tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX January 24, 2016 10:00am-11:00am EST
i'm chris wallace. the blizzard of 2016 shuts down much of the country. the storm dumps feet of snow on the east coast, hitting millions in its path. we'll have the latest. then countdown to the last gop debate before voting starts in iowa. we have new battleground polls, and senator marco rubio is front-runners. >> i will beat hillary clinton. my. >> marco rubio, a "fox news sunday" exclusive. then a new report reveals that some of hillary clinton's
we'll ask two top leaders of congressional intelligence committees how serious is the security po breach. and our panel handicaps the escalating battle between donald trump and ted cruz. and cruz' hardball campaign manager. >> how confident are you? >> oh, we'll win. all right now on "fox news sunday." hello again from fox news in washington. we begin with that historic snowstorm that buried much of the eastern u.s. the record-breaking blizzard dropped 2 feet of snow here in the nation's capital. baltimore saw the most snow ever. new york city and philadelphia also under feet of snow. hundreds of thousands of homes are without power, as this part of the country begins to dig
fran, who's on the snowy streets. >> we got snow and more, what we do know is the northeast is waking up to clearer conditions, but those in the mid-atlantic can attest it's a long road to cleaning up. tens of millions can say they experienced the blizzard of 2016. many folks were caught off-guard while tens of thousands were without power for an extended period of time. >> >> the norm did not underbhaum us as we wanted. >> they began bracing family po harsher conditions. there was no public transportation. in pennsylvania, the national guard responded to stranded motorists on the pennsylvania turnpike, some for as long as 16 hours. in new york, a travel ban began at 2:30 eastern, essentially shut down. in new jersey governor chris christie jumping off the campaign trails just days before iowa. >> this is my 17th snow emergency in six years.
>> the ice and snow canceled more than 11,000 flights since thursday. airlines hope to be back in business this afternoon. but it's not all bad. in the district we saw flooding, biking, even snowboard, and this giant panda at the national zoo. he didn't hesitate to pounce, stuff. chris, back to you. >> thank you, elizabeth. i have love that video. and thanks to colonial parking for getting me here today. they drove me across town in the snowplow this morning. gentlemen, i could not have made it without. to from the winter cold to the heat of the campaign. with eight days until the iowa caucuses, donald trump has an 11-point lead over arrival ted cruz. marco rubio is the only other candy in double digits.
cruz by ten points, but take a look at this. among the republicans saying they'd attend a caucus, more than a third say they have never gone before. donald trump has a lead among the first-timers. and in new hampshire, donald trump maintains his lead at 31%, more than dump either ted cruz or marco rubio, who are in a battle for second place. joining me from iowa is presidential candidate senator marco rubio. welcome back to "fox news sunday," senator. >> thank you. thanks for having me back. let's start with breaking news, some good news, that is iowa's biggest newspaper, "the des moines register" endorsed you saying -- senator marco rubio has the potential to chart a new direction for the party and perhaps the nation with his message of restoring the american dream. how big of a deal is that for you in iowa? >> i feel it's affirmation that our campaign is a serious
look, barack obama has done incredible damage to the united states over the last seven years. so our next president does need to be someone who is frustrated about that, but it also has to be someone who knows exactly what to do to undo this damage. my whole campaign has been build built on that, on a fundamental promise. if we do what needs to be done, i believe this country can be greater than it's ever been and i believe our children can be the freest and most prosperous americans that have ever lived. that's what our campaign is bullet on. we're happy to have that endorsement. we had a second one yesterday from the sioux city journal, so we feel positive about the momentum that's gaining as we get closer to the caucuses, as you know, caucus-goers make up their mind on the day of the caucus or leading up to is. on the other hand, senator, one of my rules is campaigns is don't pay attention to what
what 24th do. there are reports this week that your campaign has pulled almost $1 million in ads in new hampshire and iowa, switching them from 60-second ads to 30-second ads, and there's a story in the paper today that says your campaign manager told some top supporters to expect a long slog well into april. that sure doesn't sound like somebody who thinking he's going to win the early states. >> first of all, this is a long slog because of the number of people running. it's a very unusual primary and niche nomination cycle. we did not cut more ads. we have more than any other candidates. we made some strategic shortening of adding, because we got better slots at a better price. we're always looking to save money. this campaign has to be about convincing the largest number of voters possible that we are the right choice for the almost party. i know this.
