tv The Place for Politics 2016 MSNBC October 1, 2016 10:00am-11:01am PDT
gel wave design for outrageous comfort that helps you feel more energized. dr. scholl's. feel the energy! welcome back. 1:00 on the east coast, 10:00 in the west. i'm ari melber, joining you from msnbc world headquarters in new york. and here is what's happening. we begin with the politics and the reaction from donald trump here about former miss universe, alicia machado. a new interview with the "new york times," trump saying he was, quote, absolutely disgusted that mrs. clinton aligned herself politically with machado, saying, she, mrs. clinton, has portrayed miss machado as a victim and made this young lady into a girl scout when she was the exact opposite. so late last night, machado tweeting back, he's attempting to distract from his campaign's real problems and his inability to the leader of this great country. trump did not bring up the controversy in a rally in michigan yesterday, discussing other issues, like what he says is a concern about voter fraud.
>> go to your place and vote and go pick some other place and go sit there with your friends and make sure it's on the up and up. because you know what? is that's a big, big problem in this country. and nobody wants to talk about it. nobody has the guts to talk about it. so go and watch these polling places. make sure it's on the up and up. please. >> on the up and up. a new poll showing trump supporters taking a cue fraperh from him. 58% think there is a great deal of voter fraud. independent studies show there is not much voter fraud in the united states in terms of in-person ballot voter fraud. meanwhile, clinton campaign saying, quote, it's 3:20 a.m., as good a time as any to tweet about national service. we should note that tweet wasn't signed by hillary clinton so we
don't know whether it's a social media platform that scheduled the post. some aides saying they posted it live. meanwhile, clinton herself not on the trail. trump holding a rally in pennsylvania tonight. now we have reports from the trail. nbc's jacob rascon in mannheim, pennsylvania. kristen welker at our bureau in washington. jacob, we start with you and here on our msnbc weekend programming, you've been talking directly to trump supporters, is and as part of our coverage we want to hear from them directly. we know you've got one with you. so go ahead. >> reporter: sure, thanks, ari. now on that note of whether trump brings up bill clinton and hillary clinton from the past, a lot of voters seem -- they disagree on whether that's fair game or not. we have with us a millennial voter, 22 years old, lindsay smith. for you, going after hillary clinton and bill clinton from the '90s, why do that? does that look good for him? >> i think it does, just because you're fighting for what he
already did, and all the stuff that happened in the white house. do you want that again? i think -- i don't want an impeachment again. i don't want -- let's say a jerk. i don't want that in there. >> reporter: so you think hillary clinton is that. >> i think so. and she's a liar and i'm just not for that. i think all the mistresses that he already had issues with, and she makes fun of him. i don't think that's right. >> reporter: now, you and everybody in there, he already has your vote. what about the undecided voters? is this the right move for them? he doesn't have a lot of support from millennials. how is he going to get that? is this really going to do that? >> i hope so. i think everybody should vote for him, just because the politicians as you can see in years past, nothing has changed. everything is just the same. or the legacy of obama has really brought this country down. so i think that the millenniums should definitely go after trump. >> reporter: one more question,
in the last month or so, he has been more disciplined as a candidate and reading from a prompter and giving policy speeches and trying not to pick fights. and right now he seems to be back at that again, with this miss universe. is that a distraction for the campaign? >> i don't think so. i think he's trying to fight for what they're bringing up about it, and when you're a beauty contest competitor, i think, you know, you should have, like, rules that you go by, and i don't think he's doing anything wrong. i'm a woman and i still vote for him. >> reporter: thank you lind see. thank you for your time. so you have the other side there. we talked to somebody else last hour who disagreed. there you have it. ari? >> all right, jacob rascon, thank you very much. we go to kristen welker in washington, d.c., covering the clinton campaign. they had this middle of the night tweet, saying, hey, donald trump is silly for acting that way. but we are taking a higher road, or using this to talk about national service and policy. what can you tell us about that? >> reporter: yeah, they are really trying to capitalize on
this alicia machado controversy, ari. because, of course, we woke up yesterday to donald trump's tweet storm about alicia machado. so this is the clinton campaign's way of firing back, and sort of poking fun at him, as you say, for tweeting in the middle of the night. secretary clinton was out on the trail yesterday, trying to court younger voters. but she also took sharp aim at donald trump. this really fits into the broader argument she's trying to make, ari, which is that she says trump is -- doesn't have the temperament to be president. take a listen to a little bit of what she had to say yesterday. >> i mean, his latest twitter meltdown is unhinged. even for him. it proves yet again that he is temperamentally unfit to be president and commander-in-chief! >> so i think that's the tactic, and the argument that you're going to hear in the coming days from the clinton campaign. and, of course, it comes as she is getting this bump in the
