tv Matter of Fact NBC February 14, 2016 11:35pm-12:00am EST
>> our candidates are going to continue to run their own races. >> plus, with the stroke of a pen, she became a dreamer. now presidential candidates seek her endorsement. fernando: i'm fernando espuelas. welcome to "matter of fact." donald trump had a huge victory in new hampshire. and now he's moving south, to a road perhaps that leads to the nomination. will the other candidates be able to compete with him in south carolina and beyond? with me today are two journalists who are following the candidates' every move. priscilla alverez is with "the atlantic," looking for differences between candidates on the issues. shane goldmacher is with "politico" and just spent 21 days on the gop campaign trail. shane, priscilla, welcome to the program. priscilla: thank you for having us. shane: thank you. fernando: shane, you've been
some time now. what's going on there? obviously they're thrilled, but what's their plan going forward? shane: kind of the remarkable thing is for once donald trump wasn't the center of attention, and he might have been even bigger than he got. donald trump just won a state. he won new hampshire. he leads in every subsequent state in the entire country. now. he's heading to south carolina where he will have a big battle with ted cruz. the focus in new hampshire was second. was it going to marco rubio? was it going to be jeb bush? they just kind of clusterere together, and that makes the race so much more complicated. there's not going to be a classic establishment, favorite of the republican elites, that is going to take on donald trump right away or ted cruz. they're fighting amongst each other and it really leaves him a pretty good pathway going forward at this point. fernando: and how do you guys see kasich's number two position in new hampshire? is that really something that is sustainable, you think? shane: it's going to be really hard for him.
hampshire. his super pac spent a ton of money in new hampshire, and after new hampshire he has very, very little infrastructure. he's going to be in south carolina the next couple of days and really interestingly, next week, he is not just staying in south carolina, he is going to michigan, which doesn't have a te until 6. march tells you a lot about your strategy - where they go tells you what they're thinking. so march 6 is really the next state he really can win. that's a long ways away because there are 12 or so states that vote on march 1. it's super tuesday all across the south. if you don't win any of those places and you don't win any of the northeastern states like massachusetts that are voting, it's going to be very difficult to say "i'm a leader. i'm a top viable candidate" when you're not winning in 12 states until the first week of march. fernando: and priscilla, obviously a huge disappointment for hillary clinton coming out of new hampshire. how does that impact her, you think, going forward? priscilla: so she made sort of changes in her messaging. we might see some of her speeches, sort of more
sanders has been hitting. she'll certainly start honing in on the minorities. she does have a good record with minorities. and so we'll sort of see that play out in nevada and south carolina, where she has a lead in the hispanic and african american vote. fernando: so when i heard the victory speech from bernie sanders, he used "we" and, meanwhile, the concession speech for hillary clinton was all "i." how do you think that was perceived by the voters? how you think that impacts, if at all, people's perception of both candidates? shane: the big challenge for hillary clinton, if i'm breaking it down, why is she running president? what is her one sentence answer? i am running for president because x. and for bernie sanders he has an answer to that question. i am running for president because i think there is too much income inequality and people with money have too much wer. that's his one sentence answer. i've watched the clinton campaign a lot and i don't know what her one sentence is. she's tried different ones. she's now saying, i'm running for president because i'm fighting for you, everyday americans.