will republicans be getting a solid conservative, i will beat had been hillary clinton or bernie sanders. in the end, this country cannot afford four more years like the last seven. meanwhile, senator, i was shocked to learn this week that you have been the tart of more negative ads, more attack ads by your rivals than any other candidate out there, especially from the so-called establishment candidates, your rivals, and your friend and mentor jeb bush, both his super pac and his campaign have really gone after you. take a look. >> he ran for senate saying he opposed amnesty, then flipped and worked with chuck schumer to co-author the path to citizen ship. >> if they go, i will not shed a tear.
force proposed here will work. >> senator, why is it that the other so-called establishment candidates especially christie and bush, are ganging up on you, and because i know it's personal, are you disappointed in the way your friend and mentor jeb bush is going after you? >> no, in many ways it's an affirmation of what i've been says. you don't attack a candidate -- you only spend it if you feel someone is a threat so that obviously affirms what we've been saying, we have a path to the nomination, but also to defeating hillary clinton. in the end voters will vote on someone -- you sea establishment candidate. every time i have ever run for anything at this level, i've taken on the establishment. i had to do it when i ran for the senate, and even now, most of the establishment said to me you can't run, it's not your turn.
$20 million did not come in this should this is not grass-roots money, but from big donors and establishment who believe i need to wait my turn. it's part of the process. we knew that going in. i think that amount of money being spent against us confirms what i've been saying, and that is we are a campaign that's gaining momentum and support, and obviously other candidates view that as a threat, so they're responding. we'll be fine in the end. one of the knocks against you, senator, is that you're the republican barack obama, that you lack the experience to be president. you've been in the senate for five-plus years, so let me ask you, what do you consider your biggest legislative accomplishment? >> well, first let me say the most important job of president is commander in chief. being president is not like being a senator, but it's not like being a governor either, it's a unique office unlike any other in the world. if you look at the entire field, no one has more experience or
last five years on the issues of national security than i have. i'm proud of the things we have clef. we brought accountable to the v.a. i helped lead an effort that got rid of the obamacare bailout fund. just a month ago in a bipartisan way, i helped impose additional sanctions on hezbollah. i also have if experience of accomplishments as speaker of the house. this is the future, what kind of country we are going to leave for our children, the number one role is to be commander in chief, keep us safe. i will do that. i've got more experience and have shown better judgment on those issues than any of the other candidates in this field. >> i want to pick up on one of the accomplishments you have mentioned. you have said often that you led the effort to end the bailouts, so so-called risk corridors for obamacare which could have protected insurance companies who lost money on premiums.