polls. if you look at some of the key battle ground states, florida, michigan, nevada. she's up in six points. so i think that they're feeling good about where things stand. but obviously, there's another debate on the horizon. i want to make a point about what jacob was talking to that voter about in terms of donald trump potentially english up a new line of attack against the clintons' personal life. i asked secretary clinton about how she will respond to that, if and when he, in fact, goes after her. she sort of batted the question away, said i'm going to stay on topic, talk about the issues i want to be focused on. so that's a potential response we could see if donald trump deploys that tactic in the next debate. but i think it's a risky strategy for trump, ari, because of what jacob was talking about, the undecided voters. is that the way to win over suburban women, for example, the very voters he needs in order to win the white house. there's a big question mark about that, ari. >> absolutely. thank you, kristen welker. of we're we're going to take
the question to our political panel. molly, we'll put it to you. is this the winning strategy, and how much, as we get into october and the home stretch do voters want to be hearing about argumentive disqualifications of other candidates versus what these candidates are going to do on the issues for their way of life? >> well, it sort of feels like these candidates have been going after those arguments that disqualify each other for being president of the united states. i think in talking to republicans up on capitol hill, they don't like hearing all these -- or seeing all these tweets from donald trump in the middle of the night about miss machado. they feel he's getting pulled into a back and forth that he really does not need to be involved in. and, in fact, he would -- you know, they probably would prefer, you know, in this "new out today, you know, the came strategy from, say, david bossy of going after hillary clinton who tried to discredit the women
who have said that they have been sexually harassed by bill clinton. and they think that that's probably a more effective way to show that, hey, hillary clinton says that she's been for women all these years. but when it turns out women have accused her husband of sexual harassment, she went after them and tore them up. and so i think that that's probably the line that they -- members on the hill would prefer. >> right. you're referencing the biggest cup of coffee that the political world woke up to this morning, the "new york times" article. let me read it for viewers who may not have caught up. they basically say, donald trump slashing new attack on bill clinton over bill clinton's sexual indiscretions and threatened to put the relationship at the center of his political argument against her before the next debate. in an interview, he also contended infidelity was never a problem during his three marriages, though his first did end in a ugly divorce after mr. trump had a relationship with the woman who became his second wife. end quote. so seema, looking at that, is that really where donald trump
wants to go in a closing argument? >> i mean, i think it's a difficult case for him to make. he really needs suburban women and he does not do well among suburban women and i don't think dredging up, you know, bill clinton's past infidelity is the way to win suburban women. especially -- it could also make hillary look sympathetic and also donald trump has a difficult case making this amount argument. they have also tele graphed this so you know she's going to be prepared at the next debate. >> and just on the politics of it, this is what we would call a known thing. it's not saying to voters, oh, my god. here's something you didn't know. the whole -- all the attacks on trump university, trump defenders say, hey, this isn't really about policy, this is just trying to beat him up or one business proposition. but the counter argument would be well, nobody knew or cared much about trump university, so at least it's new information and voters can make of it what they will. seema, would you call this new in any way? >> no, absolutely not. and actually, we need it to be fair when you talk to trump
supporters, a number i talked to, said they don't want to live through the '90s again. it does appeal to his face. but this is looking like it's going to be a close election and for the small number of undecided voters, i don't see how this moves the ball at all. and republicans are kind of pleased for the couple weeks before the debate where trump is really staying on message, reading from prepared remarks, sticking with the script, not going off on random asides or tweeting people at 3:00 in the morning. and this week, we have seen a total rollback of any progress he made there. >> it's funny you say that. yeah, it's a very roar-shark test do you say do you want to live through the '90s again and whose fault is that? certainly there are republicans who would say this is the problem with the clintons and there's always drama. a lot of the clinton side are saying, no, this is what the right wing attack machine does. they're the ones trying to give you some sort of '920s drama. but don't take my word for it. let's go to someone who did tussle with bill clinton in the '90s, newt gingrich, here's his view. molly, i'll get your response on the other side. take a listen.
