tv Inside Story ABC November 13, 2016 11:30am-12:00pm EST
>> so, election 2016 is in the books -- a historic night that was really good to republicans, from the white house down to the state house. what happened, and what happens next? let's get the inside story. ♪ good morning and welcome to "inside story." i'm tamala edwards. let's introduce you to our panel, who i hope they've recovered. it's been quite a long week for everybody. first up, journalist harold jackson. good morning. >> morning, tamala. >> gop state official val digiorgio. >> good morning. >> must be nice to be you this morning. >> yeah, it feels good. >> all right. public affairs executive donna gentile o'donnell. >> morning, tamala. >> and documentarian sam katz. >> good morning. >> president-elect trump. up until the day of the election, everybody was saying it couldn't happen, but it did happen. but i want to talk about why it happened, to a certain extent. as you dig into the numbers, he had lower turnout than romney, than mccain. 110,000 votes between wisconsin,
michigan, and pennsylvania could have tipped it back a different way. and in some of those key states that we were being told were the key battlegrounds -- like pennsylvania -- 1 percentage point separated them. 2% more the other way for her, she'd be president. so, the question was, did he surprise us and do something more? or did she underperform and not do what she needed to do? what -- how should we look at this? >> you know, i look at the polling that came out, and then i look at the way trump's last two weeks, in time and schedule, were spent. and it seems to me that he had better information. >> mm. >> i think his poll sampling was more precise. it was not dependent on 2012. the fact that he showed up in wisconsin and michigan and pennsylvania, and everybody saying, "what's he doing?" >> mm-hmm. >> they had a better plan because they had better information. and i think the clinton campaign was relying on traditional sampling. and this is, i know, in the weeds, but inside a political
campaign, if you do not have good data and good information, you're not gonna make good decisions. >> did she also miss the moment? "it's the economy, stupid." the clintons came to power with james carville saying that. we heard her talk about a lot of things about donald trump, but i don't know that we heard that message as much from her as we did from him. >> they made a mistake, and i said this on "inside story" right after the convention. i thought it was a disaster for hillary clinton. i said it here. everybody sort of poo-pooed me. because she decided she was not going to be a change agent, she was gonna be an agent of the status quo and cling to barack obama. that was a mistake, as it turned out. now, as far as who was surprised and not surprised, i can tell you who was surprised -- it was the trump people. they were surprised that night. i've talked to some of them. he was surprised that they had actually won. who was not surprised was every single republican leader that i talked to outside of southeastern pennsylvania over the last several months, and i've been traveling the state in my campaign for state chairman. every single one of them thought that donald trump was gonna win this, and none of them were surprised. and sam may talk about this a little later -- it was in the numbers. as you get out of southeastern pennsylvania, you look at every
other county -- westmoreland county, luzerne county, which hasn't voted for a democrat in recent memory. you know, these counties went big for donald trump -- not just for don-- big, big flips, and it was enough to overcome the huge numbers in the southeast for hillary clinton. so not everyone was surprised over this one. >> let's talk about some of those numbers. white women. you know, she -- "i'm breaking the ceiling. i'm getting through." but if you look at the numbers, she did not do so well. non-college, she wasn't expected to get them, but it was really a rout. he had 62%, she had 34%. college-educated white women -- only 6% more went for her. he got 45% of them. overall, he got more white women, with all the "access hollywood" tapes, all the different commentaries. what was that about? >> first of all, i want to agree with something that val said, because he's out in pennsylvania looking at what's going on in these small towns. it was evidenced by martha raddatz and some of her comments as she was going through pennsylvania. and i want to take us back in history, because i think history
really instructs us on this. in 1963, when michael harrington wrote this book, "the other america," the people that he wrote about -- those are the people that val was seeing. those are the people that she was seeing. the women -- and the men -- they're underemployed, they're unemployed, their jobs have gone away. the globalists, that are represented in both parties -- the clintons and the republican establishment -- donald trump represented something for these people that has not existed, and they resonated to it in ways that we have not seen before. we need to take that lesson seriously -- on both sides. >> did she and the democrats miss something here? we knew she wouldn't get as much of the black vote, maybe the latino vote as barack obama got, and, certainly, that was exactly what happened. but she lost 1/3 of latinos overall to donald trump. did they miss something in how they were looking at things or the messaging that they were putting out? >> well, i don't think that you can blame the loss by hillary clinton on either of those constituencies...