interesting to me. priscilla: and there were results out of new hampshire of just that -- the i and the we -- and how that resounded with voters. and a lot of people do respond to the we versus the i, which they were hearing from her. fernando: not surprisingly. and you think about -- obviously the democratic race is two people right now -- if you had to guess, in terms what's going to happen, because we're all guessing, in terms of the republicans how will this shake , out? is trump unstoppable at this point, do you think? shane: i don't think anybody is unstoppable. i think this is a completely unpredictable cycle at this point. what people have looked at is potentially narrowing to three candidates, which would be donald trump, running as sort of a populist, ted cruz, running as a hard line conservative, and a classic mainstream republican. and the issue is, will that third person even emerge? if they don't win in sc, which -- in south carolina, which they are all very far behind. you have a slew of southern
trump's populism and cruz's conservatism. so where do you get that third person? bush, john kasich, the ohio governor, and marco rubio the florida senator, are all competing for that so-called lane. but that's just a mess right now so any prediction, in three candidate fields, are super hard to predict. fernando: what do you think? priscilla: no, i would agree with shane. it is very unpredictable and i would not like to speculate on what is going to happen because it just changes every day. it's a dynamic race. what i have focused in on is just that it's not really a governor's race, which we've seen in history. there have been moments in history where governors have fared well and we haven't seen that in this race. we have jeb bush, who is struggling. john kasich did have a second place finish, but whether that really moves forward and what means for him moving forward is unclear. so i've been interested in how the governors have been faring and whether they'll be able to come out of that establishment . fernando: well, priscilla, shane, thank you so much for joining me today. priscilla: yes, thank you
and, what beyonce and donaldfernando: donald trump and bernie sanders may be changing politics in ways few imagined. they share a disdain for the "establishment" and a willingness to test their own parties. correspondent brittany shannon talked to dnc chairwoman debbie wasserman schultz in milwaukee about the trump effect and challenges within the democratic party. brittany: this is the spin room for the democratic debate in milwaukee, where wasserman schulz engages with reporters. brittany: donald trump in this race has kind of thrown out the rule book when it comes to
what does that mean for the democratic party as far as changing its own strategy or -- strategy? ms. wasserman schulz: well, donald trump has thrown out american values, so from our perspective the entire republican field has decided that they want to adhere the dictates of donald trump when it comes to their -- brittany: drawing a hard line between republicans and democrats,wasserman schultz sees a sharp contrast -- especially with donald trump. brittany: so, looking at him as a potential front-runner, it doesn't change anything the party is currently doing? ms. wasserman schulz: with all the republicans jumping, leaping to embrace the direction donald trump has taken their party, we like our candidates who have really continued to have a substantive and robust discussion. brittany: wasserman schulz dismisses fights between sanders and clinton over progressive and feminist labels.
but maintains their mutual respect for one another. ms. wasserman schulz: they've both consistently said that they agree that either one of them would be far better than any one of the republican candidates. in fact, the republicans spend a lot of time insulting one another trying to throw as sharp an elbow as possible to try and knock one of their candidates off the stage. brittany: bernie sanders some of , his critics are saying he's unelectable because of his socialist label, and there are critics of hillary saying that she's untrustworthy. is the party ready to support either candidate? ms. wasserman schulz: i am confident that either one of our candidates, when they are ultimately the nominee, are going to earn the trust and support of american voters because they agree with our party. brittany: michael bloomberg says he could consider a run for the presidency. what would that do to this race? ms. wasserman schulz: i think he'll find it unnecessary to run, because those issues are already being taken up by a candidate that ultimately has an opportunity to be elected. brittany: the chairwoman also
candidates have the important issues covered, and voters will respond. in milwaukee, i'm brittany shannon. fernando: the democrats have launched an intensive effort to attract the women's vote, millennials, african americans, and the latino vote in the south and west. one woman is empowering undocumented people to give them a voice in this election. astrid silva joins us via skype from las vegas. welcome to the program. astrid: thank you for having me. fernando: so you've been a very powerful advocate for dreamers -- what does it feel like to make an endorsement for president? astrid: it was something that was very daunting, because again as an undocumented student i think that sometimes we fear that we still don't have voices. we sometimes still feel that we still do not have a role in this political process. so it was definitely a big responsibility and it was something that i didn't take lightheartedly and i think many others don't. fernando: and you endorse hillary clinton, of course --
astrid: well, the major reason was that i was talking to my community and i have a lot of ability to talk to people not only within political movements but outside of it, at the grocery store, at the bus stop and people, a lot of them, the issues they were talking about were things that i think secretary clinton would be very powerful in and be able to get the job accomplished. and also within our group of dreamers we really talked about this. and believe me, we caucused ourselves. we talked about it and we all came to the conclusion that secretary clinton was a choice for us. fernando: some dreamers have actually gone out there and told some people not to vote for some curious reason. why did you choose the path of integrating yourself into the political system? astrid: i've seen the effects of people not voting. i think here is the state of nevada, where my home has been for the past 20 something years, i've seen how one vote can sway an election. here in the state of nevada, sometimes when there is a tie vote they have to draw from a deck of cards.
