with any writer. thursday morning, wheeler parker junior and christopher benson discussed their book, "a few days full of trouble." watch washington journal live thursday morning starting at 7 a.m. eastern with our special holiday authors week series on c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. ♪ watch the best of c-span's q&a. wednesday, craig furman and the president on his book, "author and chief -- "author in chief." listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now app. ♪ announcer: the house and senate are in recess for the

holidays. the senate convenes january 8. the house on january 9. both chambers face two upcoming deadlines to avoid a government shutdown. the first january 19 and the other february 2. >> the committees are ready to do the work but we are waiting -- awaiting for the other chamber to come forward with a number we can agree upon. >> leader mcconnell and i will figure out the best way to get this vote in quickly. neither of us want to shut down. announcer: coverage on the c-span network c-span, now, or c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. announcer: a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work. when citizens are truly informed, our republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span.

unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capitol, to wherever you are. the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ where are you financially compared to three years ago or roughly the start of the biden administration? here's how you can tell. if you say you are better off than three years ago, give us a call at (202) 748-8000. if you say you are worse off, (202) 748-8001. the number to call. perhaps you are the same financially. you want to tell us why. (202) 748-8002. you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. post on facebook and x as well. we should do this earlier.

a recent poll done by the financial times and the university of michigan. only 14% of american voters believe they are financially better off since president biden entered office. a couple of factors. the poll takes in 70% of voters thinking the current president's economic policies have hurt the economy or had no impact. 33% saying they hurt the economy a lot. it adds 82% of respondents cited price increases as their primary financial stress. perhaps that is something you can factor into. many pvious callers talked about the prices they pay, some talked about jobs, some talked about savings. factor all those things in if you want. if you're better off than you were three years ago, (202 748-8000. if you are worse off, 02 748-8001. if you are the same, (202)

748-8002. the front page of the washington post talks about economic growth in the new year, this new year. retail sales leading up to the holidays. sales between november 1 and a december 24 up comparatively year ago. online shopping accounted for a large share of the increased, rising 6.3% compared to a 2.2% jump or in person shoppers. apparel sales roles and a strong demand for in person dining, a jump in restaurant spending. that's an aspect of economic -- the economic snapshot. april in indiana says better off than three years ago. april, you start us off. caller: i am living financially

better than i have ever lived in my entire life. i have a great job. i have a great income. prior to that i had a lot of financial problems. i struggle to pay bills. i can go to the grocery store and i don't look at prices. i justby -- i just buy what i want to buy. not long ago i had serious illness. health insurance is great. i think this is the best economy that i can ever remember living in ever. host: what changes made it better? caller: i think what made it better is, you know, there are more job opportunities. folks are not able to work remote, work hybrid. i have seen so many friends that if they are not happy with their job within a couple of months they can get a new job.

host: ok. caller: it's good. it's very good. i really wish more people would embrace the great economy that we have. to be able to go into the store and you don't really worry about things -- host: did you get it -- is that because of a new job or financial gain? caller: i think it's because i've been able to save money. i have been able to -- like i said, i have a really good job. two years ago, i had an ok job. i was making pretty good money. now the economy is really great. host: kirk up next in virginia says he is worse off. caller: good morning. i live in a rural area. i'm retired on a fixed income. when it comes to inflation i don't trust the government statistics. i go to the grocery store. you see things like brand x

oatmeal doubling in price over the last two years. when you see that kind of basic commodity like that go up to that extent that is hurting a lot of middle-class folks. the government inflation numbers on food is 12%, whatever. that's a joke. host: are you saying it as food prices that make it worse for you particularly? caller: food. interest rates. young couples can no longer afford to build their first house. it's now $500,000. that's in the course of the last three years. host: kirk in richard svile. valerie says she is better off. valerie in saginaw? caller: hi. i am better off.

i can leave my house without fear of covid. prices have always going up. i'm old enough to remember one a five cent candy bar mid something. potato chips. throughout my lifetime -- i'm 71 -- prices of always going up. it has nothing to do with the president. people have to adjust and learn how to live in their budget. my daughter, my granddaughters, my grandkids are doing wonderful. i'm retired. i live on a fixed income. i stay in my lane. i don't want to go and buy things, a new car. i remember when you get a new car for under $5,000. i remember when gas was not even a dollar a gallon. things have always gone up. it has nothing to do with the

president. it has to do with the free enterprise and companies raising their prices. we need to stop and learn how our economy works. host: what makes you better off specifically? caller: i got a nice little race last year from social security. -- raise last year from social security and i'm getting a smaller one this year. i medication has gone down. one is on the list to go down next year that i desperately need. it is over $100 per prescription. not counting my other meds. some meds have gone down to $.32 co-pay. i have really -- i'm really doing much better off. i've fully been retired for maybe two years. -- i have only been retired for maybe two years. host: sue in michigan says same

off. caller: hello. i want to wish everybody a merry christmas and happy new year. my situation is this. i'm 70 years old, retired. my husband is still working. we don't blow our money. we watch our money. we buy whatever we want. were not rich. we are in a rural area. we enjoyed ourselves. we do what we want to do. nothing has affected us. groceries did go up a little bit but i watch what we spent. -- spend. we don't do without. we buy whatever we want to buy. it has not affected me hardly at all. as far as the market goes, the market is going up so i'm happy. that is my situation. host: there are some examples. if you think you are worse off or better off or the same, call

the number that best represents you. you can also text us if you wish at (202) 748-8003. there was an announcement from jay powell talking about the fact they will not raise interest rates, at least for now. he was asked about surprises he saw in the u.s. economy. this was a few weeks ago. here is a portion of what jay powell had to say [video] -- say. [video] >> forecasters were broadcasting a recession 423. that includes fed forecasters and essentially all forecasters. a high proportion of forecasters saw very weak growth in the recession. we actually had a very strong year. that was a combination of strong demand but also real gains in the supply side. this was the year when labor force participation picked up. immigration picked up. the distortions to supply and

demand from the pandemic, the shortages, the bottlenecks begin to unwind. we had significant supply-side demand was strong -- just because the healing on the supply side. that was a surprise to just about everybody. the inflation forecast is roughly what people wrote down a year ago but in a different setting. i would say the labor market because of stronger growth has been significant the better. if you look back at the sep, there was significant increase in on employment. that did not happen. we are still at 3.7%. we have seen strong growth, still a tight labor market but one that is coming back into balance with the support from the supply-side, a greater supply of labor. that is what we have seen.