>> no, not at all. >> ...the black or the latino vote. i think you pointed out something revealing -- white women, 53% of them, voted for donald trump. so it was the message that she brought. she was a traditional candidate. she was the candidate that represented the establishment in a race in which the establishment was not chosen by the people. it wasn't chosen by the people in 2008, as well. and because she represented the establishment, perhaps she was between a rock and a hard place. she was a woman running for president -- the first woman who really had a chance to become president. and she felt, i believe, that she had to run as a traditional candidate and in traditional ways so as not to scare voters off that she's gonna be this female who's gonna bring these crazy ideas into the white house. she ran as a traditional candidate, she represented the establishment, and it cost her the election. >> so, she couldn't be bernie sanders or elizabeth warren? >> i don't think she could. i think that -- >> throughout the campaign, everybody was saying, "it's gonna be won or lost in the philadelphia suburbs," and if you take the five counties, hillary clinton has a 51,000 larger plurality -- excuse me --
coming out of southeastern pennsylvania than did obama. >> right. >> she -- that's not where this election was won. it was won in the rest of pennsylvania. >> and also, importantly, the clinton campaign asked philadelphia to deliver 400,000 votes. philadelphia delivered 455,000 votes. >> really? >> yes. they thought that that was gonna be enough to offset the rest of the state. >> right. >> the city committee did their job, the building trades did an unbelievable registration job. it was not enough to offset the anger that is driving this election. that's why everyone was able to forgive all of the crazy things that donald trump said. it was pocketbook, it was home, and it was "me and mine" first. >> should she have been able to speak to that better than she did, or did she do the best she could? >> no. >> i think she could have spoken to it better. i think she made a number of missteps, beginning with the comments in west virginia telling coal miners that, "we're going to take your jobs away from here." i don't know who advised her to include that in her speech. maybe it was an extemporaneous
remark. but, you know, she made a number of mistakes that told working-class people that, "i'm not really hearing you." and you're exactly right -- that was the constituency that needed to be heard in this election. >> let's a little bit about what we're seeing right now. we've seen protests for the last few nights in the streets of philadelphia and elsewhere around the nation. i'm gonna start on this side of the table. the biggest protest would have been tuesday -- come out and vote. we are where we are. is this right for people to be doing now, rather than saying, "the election has happened. let's figure out where we're going to fight and figure out where we're going to work together." >> well, sadly, more than 100,000 people in pennsylvania voted for gary johnson -- gary "what's aleppo?" johnson. that was their protest, and i take issue with that protest because adults need to show up at the polling place on election day. children make those kinds of decisions, and it offends me that people did not recognize that the only thing standing between donald trump and the presidency was hillary. so, they did -- there was a
protest. but that's where it found expression, and is an insult to our democracy. >> well, i think peaceful protest is part of the american tradition, and as long as it's peaceful, i think that's fine. i do wonder, as a lot of people do, in terms of how many of those people out there protesting did vote for gary johnson or who didn't vote at all... >> mm-hmm. >> ...and now are protesting the result. >> all right, now, let's go to this side of the table, because people voted for donald trump for a number of reasons -- economy, trade deals, feeling safe, "my values." but we've also seen some people where it's been ugly, it's been nasty, and it's trickled down to children -- incidents at central bucks high school in york, pennsylvania. reports of people having ugly, racist, bigoted things said to them, people saying, "now this is trump america." often when this happens, you'll see people say, "oh, we don't support that," but do republican leaders need to do more to come out forcefully and say, "this is why we're here. you guys cut that out. we're not doing that." >> well, donald trump already repudiated the kkk's endorsement of him. he's already on a record. what would be great is if both
the president and the president-elect stood up together and said, "let's all come together as a nation. let's stop these protests. let's stop the racist comments," and denounce them together -- that would be great. i thought yesterday was a great start, the two of them together in the white house. so i think they should come out and denounce all of this. you know, we've gone from the deplorables now to the inconsolables with these kids. >> [ chuckles ] >> my daughter called me about what's going on at school with her colleagues. i guess if they weren't paying my student loans, i'd feel the same way, and maybe i'd be upset, too. but i think we all should come out roundly -- republicans, democrats -- and denounce all of this. >> but i got to push back with you on that, only because when we've seen comments on this, it's usually been in response to, somebody said this, and somebody goes, of course they don't agree with that. do we need to see a more frontal, get in front of it, "i'm not waiting to respond, i'm getting in front of this trying to say, very clearly, alt-right, pepe the frog, no"? >> i think both sides need to come out and -- what's happening on both sides. yes, we should categorically get in front and denounce racism of any kind. but by the same token, we should come out and denounce people