difference, but most importantly their vote. fernando: and finally, as mrs. clinton moves to nevada with the rest of the candidates, are you feeling good for your candidate? astrid: i think i'm feeling - i'm very excited. this is the first time outside of the 2012 race where it's competitive and i will be participating, as well many of the students that have not only received daca but those that are still fighting for their parents to have that relief so that they're not deported. and people here are excited. we're registering voters, we're making sure that people are getting out there, understanding the caucus, that people really are engaged because i think that they care about it, it's just you have to find them where they're at. fernando: well, thank you so much for joining me today astrid: thank you. fernando: latino voters make up 15 percent of nevada's electorate, a significant voice in this election. >> up next. >> does this play into the concept of dysfunction in our congress? >> why are democrats begging the republicans to come to the table?
trump challenge the status quo. rep. ryan: the way we hold the obama administration accountable is controlling their budget. fernando: house speaker paul ryan has an uphill battle on his hands. and it's not just a fight with the white house. it's a fight with fellow republicans who say the president's four trillion dollar budget is dead on arrival. congressman chris van hollen of maryland is the ranking democratic member of the house budget committee. congressman, welcome to the program rep. van hollen: it's great to be with you, thanks. fernando: thank you so much. the president has presented his budget. the majority in the house is saying they will not even have a hearing on it. does this play into the concept of dysfunction and immobility in our congress? rep. van hollen: this is a really sad episode here. we had hoped with the new year,
who expressed an interest in more openness and debate, that we would see a different kind of attitude. what we saw instead is for the first time ever, we believe, the republican budget committee chairs are refusing to even have a presentation of the president's budget, in the sense that we usually have the president's main budget director come and testify before the budget committees and provide the outlines of the president's budget. they've refused to allow him to testify, a major breach in protocol and something every american regardless of their political persuasion should be unhappy about. fernando: so you mentioned protocol. i mean, even if they are going to vote against, why not hear out the president? rep. van hollen: well, that's exactly what we're asking. that is why whether you've had republican presidents or democratic presidents and regardless of who has been in
the budget committees have always heard from the president's main budget person. and it should help everybody. you should want to hear the ideas of the president's budget, whether you agree with him or not in the end. and the american people deserve that kind of hearing. i've written a letter with my colleagues to the chair of the budget committee asking them to reconsider this because it's a breach of protocol but it's also a breach of opportunity for everybody to hear what the president's budget includes and for that important debate. fernando: and as we look forward, and you know very well that voters are very frustrated with washington in general, both parties and so forth, is there a reason for hope? rep. van hollen: when you have divided government, a democrat in the white house and republicans in majority on the hill, you've got to have people who are going to at least look for the common ground. i will fight to the end on certain issues, i will make sure we don't cut social security, protect a woman's right to choose.
but there are other areas of the budget where we should be able to find common ground. and i was pleased, yes, for some help. last november, i helped negotiate a sort of two year, bipartisan agreement on the budget that prevented the government shutdown and prevented the default on the debt. so that was a glimmer of hope. but now we're sort of back into it and this is a very bad sign, a refusal to even hear from the president's budget director. fernando: well, let's hope for some hope. congressman, thank you so much for joining me today. rep. van hollen: thank you so much. democrats see little hope, as the conservative house freedom caucus pushes for lower spending levels. passing the budget may be difficult for speaker ryan if republicans don't unite around a single plan. >> coming up next, twitter's plan to take down terrorists. >> it's a constant battle. >> then, political correctness
and donald trump. fernando: twitter visionaries believe that the popular social media service functions best as a virtual "global town square." because of its world-wide reach, terrorist organizations are using it as a recruiting tool. from the black lives matter movement to the toppling of foreign governments, twitter has succeeded in galvanizing social movements. but enabling groups in terrorist atrocities like the isis attacks in paris is not what the social media giant had in mind. according to twitter, over 125,000 terrorisislinked accounts have been suspended in the past seven months, most affiliated with or supporting isis. and in a blog post, the company condemned the use of twitter to promote terrorism, noting that "twitter rules make it clear that this type of behavior is not permitted on our service."
social media, banning terrorists from u ung twitter is like playing whack-a-mole. tom sanderson is a terrorism expert at the center for strategic and international udies. tom: social media is a tremendous tool of amplification and a multiplier of isis activities. it will be to their advantage for years i believe, or perhaps forever. limiting t tir accounts, going after social media is an important thing to do, but it will have a limited effect. fernando: sanderson also noted it is important for social media companies to "police" the internet. but the advantage goes to those who know how to exploit it. i'd like to know your thoughts. tweet me @matteroffacttv. check in on facebook or connect with our video site to view and share videos from all our programs. >> when we return, beyonce and