running president that did anything against obamacare. we got rid of the bailout fund, which may lead to the collapse of obamacare. >> senator, while you certainly did speak out on the issue, it was other republicans who actually pud that provision in a spending bill that obama was forced to signings which put it into effect. in fact you voted against that spending bill. the fact checkers at "the washington post" gave you, as we put it up on the screen, four pinocchios for your response. how do you respond? >> first of all, they're wrong. the reason it was inserted is because i spent a year and a half pushing this issue, speaking communicating with my colleagues, for a year and a half i was the only one talking about it. it happened because we led the effort on it. did someone else physically type
that's absurd. maybe, but that's not the issue. that. from everyone watching this, to the editorials around the country, i believe "new york times" wrote one saying how marco rubio has done something that will lead to the collapse of obamacare. we pushed this the entire time. had it not been for our efforts, the obamacare bailout may very well still be there in law. let's talk about another controversy, and that is your tax plan. let's lay it out. you would establish three income tax brackets topping out at a 35% rate for the highest earners, but some still argue that's still too high. carson and paul propose a flat tax rate of just under 15%. senator, the argument is that their plans would do more to promote economic growth than your plan. >> they would not, because two
mentioned, especially ted cruz ooze contain a value-added tax, a european-style tax, you find it in canada as well. >> let me just interrupt to say you know that he flatly denies that. >> he can deny it, at the may not call it that, but it works exactly the way a value-added tax works, and everybody who knows about tax policy agrees. it is a value-added tax. it's a tax on businesses. businesses have to pay a tax on both the money they make and on the money they are paying their employees. this is why ronald reagan investigated the v.a.t. tax, it was a way for government to blindfold people. not only do they get a statement with their tax showing how much they paid in taxes. the employer is now paying the tax. they'll get the money to pay that tax by paying the workers less. so it's a way to disguise the burden of taxation. you have created a new tax and
liberal congress now has multiple taxes they can race. they can now also raise the v.a.t. tax. it's a dangerous scheme. we won't have a v.a.t. tax when i'm president. what people leave out is we increased per child tax credit for working families and alloy all businesses, especially s-corporations, a large number of americans are paying taxes through their business, as high as 39.5%. under my plan, those small businesses, those s-corporations and partnerships would only be paying 25% flat. so my plan actually represents a substantial growth in the economy, but also a substantial savings for the vast and overwhelming majority of americans. >> senator, we're running out of the time, so i'm going to ask you for a quick reaction. as i'm sure you have seen there's news stories today, "new york times" reporting that billionaire and former new york city mayor michael bloomberg is
for president. how would he shake up the race? >> well, i don't -- i haven't spent time thinking about mayor bloomberg. i've met him a couple times, don't know him well. i'll wait until he becomes a candidate. if he becomes a candidate we'll have a conversation about our differences. if he as just out there talking about president, there's a lots of people that have done that. as of now he's a private citizen that owns a big companies. >> do you feel at a disadvantage when you've got bloom berg and trump who are both billionaires? >> i think this is a great country where the son of a bartender and maid can be running for the same office and have the same opportunity as the son of a millionaire or for that matter the son of a president. it's extraordinary. in no other country would that be possible. i want america to remain that kind of country. >> thank you, senator, for your time.
twitter you can't predict... the market. but at t. rowe price, we can help guide your investments through good times and bad. for over 75 years, our clients have relied on us to bring our best thinking to their investments so in a variety of market conditions... you can feel confident... ...in our experience. call a t. rowe price retirement specialist or your advisor ...to see how we can help make the most of your retirement savings. t. rowe price.
make great deals for everybody. that's what the country is about really. >> if as a voter if you think we need more republicans to cut a deal with harry reid, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer, then i guess donald trump is your guy. >> trump priding himself as a deal maker, while ted cruz worries he would do just that with the washington establishment. time for our group, george will, lisa lerer, who covers national politics for associated press, michael needham, and political analyst juan williams. let's look at the latest fox news poll. trump is now up 11 points in the last two weeks. cruz is down four points. george, now that their truce has ended --
too soon whether to say whether trump has done this. the six-term governor of iowa came out against ted cruz, broke the tradition of governors remaining neutral in iowa on the issue of ethanol, of all things, which is an important boondoggle to iowa. >> our a worth while program if you're an iowaen. [ laughter ] >> general douglas mcarthur said every disaster in war can be explained -- too late. s is beginning too late to rally against mr. trump. it's also unclear yet whether the fire between trump and cruz is going to have the effect that the war between dib gephardt and howard dean had in 2004. they trained their fire on each
through, won iowa and won the nomination. the polls show that donald trump's supporters are -- >> i'm going to interrupt you there, because i'm going to get to that and bring in lisa to discuss exactly that subject. there are some interesting numbers in the poll. meteorology most of trump's late is among the 38% -- 43-19 among first-timers, but only a three-point lead among traditional caucus-goers, which lisa raises the question, will those trump supporters show up? >> the truth is we just don't know. in some ways, the iowa caucus -- this is a highly untraditional campaign and highly untraditional organization. he's not doing any of the traditional things you do. 4 cruz set up camp cruz, which is a sweep-away camp for all
help. he's doing exactly what we're supposed to do if the traditional rules apply in iowa. but it's not clear if the traditional rules apply at all. that's what we'll find on you. >> george mentioned the fact as to whether or not the republican wing of the republican party has delayed too long in firing back against donald trump. well, that ended this week "the navl review" published a special edition called "against trump" in which morn than 20 conservatives railed. but this week trump also got a big personal endorsement. >> are you ready for a commander in chief who will let our warriors do their job and go kick isis' ass? >> so, michael, who moves more votes? the thinkers at the national review or sarah palin?