>> this is lik ferguson. this is like benghazi. this is like being shot at when she landed in bosnia. the truth is, they're finding victims who aren't very attractive. they're not -- turn out to be not real. she has a fair chance of winning if they can keep this campaign down in the gutter. if it's -- he said, she said. it's a personality thing. she is has a fair chance of winning. she has zero chance of winning if trump can discipline himself and run this at a very high level. >> molly, i think what newt gingrich is trying to say there, and i could be wrong -- i'm often at the risk of being wrong. i think what he's trying to say is that because the clintons picked this topic, they brought up the history with miss machado, somehow they are trying to bring up the victims. of course, though, it was trump who kept talking about it for four days. >> again, that's the whole point. trump is the one who takes the bait. and the argument that i've heard some republicans on the hill make is not to dredge up the
'90s, per se, but just to dredge up hillary clinton's reaction, the way that she treated the women who made these accusations against her husband of sexual harassment. it's not necessarily all the infidelity and what not. it's more so the way hillary clinton reacted at the time in attacking and tearing these women down. and it's more so to go to show that, you know, hillary clinton says she's for women. but look at what she did when this happened in the past. now that said, i'm not sure whether that -- you know, where -- if donald trump can actually stay focused on that kind of message, because he does get so clearly drawn into these other, you know -- as newt gingrich would say, these arguments and attacks that are in the gutter. >> right. >> and that's the concern for people. and that cup of coffee -- it was a good cup of coffee this morning. i like that description. >> yeah, and let me bring in -- i want to bring in seema on one other point. given this performance and the two unpopular candidates, this
would have seemed like a year if we were projecting months ago where third party candidates would have more traction. and yet the third party candidates on offer are also -- it turns out, pretty flawed. take a look at gary johnson talking to our own chris matthews here. >> who is your favorite foreign leader? >> who is my favorite? >> just name any one of the continents, any country. name one foreign leader you respect. and -- anybody. >> mine is shimon perez. >> i'm talking about living. go ahead. you've got to do this. anywhere. any candidate. canada, mexico. europe. over there, asia, south america. africa. name a foreign leader you respect. >> i guess i'm having an aleppo moment in the former president of mexico. >> in the whole world. >> i know. >> anybody in the world you like. anybody. pick any leader. >> i mean, what do you make of gary johnson, seema, being as unprepared as anybody? >> that was -- that was horrible.
honestly, that was horrific and a lot of people looking for a third choice. but when you have somebody who cannot name a single world leader who once believed the united states -- that was really bad. >> molly, briefly? >> i'm surprised he didn't just say, hey, i'm an isolationist. what's the rest of the world got to do with it? you know? i want to stay out of these conflicts. but not coming up with a leader, that's -- tough. >> yeah. and there was -- it's a slow-motion melting. it's a hard clip to watch. i will not play it again. for the rest of this hour, in case viewers are nervous. but you kind of see very quickly that he is not going to come up with anything. god bless all of the candidates, though. we know it is hard to run for office. molly and seema, thanks for joining us. thank you. >> thank you. weather is, of course, the other story we're keeping you updated on and we want to give a brief update. hurricane matthew, category 4, the strongest storm to hit the atlantic in a decade. raphael miranda is here. what is the latest? >> we may start to see the
tropical storm force effects as early as 36 hours from now in jamaica and also haiti. those are the countries most concerned with matthew right now. but eventually it could be a factor for the u.s., as well. we've been watching as matthew has seemed to stall out a bit, a bit of wobbling going on and fluctuations in the intensity over the next 24 to 36 hours, as well. it was a category 5 storm, weakened a bit down to a category 4, but the winds still 145 miles per hour. those are the sustained winds. we're seeing higher gusts than that. here is the track over throughout the weekend. making a near pass to jamaica tomorrow night into monday morning. and then possibly landfall in southeast cuba. that's on tuesday morning, as maybe a major category 3 hurricane, or may weaken a bit and then it gets interesting for the u.s. this is miami right here. by thursday morning, another maybe. a category 3 hurricane, just offshore, which way will it go from there? that depends on which model you're looking at. right now the forecast, it's just too early to tell. but i want to show you two
versions. this is the gfs, the american model and this is the european model. watch what happens when i set this into motion. this is late thursday. and look how close it has that hurricane moving towards the southeast coastline. the european model, out to sea. that's what we want to see. but this is a horrible scenario for the southeast into the carolinas. a major hurricane possibly making landfall and heading up the coast towards the northeast, hopefully that won't play out. and the euro will be more accurate with this one. but, of course, we'll watch it and track it throughout the weekend. ari? >> thank you so much. obviously a lot of people hoping for the best there. in politics, we've had this week of questions about tweets and beauty contestants. is donald trump preparing an attack now to get under hillary clinton's skin? next up, we will hear from the campaign itself. we have a senior trump adviser on with us to break it all down. that's straight ahead. >>announcer: valhalla awaits...
