominee is. >> but saying -- i'm getting my awkwardly presented stand up there. all you're doing is saying your paycheck for a couple months a year, if you make 3, 2 or $300,000 a year is going to look like in january. does that actually look like a devastating tax increase? >> if that message can continue during a general election and be outweighed by a message hammered on television saying they're going to increase payroll taxes. and we all know our track record is democrats -- easily
acceptable to people out -- >> you would have just waited to run again -- i can see it in his smile. josh barrow, l. joy williams and hugh hewitt. we will be back. up next, we'll tell you why trump supporters in colorado are out protesting what they see is a rigged delegate system. stay with us. (laughing) there's nothing like making their day. except making sure their tomorrow is taken care of too. financial guidance while you're mastering life. from chase. so you can. hey liquid wart remover? could! take weeks to treat. while you're mastering life. embarrassing wart? dr. scholl's freeze away wipes 'em out fast with as few as one treatment.
freeze away! dr. scholl's. the #1 selling freeze brand. ♪coming soon from progressive, it's "savin' u," the new hit single from the dizzcounts. ♪ cash money ♪ the biggest discount and understand... ♪ the dizzcounts. safe driver, paperless, paid-in-full, multi-car and joey fatone. ♪ savin' you five hundred ♪ i'm savin' you five hundred
we have auto-tune, right? oh, yeah. that's a hit! all: yeah! and so..even more efficient -t willand save shoppers money. genius! oh no... charlene! ...no, no. shh... at jet.com, we're always looking for money saving innovations. some say "free the whales." for them, nothing else is acceptable. but nothing could be worse for the whales. most of the orcas at seaworld were born here. sending them into the wild wouldn't be noble. it could be fatal. when they freed keiko, the killer whale of movie fame, the effort was a failure and he perished. but we also understand that times have changed. today, people are concerned about the world's largest animals like never before. so we too must change. that's why the orcas in our care will be the last generation at seaworld.
there will be no more breeding. we're also phasing out orca theatrical shows. they'll continue to receive the highest standard of care available anywhere. and guests can come to see them simply being their majestic selves. inspiring the next generation of people to love them as you do. last night, donald trump supporters in colorado gathered outside the state capitol building in denver to protest what they consider unfair results from last week's state gop convention. ted cruz swept 34 of colorado's 37 national convention delegates last weekend. the colorado protesters joined a chorus of outrage that donald trump began to voice earlier this week when he called the state's delegate system rigged. in a wall street journal op-ed he wrote, what we are seeing now is not a proper use of the rules but a flagrant abuse of the rules. the system is rigged with double
agent delegates who reject the decision of voters, unquote. the thing is, the colorado delegate selection process was not rigged in the sense that the rules have been in place for eight months. but trump does have a point about the process, not exactly being small d democratic. last august, the state gop executive committee got together and voted unanimously to skip the usual presidential primary or caucuses and hold precinct level, local and state conventions instead, followed by a congressional level contest to pick the state's 34 unbound delegates, plus three more appointed by party leaders. it's an arcane system but one the campaigns knew about and had the opportunity to organize around. cruz did, trump, not so much. it also could be worse. think about indiana, where party leaders got together last wednesday and picked the state's 27 gop delegates. all but one anti trump nearly three weeks before indiana voters go to the polls. again, not small d democratic,
but also not unprecedented. throughout most of this country's history, state conventions were the way national delegates and party nominees were chosen. it wasn't until after the chaotic 1968 democratic convention where hubert humphrey got imposed on that party that popular primaries and caucuses became the standard. what happened in colorado last week is the last vestige of that old system. if voters dislike that system, they're always welcome to become active in the process and change it. and up next, who won the week? you focus on making great burgers, or building the best houses in town. or becoming the next highly-unlikely dotcom superstar. and us, we'll be right there with you, helping with the questions you need answered to get your brand new business started. we're legalzoom and we've already partnered with over a million new business owners to do just that. check us out today to see how you can become one of them. legalzoom. legal help is here.
r...on every plate - and we're about to keep it going. yeah, you've got two more weeks to try the largest variety of lobster dishes of the year... ...like lobster lover's dream... and new dueling lobster tails. this party can't last so hurry in. i'm terhe is.at golf. people say i'm getting better. no one's ever said that. but i'd like to keep being terrible at golf for as long as i can. he's just happier when he's playing. but he's terrible. for the strength and energy to keep doing what you love, try new ensure enlive. only patented ensure enlive has hmb, plus 20 grams of protein to help rebuild muscle. and its clinically proven formula helps you stay you. oh. nice shot. new ensure enlive. always be you. ... 83% try to eat healthy. yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day women's gummies. complete with key nutrients we may need... ...plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day vitacraves gummies.