good conservatives are split among all different candidates, but the establishment has become completely unified in trying to kill ted cruz. trent lott, the senate majority leader who helped shepherd no child left behind, now a lob lobbyist, came out and said he's going to do what he can to stop ted cruz. so many people are , trent lost set we need to coopen them. >> you also had bob dole that did an interview with "new york times," which took off after cruz. >> he did and got into the 1980 election stop ronald reagan back then. so you see the republican establishment absolutely hates the fact that ted cruz has come to washington -- >> i love that you're leaving out donald trump. they don't like him, either. >> sure, and i think the appeal
>> for the average voters, who you represent, is being antiestablishment a plus or mine sinus? >> i think it's clear the two candidates who are duking it out are the most antiestablishment candidates. donald trump because of his perm, because of things he's said and ted cruz because he hasn't been co-opted, and most importantly they fear that ted cruz hasn't been able to be co-opted. one other question. you want you to look at an odd comment that donald trump made on the stump yesterday. >> the pulse, they say i have the most loyal people, did you ever see that? where i could stand in the middle of fifth avenue, i could shoot somebody and wouldn't even lose any supporters. >> there's times when you just shake your head. is that funny or alarming? >> i think he meant it funny, it probably is funny. there's certainly no evidence it's not true.
every single rule of politics. that's what people want, because every single rule has gone el this country $19 trillion in debt. you don't do that without a lot of partisan ship. that's why donald trump has taken off. this is an antiestablishment year and it's a good thing it is. >> you're endorsing cruz it sounds like this morning? >> i'm endorsen an antiestablishment candidate. >> i'm just asking the question, you don't mention trump. >> those are the people who have gotten us in trouble. >> we asked you this question, and got this tweeted out by a fellow d. or a woman, i suppose, by the name steelers slob, who tweets -- are donald trump and ted cruz going to feel silly after they're doing tearing each other apart and rubio eats their lunch? juan, what do you say to steelers slob? and what do you make of this trial balloon we see in "new york times" that michael bloomberg right run as a
on the first score, george and i exchanged a look about that. that was very interesting. on the politics you heard george mention what happened to the democratic race some time ago when you had kerry snead through that lane, and you have here rubio as the laters of the establishment group that christie, the kasich, the bush group. the problem here, chris, is it feels like it's too little too late. i think some might argue he's been the best on the stage, and yet it's had almost no effect in terms of pushing him into the upper layer. it's clearly now between trump and cruz. the other thing i would say is on the key issues here, he needs cruz to fall apart, specifically immigration and the like. cruz is just eating up the opportunities for rubio. >> in 20 seconds, michael bloomberg?
hillary clinton. if hillary clinton is able to best bernie sanders, if it's not a matter of trump or cruz -- >> again sanders? >> then he's not running. >> so he just needs a big centrist open avenue before he would consider doing it? >> yes, sill. >> thank you, panel, we'll seal you later. up next two leaders tackle the latest can chapter in the clippen e-mail -- material with a classification level above top secret. what do you think? is the scandal real or just politics?