after what seemed like a somewhat more disciplined donald trump in the weeks leading up to the big debate, last week anything but discipline has emanated from the republican nominee. you could start with his continued defense of his comments about former miss universe, alicia machado, culminating in a tweet storm early friday morning while most were sleeping. something hillary clinton seized on in her campaign trail events this week. >> his latest twitter meltdown is unhinged. even for him. it proves yet again that he is temperamentally unfit to be president and commander-in-chief! i have said it before and i'll say it again. a man who can be provoked by a tweet should not be anywhere near the nuclear codes! >> hillary clinton's perspective.
for the trump perspective, we go to trump senior adviser, boris epstein. good to see you here. >> good to see you, ari. >> "new york times" today has a big story with donald trump's new attack in his own words, on hillary clinton. let me read it to you. quote, hillary was an enabler, she attacked the women who bill clinton mistreated afterward. i think it's a serious problem for them. and it's something i'm considering talking about more in the near future. he is attacking hillary clinton because of bill clinton's inif i had infidelities what did hillary clinton do that was wrong? >> she called the women bimbos, floozeys, said we have to discredit them. she hired private investigators to go and dig through their trash, dig into their private lives. she instructed her attorney, bob bennett, to threaten pedaling naked pictures. this is documented. hillary clinton spent the '90s bullying and smearing the women. one of the women said the shame
stuck to them like tar. so this is her history. this is not a innuendo, this is fact. and if she is trying to act that she is somehow a champion for women, she doesn't have a leg to stand on. >> many of the allegations you just made are strongly contested. some don't even make sense. why would hillary clinton be personally spending money on private investigators? i don't know if you can find a source for that. >> it doesn't make sense? of course it makes sense, ari. the reason is because she wanted to find something in the history of those women to discredit them. and it's well-documented, various sources. >> of can you name a source? >> as soon as the monica lewinsky story came out from the "wall street journal," hillary clinton was championing the pushback effort. >> can you name a source, just on the investigator claim? >> listen, if you look at the sources on all of this, it's her book, the ap, the "wall street journal," it's plenty sourced on everything we're talking about. and it's well-known. now, if hillary clinton is going
to deny or the clinton camp somehow wants to deny she spent the '90s bullying and smearing these women, they can do that. but we all know that happened. and she needs to own up to it. and not act as a champion for women in some ways. >> so your allegation is essentially amounts to what was her role there. you're saying that you believe the campaign is arguing that hillary clinton was attacking these women? >> we're not arguing. it is just fact. look at the '90s. look at the history of the '90s. even her claim on air that it was a vast right wing conspiracy. this it issue came up because hillary clinton attempted to use women as a prop during the debate. she failed. mr. trump responded. he won't be bullied. like these women were bullied in the '90s. so now, you know, it's up to us and incumbent upon us to make the record clear. >> well, i suppose -- >> hillary clinton's record with women is pretty -- >> i suppose what a lot of people remember from the 1990s is bill clinton involved in these incidents, which people reach their own judgment about,
and bill clinton -- hold on. and bill clinton making his defense, and then the house republicans pursuing impeachment proceedings in an independent investigation of that. and that all resulting in 1998 with bill clinton not leaving office, but winning back house seats at the end of a presidential term for the first time since fdr. so on the substance, what you're saying is a counter history. in other words, people don't remember hillary clinton out on television or out in rallies or out doing a lot of speeches. >> right wing conspiracy? >> they did make that reference, yes. about but your candidate is now saying she was leading this charge against the women and you just told me without sources, you didn't name sources. >> i did name sources. look at the ap, look at the book, i think it's called "her way," fluffy books. even in the books that are positive about her. it's the -- ap, "wall street journal," the books about her. it's well-documented that she led these charges to -- and