that want to destroy their own neighborhoods and riot and loot or beat up white people at the polling places. the racism's going on both ways. that should be denounced both ways. >> well, and i have to agree with you, tamala. i think it goes more than some pronouncement at this point, both national leaders standing up there and saying, "we deplore this." yes, donald trump did repudiate the klan endorsement, but the fact that he got a klan endorsement in 2016 is troublesome. the fact that they thought he said or did something -- >> what do you want him to do other than what he's done to denounce it? >> i want him as president, through his policies, through his procedures -- >> well, that's not -- we're not talking about that now. we're talking about, what should we be doing now? what would you have donald trump do now to denounce this? >> well, he's president -- he's not even president now. i'm saying, donald trump as president needs to do more than make high-sounding statements about, "i repudiate the ku klux klan." they endorsed you. they endorsed you for a reason. you, through your actions, must show that you are indeed, as you said, the president of all america. >> he took -- he could take a page out of president obama's playbook. and i think he'll remember, after president obama was elected -- i think it was after -- he came to
philadelphia, and at the constitution center, talked about race. >> it was before. >> was it before? but -- and afterwards, with henry louis... >> ...gates. >> ...gates and the guy who had the beer. donald trump has an extraordinary opportunity... which i thought on election night, by advancing the idea of infrastructure -- hardly the centerpiece of republican public policy -- donald trump showed a bit of shrewdness there, because if he can get infrastructure, he can get some votes from democrats, and then he has some currency to trade. and it's the same with race and sex and gender and all of the things that we identified with him and which he denied. if he comes out early and starts to talk about these things as a healer, he could launch a very successful first year as a president. and it's not about repudiating. it's about saying, "what do i believe in? what do i want to see this
country do? how can we come together?" you know, we had a civil war, and 600,000 people died during that civil war, and we survived it. i think we'll be able to survive -- >> i'm saying it goes beyond what he can say. it's what he can do as president. there are policies and actions he can take that very clearly shows that, "i realize that these urban centers of america didn't vote for me, but i do understand that your issues, your problems are just as great as they are in the heartland, and they have not been addressed, either." >> i think they have been addressed. we've talked about providing vouchers to the inner cities, to reform the education system. we've talked about the fact that the democratic party has basically taken the black vote for granted. >> then you're saying they have not addressed, if you're taking the position -- >> so, we're talking about addressing those. as a republican, i've been talking about this all my adult life, having grown up in south philly and seeing what liberalism has meant for the inner cities. it's been the reason i am a republican, 'cause i've seen what liberalism has done to the inner cities. we want to provide educational opportunity, we want to provide jobs for the inner city. i don't want anything for young black men more than i want for my son. i want the same things for my son as i want for young black men in america. they've been abandoned by the
democratic party. donald trump has talked about that. and i think sam is right. he's got a historic opportunity here to reach out to urban america, not just african america. >> with policies. with policies. >> well, i think what we were talking about -- what sam's point was -- is to the mantle of leadership, rather than responding to -- step out and say, "i'm gonna get in front of this and make a big speech on it or make a big statement," but we'll see what he chooses to do. let's talk a little bit about one thing that he said he is going to do, which is to change obamacare. there are some people who love that idea. there are some people who worry about, you know, "i've got a pre-existing condition. what happens to my 24-year-old kid?" what -- will he indeed repeal obamacare, and what does it get replaced with? >> that's the question. now, paul ryan had had a plan some years ago about this. we're gonna see whether we're gonna dust that plan off, but i think it's pretty likely it's gonna be repealed. the republican leaders want it, the republican base wants it, and small businesses want it. small businesses are getting crushed. 50% increases in premiums in southeastern pennsylvania, only one insurer left that's participating in the exchanges. it's gonna collapse under its own weight, anyway.