a look outside the beltway at charlotte, north carolina, where they're now shoveling out bank of america stadium ahead of today's nfc championship game between the carolina panthers and the arizona cardinals. now, to the latest developments in the hillary clinton e-mail scandal. we learned this week some of the e-mails contained information so sensitive most lawmakers can't read them. joining me now, two top members of the house and senate intelligence committees here in washington, adam schiff, and james lankford. how sensitive was invite information in clinton's private e-mails? and does it represent a security threat if a foreign government
>> it absolutely represents a security threat. there's about 1340 e-mails that we know of so far that had classified information. there's been a lot of conversation about what the s.a.p., special access program, information that's been referred to. it's a special compartmentalized top secret information that only certainly individuals should be able to see this. so yes, it is a major risk to have this kind of information outside of a government server. >> congressman schiff, you've generally i think it's fair to say have downplayed this store. what about some of the information what this special access program, a special classification, some say higher some say just
a specific classification inside top secret? >> chris, when you read these e-mails, i think what leaps out
would be a difference of opinion between the state department and intelligence community whether they should be classified at all, what the classification might be. i wouldn't rush to judgment based on the inspector general's cover letter. i also think that given none of them were marked classified at the time, and let me give you an example of why. if i were to send an e-mail to secretary kerry, on a trip to visit a foreign leaders, including an argument in "new york times" or some other publication about a snowden leak -- i'm making this up, but for illustrative purposes -- if that suggests it's accurate, it might be classified. if
it's just to put the secretary on notice, it's unclassified. you can see why even among compartmented programs there
clinton and her campaign people are pushing back hard. he spokesman has accused the inspector general in the her he sent, and here it is, to committee chairman and the senate of playing politics. here is that spokesman. >> i think he put two republican senators up to sending him a letter so he would have an excuse to resurface the allegations that have been discredited. >> clinton says this supposedly super-secret information was a "new york times" article about a drone program. here she is. >> the best we can determine is that it's likely what they are referring to is the forwarding of a "new york times" article. >> senator, let me ask you to respond directly to them and to congressman schiff. one, is it just politics? two, are we just talking about a newspaper after?
about a newspaper article. again it's the conversation that interchanges between staff. this whole clinton procedure of trying to attacked messenger, saying the messenger must be a member of the right-wing conspiracy out there, the inspector general is an obama appointee, is doing his job. he's been asked by a committee to keep the committee up to day, keep the committees both in the house and senate up to date, that is hi task. the inspector general is not designating these as sensitive, classified or top secret. that's within the ic community or state department. even state department has continued to redact these documents over and over again and say this shouldn't go out public. this includes methods, includes procedures, this includes human intelligence. those are on their face classified information. so if something is sent to the
foreign information. they don't have to be marked classified. it's knows. >> our intelligence reporter catherine herridge has said hsc-0, about human intelligence operations. does some of the information that have sent to clinton or that she sent back, does it include sources and methods? >> i'm not going to get into that. for national security measures and others, we need to stay out of what's in these e-mails and try not to allude to. i would say that is the most sensitive type of e-mails out there, because lives are on the line or sources are on the line. >> and do you think that lives were on the line -- again without getting into the classification -- lies were on the line in some of the information in these e-mails?
that for all of these conversations, but i would say anytime that any information comes out with human intelligence or can confirm something that people may wonder about, but once the conversation starts, it confirms it, it tells our adversaries that can get to a private server in new york, once they get that confirmation, it does do serious damage. >> congressman schiff, i want to pick up on one thing that senator lankford said, the inspector general, and he was simply reporting what the intelligence community cause saying, appointed by barack obama, confirmed unanimously by a democratic-controlled senate, he hardly seems like the right person for a political hit job. >> i would say this. you have several republican chairs actively campaigning against hillary clinton and doing investigations of her at
to -- >> muck cullo isn't, he was an obama appointee. >> let me fin, one who went to a rally saying his purpose was to defeat hillary clinton. they are conducting investigation in congress, so i think the inspector general has to be very careful not to allow him to be used by one political party against another during a presidential race. i think the inspector general had to know or should know that when you put an unclassified form of letter, you have to reasonably expect it's going to be leaked. that letter i have to say was bra attitude tuesday in the information it included. it could have transcripted the inspection without commentary, but by put ugh the commentary in it knowing it's going to be leaked, i think the inspector general does risk his reputation. once you lose that you're not much good to anyone.