♪ no, you're not ♪ yogonna watch it! ♪tch it! ♪ ♪ we can't let you download on the goooooo! ♪ ♪ you'll just have to miss it! ♪ yeah, you'll just have to miss it! ♪ ♪ we can't let you download... uh, no thanks. i have x1 from xfinity so... don't fall for directv. xfinity lets you download your shows from anywhere. i used to like that song. back with me we're going the talk about who won the week. dare i ask, who won the week? >> it was a tie between ted cruz and ivanka trump. ted cruz had a great swing and a great appearance before the republican jewish committee. i was at the speech with the media in back of the room.
ivanka trump is back on the trail. she's amazing. the clip you played earlier today, she's her father's best weapon. not discuss cruz-trump ticket. that's the winners of the week. >> i have to give it to ted cruz. he's figured out the system is about winning delegates and not whining about winning them and going into the states. i think he's done well. ivanka trump, people were laughing about her not being able to register, by the end of the week they were saying not bad. who won the week? >> new york city and the five burroughs. the candidates ate their way through the bronx. new york stats ge got to be the star. the bell of the ball. >> with the exception of my
nemesis of the subway. who won the week? >> i'm an organizer at heart. i'm going to say were fight for 15 and unions so that the issues they are fighting for got onto the presidential debate stage. there's an argument over what is going to happen whether we're going to get a federal minimum wage at $15. whether we can do it. workers all across the country are joining in the fight for 15 as well as verizon workers. trying to push back on these movements across the country as people are trying to unionize and get better working conditions. >> both you have worked democratic politics for a long time. ten years ago we would be fighting over whether the minimum wage should be 12 or 15. from your point of view is this fight over 15 or $12 an hour, is it perilous for republicans?
>> no. governor brown said as he signed the week in california, he knows it's going to hurt business. for a state that's functionally bankrupt that has unfunded liabilities and the tens of trillions of dollars, losing jobs, this isn't anything about the people who are employed. it's an enormous barrier to kids getting the first job. >> how can you be so charming and so negative? how do you do that to me? i have a tie for my who won the week. one of them is richieto tores. we didn't have a single question in that new york debate about urban policy, public housing. if we're having debates about whether it's minimum wage or whether small businesses can continue to pay or whether we're talking about public housing
itself. the idea we're not debating that and that the candidate s have t be dragged kicking and screaming the see with new yorkers live is scandalous. the real winners are the people who play dominos with hillary clinton. they woke up that morning in the complex and harlem and by the end of the day, they were playing dominos with hillary clinton. show got so excited about beating them, i really believe they must have let her win. she looks like my god mother. this is how excited my godmother is when she wins. do you think it's important, these are humanizing moments. the stan substantive issue is important. >> i think it was outstanding. she looked so relax and comfortable. you don't think her looking as relaxed as she should look, but
she looked great in that moment. she went and decide something that people have fnot been doin. when she spoke about it following it, she spoke about it in way that showed a level of compassion that some people felt she didn't show in that debate on friday night. >> is the pressure on bernie sanders to do it too? >> i agree with you with the lack of urban policy. i spend to this new yorkers lost in the debate. we became a backdrop to the debate rather than discussing the real issues. there are states that have to contend the rule areas. you also have big major cities with housing, deaf nifinitely i equality. those issues weren't addressed. >> this is something that
republicans have to reckon with too. part of the donald trump appeal is blue collar workers struggling. i'm out of time. i'm just going to look into the camera. that is our show for today. i'll see you tomorrow. don't miss later today at 3:00 p.m. don't miss a look at the presidential race with the msnbc journalists covering it on the ground. a special round table you'll not want to miss. we a closer look at donald trump's thonew york tone on the campaign trail. stay tuned. plap
to help your body clot normally again. pradaxa is not for people who have had a heart valve replacement. don't stop taking pradaxa without talking to your doctor. stopping increases your risk of stroke or blood clots. ask your doctor if you need to stop pradaxa before any planned medical or dental procedure. pradaxa can cause serious, and sometimes, fatal bleeding. don't take pradaxa if you have abnormal bleeding. and seek immediate medical care for unexpected signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. pradaxa may increase your bleeding risk if you're 75 or older, have kidney problems, stomach ulcers, a bleeding condition, or take certain medicines. side effects with pradaxa can include indigestion, stomach pain, upset or burning. don't just go with the flow. go with pradaxa, the only blood thinner that lowers your risk of stroke better than warfarin and has a specific reversal treatment. talk to your doctor about pradaxa today. wyou could just forget frthe beach wedding... and the beach booty...
you could just book a different resort. like in alaska. they've got igloos. ♪ ♪ only those who dare drive the world forward. introducing the first-ever cadillac ct6. . good day. i'm alex whit here in new york. just three days until the new york primary. some of the candidates are scattered to the far corners of the country, in fact the world. hillary clinton in hollywood.