these efforts to push back against these women. and bully these women. these are direct quotes. >> right. so my point is only that reads much more like a counter narrative than the main things people remember. on the political side -- >> media, i guess, right? >> no, thanks to the evidence. again, you can -- we have you on regularly. if you want to come back with an actual source, explicit for the idea she personally funded or oversaw investigators, we'll have you back on about it. >> are you somehow denying she said bimbo or floozy. >> i'm not here to do denials. i'm asking you questions about your campaign. >> i'm answering those questions. >> but the main question that on the political side, having discussed some of the substantive side is, that is why republicans have basically publicly and privately urged trump not to pursue this. what has changed in your view that makes this a political winner now when it wasn't in 1998? that's a question for you. >> it's not about being a winner, it's setting the record straight. as far as sources, i give you sources. of look at all of the stories of hillary clinton's role.
not one said hillary clinton sat back. every single story, including the story in the "washington post" this past week, look at the "washington post." it's not the friendliest newspaper to the trump campaign. so you can't say it's slighted. look at the "washington post." it directly and specifically stated hillary clinton was in the leadership role in efforts to push back against these women to smear these women. so these are the sources. "washington post," ap, "wall street journal." books about her. >> and what is the message then that donald trump wants voters to take away? what is the main point that emerges in your argument about hillary clinton? >> to not be fooled by the clintons. to not be lied to once again by the clintons. just the way we're being lied to by the e-mails. five people surrounding hillary clinton received immunity, including mills. the way we're being lied about the clinton foundation, taking foreign money by gilbert chagou chagoury. and now saying the women should be believed. she spent all of the '90s and some of the 2000s pushing back against these women. so what happened to believing the woman when she claims
harassment? if you ask these women, they will tell you that hillary clinton did not believe them. but did the opposite when it came to her husband. so she spoke in one way, but acted in a different way. and, again, this isn't about, ari, you know, some political narrative or driving a message. this is about setting the message straight. we care about the issues, national security. we care about the economy. but we're not going to be bullied by somebody who has a history of smearing women and then say that somehow mr. trump is has done worse or -- anything similar or equivalent. secretary clinton has a much more sordid history with women than mr. trump could even think. >> final question. do you think donald trump should raise this at the next debate? >> that's up to mr. trump but it's not a threat. >> it's not a threat. what would you call it? it's a promise? >> it's part of a discussion. we are concentrating on the issues. hillary clinton is trying to use props, like this one she used, mark cuban. we're obviously swimming laps in the minds of the clinton camp. because they're so nervous and
trying to use dirty contribution. we're not going to do that. we're talking about what the american people, minute, women and children, care about and that's national security, jobs, making sure that nafta is renegotiated, we don't lose 700,000 jobs like with nafta. make sure isis doesn't keep killing people. thanks to hillary clinton's failures. >> >> we're out of time but an explosive set of charges from the trump campaign. we cover both sides and as always, welcome you to come and give your perspective. the importance of early voting next. where it's happening, the most and how it could affect the outcome of this race. long before november. that's straight ahead. i'm terrible at golf. he is. but i'd like to keep being terrible at golf for as long as i can. new patented ensure enlive has hmb plus 20 grams of protein to help rebuild muscle. for the strength and energy to do what you love. new ensure enlive. always be you.
there it is. now you're an expert in less than a minute. this is truecar. welcome back. i'm ari melber here at msnbc, world headquarters in new york. half hour. here's what we are monitoring, keeping an eye on the sea, peak winds 155 miles per hour. parts of haiti and cuba could also be in that path. we're going to be tracking the course into the next week.