it should be repealed and put with a free-market system that keeps in place the good things about it -- which are more coverage for people, pre-existing conditions being covered -- but replaced with a free-market-type system that provides subsidiaries for those who -- >> i just want to note for the record that president obama, from the time obamacare was passed, said repeatedly to the republican congress, "help me make it better. help me change it so that it's something that makes more sense to you." >> put lipstick on a pig. >> oh, that's -- >> but is it dangerous -- is it dangerous that in getting rid of it, you could end up getting another group of people angry with you that they don't have health insurance? >> i wouldn't underestimate the extent to which obamacare contributed... >> right. we saw it in our polling. >> ...to trump's election. over the last several months, we've seen the vacancy in many states of multiple insurance companies so that there's monopolies. we've seen premiums go through the roof. and it has -- the issue really is, what are we gonna call it? because if we keep pre-existing conditions and if we keep the
exchanges and we do all these things, it's gonna still be like obamacare, but we're not gonna call it that anymore. >> i think you're exactly right, sam. i think a lot of this is the fact that it is called obamacare. and there are some people in the congress who wanted to deny him that legacy. >> no, that's not it. you can't say that every time we have a legitimate policy discussion it's 'cause we don't like barack obama 'cause he's a black man. >> the constitution has been amended 27 times. you're trying to tell me you can't fix obamacare by amendment? >> it has to be scrapped. it's created a -- >> well, we'll see what the congress needs to do. >> mitch mcconnell was committed to his failure, and he got it. >> well, quickly, will there be any other major parts of the obama legacy that we think will immediately be challenged? >> i think the iranian nuclear deal will be immediately challenged, and, well, it should be. i think the whole role that obama has played in trying to create a two-state solution in israel -- i think that will be abandoned. and i think the nature of our relationship with russia will change. and i think all three of these things need to happen. >> all right, we'll take a short break and come back to more "inside story." >> "inside story" is presented by temple university. remarkable change isn't easy, but for those who take charge,
closing bell." and with a 2- to 3-point percentage of error, it could have gone either way. were the pollsters really wrong, or did the rest of us forget percentage of error? >> first of all, national polls don't matter. >> yeah. >> 'cause we don't elect presidents on a national poll. we elect presidents in 50 separate elections. so, the fact that the l.a. times had it right, kudos to them, but you had to look at -- look, terry madonna's been a very accurate pollster. and i don't remember, but i think the last poll he had in pennsylvania was hillary up 8%. >> and pat toomey losing by 12%. >> yeah, more than that, it was. yes. investor's business daily also had it right. they also had it right in the romney-obama election. the polls i was looking at, interestingly enough, for southeastern pennsylvania were all dead-on right. they all showed trump down by as much as 19% at one point and then closing that gap to about 10% -- in chester county specifically. they were dead-on. they also showed that there was not much effect on the under-ballot, and we saw that in chester county. we re-elected all nine of our state reps and tom killion.
so the polling wasn't necessarily off across the board. >> but is the issue that the whole thing is that nobody picks up a landline, nobody answers a cellphone, and you can't go to online? or did the l.a. times figure something out -- you get a set of people and you stick with them the whole way through? which one is it? >> there was -- notwithstanding l.a., there was a rizzo factor here. and sam knows about this. >> i do. >> when frank rizzo ran, first of all, he never won a poll and he never lost an election. >> well, that's not true. >> well, all right, he did -- yeah. but generally speaking... he did lose one, all right. i'll give you that one. >> he lost two -- in '83 and '87. >> all right. but isn't -- >> he's a documentarian. he knows these facts. >> i know. >> the bottom line is -- i think the question really is, how does polling need to change so that four years from now, people can believe it? >> that's a good question. >> yeah, and i'm not sure. i think that's a technological answer that's required to that. i think what really was missed here by the pollsters are the number of people who weren't truthful when they talked to them. >> that's the real factor. >> if you rode through the different areas of pennsylvania, southeastern pennsylvania -- i live in jersey -- i was struck
by the dearth of hillary clinton signs. you could hardly find any. and very few donald trump signs, which means that people weren't really proud of who they were supporting. they weren't really declaring whom they were supporting. and that proved true during the election. we found out exactly who they voted for. >> you know, sam, you've been a candidate, and, val, you run candidates. if we go to online polling, do you trust that? >> no. >> what is it that we should be doing -- cellphones? >> well, first of all, i think the media should get out of the polling business. >> we just report it. >> i have to tell you, of all the things that took place in this election, the worst thing, from my perspective, was the way television covered the campaign. every time you turned on, you were looking at partisans. what about analysts? what about, like, david gergen? you know, david gergen would be on once, and then you'd see katrina pierson and you'd see jeffrey lord and... and then they would talk all over each other, and there was no -- and the same with the debates. if you'd have a two-min-- if you've agreed to a two-minute limit on your answer, your microphone should be turned off