all of this material and former federal judge and bush attorney general michael lieu casey had an article in the "wall street journal" in which he wrote -- it is nearly impossible to draw any conclusion other than she, hillary clinton, knew niche to support a conviction at least for mishandling classified information. if david petraeus was brought up on charges for roughly similar hillary clinton? >> jim comey has been a good leader for the fbi, but the real retained. did the secretary of state willfully retain classified information? it has to be information that was classified on a nongovernment entity on her own computer or in this case her own serverer.
faced when he gets information from petraeus. she was forced to resign and lost her security clearance. no other cabinet officials had a private server and kept this would be completely unacceptable for the d.o.d., for the secretary of defense, because you assume conversations that happened with the secretary of defense will be classified. you would assume the same for the secretary of state, that that would be classified. so this issue of willfully retaining becomes the questions have to determine. >> 30 seconds, is there a criminal case here? >> no, and there's no evidence there is, and i think you have to take former attorney general mukasey's comments as a adviser with a certainly grain of salt. >> he is a federal judge. >> he's also working on one of secretary clinton's opponents' campaigns. when you consider the facts of the petraeus case, there was a
information with a mistress, and was less than candid about it with the fbi, that is a very differed fact situation than someone who receives information not marked classified. >> what about this willful retention? >> one other thing to mention -- so many of these e-mails that are now considered to be classified, the state department acknowledges were not classified by the time the secretary received them, but nowd it's hardly among the most sensitive -- >> you understand understand that does not al terr the question -- >> but that it was classified after the fact is also significant because of the time when they were received by the secretary they were not classified. >> the secretary should know what's classified information and isn't. >> you will see that it is not apparent on its face, because it
a newspaper article or classified source. so it is not as self-evident as you might thing. we'll have to leave it there. never expected to settle this issue today. thank you for joining us. when we come back, with the race tightening in iowa, hillary clinton goes on the attack against bernie sanders. we'll bring back the panel to discussion her strateg and can you explain why you recommend synthetic over cedar? "super food?" is that a real thing? it's a great school, but is it the right one for her? is this really any better than the one you got last year? if we consolidate suppliers, what's the savings there? so should we go with the 467 horsepower? ...or is a 423 enough? good question. you ask a lot of good questions... i think we should move you into our new fund. sure... ok. but are you asking enough about how your wealth is managed? wealth management at
jeb bush once stood tall. before his campaign sank like a rock and he started desperately slinging mud on fellow republicans. that's not presidential, jeb. john kasich did cut ohio's taxes. cut state spending. turned a deficit into a surplus. brought back jobs from mexico and china. that's john kasich, that's conservative, and that's presidential. new day for america is responsible for the content of
democratic nomination. now take a look at the latest real clear politics averages. in iowa clinton lead by just over six points. in new hampshire sanders leads clinton. what's happened? >> the path is a whole lot messier and less clear. sanders, from vermont, has a slight advantage, you know once you get past the first two states, it gets better with hillary clinton. she remains stronger with minority communities. but then once you get past super tuesday, you have these western caucuses in places like colorado where he could do well. i think it could be a drawn-out battle. so this could end up being a slog.
this does for her when/if she fakes it to the general. >>
as i said before, watch what politician do, not what they say, and they're really going after bernie sanders in a way they never have before, saying he's a socialist, too farther to the left, and on the economy, cabses, but at least in the early morning states, george, it doesn't seem to be sticking. >> think about that. hillary clinton is saying on the democrat nominating electorate they say inadvertebraantly they unleashed chelsea clinton, and sanders says, of course, i've always been for a single-payer system.