meanwhile, those new post debate polls showing scientific backing for the idea that hillary clinton did well, pulling ahead of donald trump in several key states, but always room for error. a month ago, clinton had 270. joining me to break it down, lar larry savado. great to see you. harry, you guys do a lot with the numbers. for someone who isn't obsessively on your website where you have all of the different bars, what scientifically do we know now that we didn't know before the debate? >> i think we know that hillary clinton has a larger he lead now than before the debate. you listed those swing state polls and we saw that across the board. you're seeing gains in every swing state and look at a state like florida. if donald trump doesn't win in the state of florida, that pretty much closes his pathway and he's down four in the most recent mason dixon poll. >> do you have any firm view
whether that is debate-related or debate overlap? >> i think it is absolutely debate-related. you can see that in the tracking polls, as well. you see that clinton is just gaining a lot of ground. and before the debate rps you saw her numbers falling and now all of a sudden if you look at our model, her chance is up somewhere between 10 and 15 percentage points. >> larry, do you share that view? the smart money in politics, the debate was going to be more pivotal for donald trump. as famous as he is, this is a forum voters had not seen him in. we have seen nothing but hillary clinton in the type of big political moments. do you agree with that assessment that this hurt him a little bit? >> i think it hurt him more than a little bit. performance matters. look, i've studied presidential debates from 1960 on, and i've watched every single presidential debate from '60 to the current one, obviously, several times. and trump's performance was the worst performance by any major party nominee in that entire time period. >> wow.
>> of course -- >> you stand by that. >> of course -- my god, yes. go back and look yourself. don't take it from me. when you do that badly, it's bound to have an impact. we live in a polarized era. if we didn't, she would have gained more than a point or two or three. in each of the -- >> so you think -- just to pause on your point there, you think worse than bush senior when, you know, clinton went around him in the town hall and the feeling would he was just sort of, you know, flattening and worse than obama's first debate in 2012, where people were shocked he seemed sort of out of it? >> absolutely. i was at the 1992 debate. bush had some bad luck. he was photographed looking at his watch. it's not really a terrible thing to do. and i don't think he was outclassed to that degree. he certainly lost the debate, but he didn't lose it by the kind of margin that donald trump lost to hillary clinton. look at all of the actual good polls. the random sample polls.
not that online junk. shety feeted him by a massive margin. and that is going to have an impact in every swing state to one degree or another. it's going to have an impact nationally. but because we're polarized she's not going to gain five or ten points. >> when you say online junk, are you talking about instagram, snapchat or unscientific web polls? >> the unscientific web polls, you know, that were being touted as proof that trump won the debate. how anybody could believe that, well, it just goes to prove, einstein was right. we have parallel universes. >> exactly. the viewers may not be able to see. harry thought my joke was really funny. >> i laughed. >> off camera. let me pinlt out one other piece of data. we've got our quantities here. you guys are quantitative guys. look at the candidates doing all of the media but also on the ground. today, of course, trump in pennsylvania, which is must-win for him. iowa, new hampshire, pennsylvania, virginia, north carolina, ohio, florida, nevada, colorado. not a lot of surprises on there,
harry, although it does seem that trump needs more states than even other republicans have. i mean, he needs ohio plus florida. >> he needs ohio, plus florida and even that, you can build a map for hillary clinton to win without winning either of the two states. if she wins in colorado, virginia and new hampshire, plus wisconsin and michigan, she's basically got it. she's got the 272 electoral votes. >> is it confidence we're seeing hillary clinton go to ohio less or confidence we don't need to win ohio so forget it? >> it me it suggests that ohio if you look at the state polls from there, has been a state that leaned a little more republican than some of the other swing states. so it's confidence, yes, but also recognition of the reality. >> larry? >> yeah, essentially iowa and ohio are the swing states most likely to vote for trump. doesn't mean they will in the end. but i think they're leaning that way right now. certainly iowa is. and colorado got uncomfortly close, although i'll bet it isn't that close right now. look, if trump loses, either
florida or -- i think kerry mentioned that. if he loses florida, he certainly has lost the election. i think if he loses north carolina, it's an indication he probably can't win. it's hard to construct a pathway to 270 without some of the states that are being closely contested and where clinton actually has a slight lead. >> larry, last question. there are certainly regionally based arguments the candidates make. if you look at immigration or look at jobs, certain places it's going to play better. the big news today, i was just discussing with the trump adviser moments ago, is donald trump saying he's going to make hillary clinton's role and bill clinton's infidelities an issue now. does that help him in any of the states he needs, in your view? >> i don't believe so at all. look, this is insane. to make that a centerpiece of a campaign in 2016, because neither of these candidates is a saint. the obvious answer is, pot meet kettle. and that's exactly what's going to happen. and it's not going to have a
narrator: it wasn't that long ago. years of devastating cutbacks to our schools. 30,000 teachers laid off. class sizes increased. art and music programs cut. we can't ever go back. ryan ruelas: so vote yes on proposition 55. reagan duncan: prop 55 prevents 4 billion in new cuts to our schools. letty muñoz-gonzalez: simply by maintaining the current tax rate on the wealthiest californians. ryan ruelas: no new education cuts, and no new taxes. reagan duncan: vote yes on 55. sarah morgan: to help our children thrive.