after two minutes. >> it'd be really fun being a host in that environment. let's talk about another huge race in the state -- pat toomey, as you pointed out. everybody thought katie mcginty would win. he eked out a 2% win over katie mcginty. what does this mean for him? is he kind of a kingmaker in the state? he's the republican casey wolfe for democrats. what does this mean for pennsylvania? >> yeah, well, that remains to be seen, 'cause pat was not seen as a trump supporter, and the trump people were gonna remember that. so the question is, how much influence does he have with the trump administration? but in washington, he's gonna be a force. he certainly is the kingmaker in the republican party in pennsylvania and the person that we're gonna be looking to for leadership. pat had said, "we can do everything right in this campaign and we're gonna win by 1.5, 2 points at the most," and he was right all along. interesting, in the numbers, he outpolled obama -- excuse me, he outpolled trump down here, but if you look at the rest of the state, trump outpolled him in every other county. >> which, maybe why he didn't vote till 6:45 and then waited
to say who he was supporting. do you think he goes back at gun control? >> no, i think that was a principled -- i think that was a principled position for him. >> do we see katie mcginty anymore, or that's it? >> i think she might end up back in the wolf administration. and i just want to say for the record, i never assumed that she was a lock. i questioned hillary's coattails. i know that toomey is a very formidable campaigner. he picked up democrat -- gabby giffords. i mean, it was a very thoughtfully constructed campaign, so i really didn't think that that was a lock. >> we've seen dwight evans go down to d.c. he was a leader on the septa resolution of the strike. are we about to see a new era for dwight evans as being seen as a leader in the city of philadelphia? >> no. >> dwight evans has been a leader in the city in the past, especially when he had a high position in the state legislature with appropriations. what are -- i don't see him, you know, repeating that role as a minority member of the congress. >> yeah, that's exactly right. he's a freshman -- 61-year-old freshman -- in the minority at a
moment in time in which everything that the progressive wing of the democratic party wants to do is likely not to get done. >> what about in the city itself, the way bob brady, who will also be -- he's got more stature, but he's a member of the minority now. is he setting himself up to be seen as a leader in this city? >> i'm not so sure that jim kenney wants to see somebody else be a leader in this city. >> okay. well, we got to take a break. we'll come back to their inside stories. ♪ what do we want our kids to learn? how to game a test... or test themselves in a game? how to master an exam... or examine a master? how to be robots... or build robots? the njea believes students deserve a well-rounded education- including arts, music, technology, and so much more. that's why we're working with parents and communities to reduce the emphasis on high stakes testing. because when you limit the tests, they can test the limits...
>> "inside story" is presented by temple university. remarkable change isn't easy, but for those who take charge, it comes naturally. explore temple's impact. visit temple.edu/impact. >> welcome back to "inside story." time for our insiders' inside story. harold? >> well, my inside story is something that's actually very visible. let's see what happens in the next week or two to governor chris christie of new jersey. he said just this week that his job is to make sure that there's a smooth transition in
the white house for president-elect donald trump. i thought his job was to be governor of new jersey. if it isn't, and if he's vying for a job as chief of staff in the white house, then give up the governorship and let somebody else do the job. >> val? >> well, the next chapter of pennsylvania's shameful porngate scandal may be coming next week, as acting attorney general beemer announces that he's going to release the maybe thousands of pornographic e-mails. josh shapiro is calling for him not to redact those, except for social security numbers and other sensitive information, but to give the names as well, so it could be an interesting week next week. >> could be explosive. all right. donna? >> in these challenging times, and in the city that was founded on tolerance, we're lucky to have a mayor that is committed to the protection of constitutional and civil rights for everyone in the city. i think that's gonna matter now more than it ever has. i spoke to the mayor this week. the tone of his remarks were respect for the office and an absolute commitment to the protection of the people that
are here. >> all right, sam, you get the last word. >> and i'm gonna pick up on that same theme. in a year in which politics was conducted in the lowest form of incivility that i think any of us have ever seen, hopefully, we've gotten it out of our system. we need to start listening to each other, and we need people to be leaders. and leaders represent a view of the future of the country which they can articulate in policy and words to help the country get together. >> all right, that's it for us. my thought -- talk to somebody who thinks differently. >> i'm nydia han along with gray hall. coming up next on "action news," local leaders continue to weigh in on an investigation after black penn students were targeted by racist messiage on a group massaging app. a local veteran shares his story in the making from hislif.