together the obama coalition, the coalition that beat her in 2008. as you said this will be a long slog. we know already that hillary clinton is not a wine that
travels well. she does not benefit from lots of exposure. more people see her, the more they seemed to recoil from this. i think she's in a woors position in january 2016 than in january 2008 i still think that her biggest problem may not be a senator named sanders, but a general named petraeus. distinguish it how you will, but the petraeus precedent does not look good for someone who has carelessly -- >> the fact that he was prosecuted for mishandling of classified information. >> correct and probably much less important classified information, but he game that information to someone else. >> it's never even been asserted
>> it's clear she violated the rules. what is important is was it careless and reckless? >> sure, you can make a negligence argument, but that's not a legal charge, george. >> senator lankford said a willful mishandling. quickly, i'm going to tee it up for you, hillary clinton was asked about it, and like her campaign marcher, she basically dismissed it as political. here she is. >> this seems to me to be another effort to inject this into the campaign, it's another leak. first you have this inspector general saying this was so classified s.a.p., special access programs, and despite
don't want him discrediting -- and mccullough. >> who of course has said something was previously classified, and them james clapper said, no, that was a mistake, it should not have been classified. so we have things going back and forth, and argument about what is classified and not. the over-arching point to me is republicans don't want to run against hillary clinton. they think they have an easier shot against bernie sanders. that's why you have karl rove and american controlledroads running ads against hillary clinton. this becomes a highly politicized investigation. the moment is, yes, mrs. clinton is entitled, privileged, secretive, but did she cross the line, chris? does she violate the law? that's what i'm arguelinging. >> this is quite the doors emergency from juan williams.
remaining argument hillary clinton could make against barack obama was that she is was competent, you wanted her picking up the phone call at 3:00, when juan williams is now even saying this was negligence -- >> i think she broke the rules. >> the difference in 2008 and now is that last argument she had, even that one doesn't stand any more. so lisa, it's interesting, because the clinton people are now saying even if she were to lose iowa, lose new hampshire, then there's a firewall. you again to south carolina, to the original states before you get to the western caucuses. there's a lot of big states that will be her firewall. do you buy that? >> i just think there's no reasons for sanders to drop out of the race, even if that's her firewall. she won't have enough delegates.
argument -- he's talksing about her wall street ties, and her paid speeches. do those -- >> speaking fees get at the fundamental problem she faces, which is a question of honesty and truthfulness. it's exactly the problem with the e-mails for voters, was she telling the truth? if his arguments start to dovetail into this theme, she's going to of a problem going to the general election. >> you know as well as i do, if prices happen, campaigning can change on a dime. >> particularly if you lose the first two races, then the other states do we want to double down. the idea that the democratic electorate electorate, which is to the left, is going to abandon bernie sanders is fanciful. thank you, panel.
>> i think the rigors of our democracy requires to have a full-throated discussion. >> that's the high-minded way that jeff roe describes his brand of politics, but a video for his company brags, he's ruthless in backing his candidate. your entire life is going to go under a microscope. i think people want someone with them that will ruthlessly defend them. >> you don't shy away from that word? >> sure. the context to me is it's all in. >> we had a few good days in iowa. >> it was all in for cruz, leading an army of 2 ,000 volunteers. >> we have volunteers in 81% of zip codes in this country.
psychographic targeting. >> we have 17 different scripts out the door, on the phone and on mail pieces. >> which means they not only know if you're more likely to respond to a mailer about the hunting tradition or crime stats in places with less gun control. the bottom line. >> scrape all the social media and all the analytics. >> it's strong christian conservative leader in the world cloud. >> jeff roe built his reputation as the bad boy of missouri politics. in 2008 he targeted a democrat running for congress. >> kay xwaerns and nancy pelosi celebrating their san francisco values. >> is that where attacking donald trump's new york values came super from? >> there's no length. >> roe worked against cruz in
he put on the this mailer charging cruz betrayed his country by representing a country with ties to china. now they're on the same side. >> we're running a deeply driven around lit cal campaign, identifying the voters we need and devoting the resources, and jeff does just a remarkable job. >> how confidence are you that cruz will win. >> oh, we will win. >> excuse me? >> we will win, and the movement has chosen him to be the leader. >> then something surprising, as the ruthless bad boy described the grassroots support. >> we have millions of people donating to the campaign. that's big stuff. >> you're getting emotional. >> yeah. >> why? >> it's important who runs our country is important.
missouri. when i asked how that prepared him for a career in politics. he said hog farms are a lot cleaner. be sure to tune in thursday 9:00 p.m. eastern for the next gop debate, just four days iowa. that's it for today. we'll see you next "fox news sunday" live from des moines, and we leave you today with some