they don't taste chalky and work fast. mmmm. incredible. can i try? she doesn't have heartburn. new alka-seltzer heartburn relief gummies. enjoy the relief. request for ohio. ballots reportedly up at least 8%. does that give us an idea of early voting turnout? the countries leading expert on early voting has it all for us, straight ahead. sureor put themhave ston a rack.e tires. but the specialists at ford like to show off their strengths: 13 name brands. all backed by our low price tire guarantee. yeah, we're strong when it comes to tires.
it begins from the the second we're born.er. because, healthier doesn't happen all by itself. it needs to be earned every day. using wellness to keep away illness. and believing a single life can be made better by millions of others. as a health services and innovation company optum powers modern healthcare by connecting every part of it. so while the world keeps searching for healthier we're here to make healthier happen. early voting under way in a dozen states, that clincludes iowa, north carolina, and wisconsin. so the election is effectively
begun. and by november, all about 37 states, plus washington, d.c., will have some kind of early voting. according to our next guest, a third of the electorate could cast ballots before election day. joining me, michael mcdonald and associate professor, at the university of florida, leading the united states elections project. i don't know if you've been watching, but our producers were so excited for this segment, we have teased it eight times over the last hour and a half. that's how we roll. we love early voting, apparently. but it rlly is c-change, right? because we cover it like it's a countdown like the polls are a projection. what your research shows, this election has already begun. >> that's correct. we have had had north carolina voting since september 9th and we have had quite a few other states come on board since then. technically, every state in the country is offering some form of early voting at the moment, because our military and overseas civilian voters started voting last week. yeah. >> well -- go ahead. >> so, yeah, there's been a lot of excitement. and we have seen over the years
that the number of voters who cast a ballot prior to the election has steadily increased. it was 32% in 2012, and there are three more states now offering early voting that didn't do it in the past. minnesota, massachusetts and new jersey. so we should see an increase. and that would be a typical election. there may be some odd things that go on in this election, where perhaps people have made up their minds sooner. so we might even see a higher volume of early voting than we have in the past. >> yeah, i could think of a couple ways this election is not typical. but, you look at ohio, where we've got the numbers. 800,000 people here going for those early absentee ballots. that is a state where currently donald trump is doing better. he's trailing in a lot of key states, but not ohio. so i know you're looking at the civic side of this, and as americans, we want everyone to be able to vote as easily as possible. that's a good thing. but on the political side of this, is tha helpful in certain states where if trump is up, he
can try to get those people out right now? >> well, absolutely. the campaigns are working very hard to secure the vote so they can knock off the people who are the people who have already voted and start working down the list to the moderate to low-p low-propensity voters and get them to participate. absolutely, the campaigns are doing this. now, ohio shouldn't get too excited by some of these states like in ohio. the secretary of state of ohio sent out an absentee ballot application to anybody who had voted in 2014 or 2012. and so the volume of applications are up, just because the way in which the elections being -- >> that's important. you're saying that that's government-driven. they have set a policy to send it. it doesn't tell us whether those ohio voters are wanting it. are there states where it does show what people want to do? >> yeah. there are three states in particular where we have got good apples to apples comparisons of past elections. and it's giving some indication that the early voting numbers are saying that the polling numbers are pointing in the same direction.
it gives us, you know, two signals pointing in the same direction, telling us that maybe those polls are actually correct and picking up in terms of the votes. >> which states are those? >> so let me start with maine. that's an interesting state. it's a state, of course, that splits its electoral college votes between the first congressional district and there the early vote looks fairly good for clinton in the first congressional district. in the second congressional district, it looks a little better for trump. and there have been some speculation, some polls that suggest that maine may actually split its electoral college votes for the first time. that's being borne out in the early voting numbers. if we project off of maine to two other states, one looks like cv-1, the other looks good for trump. so the one that looks like 1 is north carolina. interesting among democrats as measured by the volume of absentee applications is up for registered democrats, down for registered republicans and we know that obama lost the state
by about 2 percentage points in 2012. so it could be that clinton is actually doing better in north carolina than obama did in 2012. the state that looks good for potentially good for potentially good for trump is iowa, where we see the democratic registration absentee ballot applications are running at a lower level than 2012. >> got it. that's a great breakdown. that's all new stuff. your eyes light up when you start talking about your congressional district early voting projections. you're in the right line of work, michael mcdonald. thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> next we'll turn from all the politics to an important policy battle you may not have heard this week, the veto override of a 9/11 bill. our next guest wants to pursue justice in the courts. qo :é @d888888@888jj
washington this week. congress overrode president obama's veet ohio. that was the first time of his presidency. this was all over a big bile that will allow 9/11amilies to sue saudi arabia for their alleged role and background participation in the 9/11 attacks. joining me now is terry strata, a 9/11 widow and national chair of 9/11 families and survivors for 9/11 justice against terrorism. how did you get involved in this? >> i lost my husband on september 11th in the horrific attacks. ever since then the families and i have been fighting for truth, accountability and justice for the murder of our loved ones. >> there is more than one reaction to 9/11. there was a big foreign policy reaction. there were a lot of other laws passed. here we are looking at a new law this week 15 years later. your group says it was necessary because of what you wanted to achieve, not through foreign policy but the courts. what are you trying to achieve in court?
>> we are trying to achieve the truth, accountability and justice. those are the things we want to achieve when we filed our lawsuit in 2002. for over a decade, we've been fighting for this and the saudis have been dismissed on sovereign community, which no person, entity or nation is entitled to in regard to a terrorist attack on american soil. >> who are you suing? >> the kingdom of saudi arabia for the role they played in financing the 9/11 attacks. >> is it your view this lawsuit will basically expose things that otherwise we wouldn't know? some look at this and say you had the 9/11 commission report, the redacted portions about saudi arabia. we learned things. is there something new you think america could get out of it? >> there is so much more than we know about the saudis role financing terrorist organizations like al qaeda, like isis. the purpose of the lawsuit we need the justice and should have the right to our civil justice system, but will deter future terrorist attacks.
once we can send out the message, if you can attack us here on american soil, we can hold you accountable in a u.s. court. we are hoping to stem the flow of money that continues going to these terrorists organizations. >> based on your work and the people of your organization, it's been a road. i want to read what this is. it's justice against monsters of terrorism act. there are claims against foreign officials for acts of terrorism. this was not the law prior. the president veet oed it saying it would be bad for national security and put our interests at risks. how did you feel going down this road to this week? >> incredible. what congress did was an amazing job. it's an amazing testament to our democracy and how it does work. it was a bipartisan bill that had wide support. the bill was vetted over the last four years. it came out of our senate judiciary committee twice out objection. it passed through our senate twice unanimously.
through the house of representatives unanimously. because the bill finally became so narrowly tailored to only hold a nation accountable for funding a terrorist attack on american soil that the language became something everyone said yes, this is the right thing to do. >> where do you go from here now? do you go back to court without being blocked the way the case was previously? >> exactly. now the case can proceed. it can move forward. we'll see where it takes us. >> all right. terry strada, i appreciate you coming in. congratulations on what i know has been a long road. >> thank you very much. >> that does it for me this hour. you can find me on twitter and instagram. richard lui has more straight ahead. when heartburn hits, fight back fast with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue. and neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪ tum -tum -tum -tum smoothies! only from tums
you're smart. you already knew that. but it's also great for finding the perfect used car. you'll see what a fair price is, and you can connect with a truecar certified dealer. now you're even smarter. this is truecar. a very good saturday afternoon to you. i'm richard lui at msnbc new york headquarters. donald trump on defense. new polls showing his poor