i think that combination was not anticipated broadly. host: if you want to see more of that, it took place on december 13. you can find it on the archives at c-span.org. riya in south carolina says worse off than three years ago. good morning. caller: good morning. the reason i'm worse off than i was three years ago is because i have not received a raise. i have received two raises. i started full-time in 2019 for the pandemic it. -- just before the pandemic it. i was guaranteed a raise every year for the cost of living. then covid hit. i ended up not getting any raises for all of covid until last year. that coupled with the food cost increase and i'm only making about $2000 a month, there is literally just no ability for me

to pull myself out of the hole. i'm having to borrow money just to buy groceries. things that cost two dollars three years ago now cost five or six. it is just really exhausting because i'm working 40 hours a week and i can't afford anything after i finish paying all my bills, my light bill, cable. i live in a camper. i can't even afford regular rent. paying homage bills, i make $2000 a month. i have maybe 200 and $300 left over every month just to buy groceries. the cost of groceries is so high that it into being $200 to $300. i have to borrow money just to pay my bills. i don't blame joe biden for it. i blame -- is the responsibly of the u.s. government to not be taking care of its people or

ensuring we have what is necessary. i know the homeless situation is much higher than it was a few years back. it is because the cost of living has forced people out of homes to live in campers like me or to live on the street because they can't afford rent. it is really frustrating. host: giving us her story there in south carolina. we will hear from alice in austin, texas. better off than three years ago. caller: how are you? host: go ahead. you are on. caller: i feel like i'm a lot better off than i was three years ago. this year i did not have to pay any co-pay for my insurance. i am retired. i have had all my covid shots. i have great grandkids.

one grandson who is getting his fellowship. i had my first great, great granddaughter and everything is going just fine. joe biden is doing a great job. i am a democrat but i also think outside the box. life is just great. host: ok. alice in texas. joseph in maryland, says he is worse off than he was three years ago. tell us why. caller: good morning and thank you. it's a pleasure to hear your voice. you are a hard worker providing for our world. i hear your voice everyday whenever you are worki announcer: you can continue watching this portion of washington journ on c-span.org. we takyou live to a discussion on the 20 election with pollster and political analyst frank

luntz. >> i'm speaking with frank luntz. we are happy to have him with us. i hope you will give him your undivided attention. as he discusses what is possible and probable in 2024 based on the latest results. welcome. >> thank you. i'm going to do something that i've not done before until this moment, which is to say that these last few weeks, the last few months have been very challenging health-wise, but they have also given me a sense of a new lease on my career, a new way to look at and articulate where we are right now. it's been very tough. i spent a few days in the -

in the e.r. i will tell you that our health care system is not so great but it also allows me the freedom to tell you what everyone in this call is seeking right now. which is the truth. not a democratic truth, not a republican truth, not even a no labels truth, but a truth about where we stand and sit as a country, as we are going into 2024, which looks to be one of the worst elections of modern times. i i'm going to do something special for you which is walk through some data with you. stuff we have been doing over the last few weeks. and i'm going to open this up to answer questions. it's important that we speak of what we know rather than what we wish to know. and that we examine -- and i'm trying to pay attention to every word that i say to you.

because it's never been more important. i'm afraid that people are often misled. i'm afraid what i often see on the television, 15-20 feet away from me, is not always the truth, not always accurate. but at this point, if we are going to make the right decisions as a country, as a people, and as a functioning democracy, we need to know where things are. going to pull up -- i'm going to pull up some results for you that i think you will find particularly in wharton. -- particularly important. i'll try to get it full-screen for you. to start, where we are right now, and we look at this every month, and majority of americans -- a majority of americans will consider voting for a third

party candidate with joe biden versus donald trump. i want to dispel that the -- at the outset that this idea of a third already candidate leads to the election of donald trump. that is false. that is inaccurate. the reason why trump at this point does a slightly -- ever so slightly better is because joe biden is doing so much worse. as we get closer to these first votes of 2024, if you are a democratic-leaning person on this call, you should be apoplectic about your party's nominee. not because of an issue, or any attributes other than one, and that is his age. and that is something that no campaign can fix.

that is something that no spin doctor can change. and that has weakened him. but overall, it is an eight point difference. 80% of independents would vote for a third party candidate. i know most polling right now, if you take a look at the nationwide surveys, most polling has donald trump up by two, on average. we have him that even. notice that at 20%, we choose a community third party candidate. 16% of independents. the top choice among republicans. 37% among independents. i know how many people are on this call. i know who is on this call.

i am a little bit nervous. because i want to get this right. but i want you to see this. third party candidate, 15% of democrats and 16% of gop candidates. how does that elect donald trump? it doesn't. allow me to show you a few things that we have been learning. i'm trying to figure out what matters most to america right now as we enter 2024. and what matters most for this country is still freedom. but there are two definitions of freedom. republicans define it as freedom to own a gun, speak your mind, pray anyway you want, freedom to -- democrats describe freedom as freedom from racism, from bigotry, from hate, from fear -- whether you define at the republican way or democratic

way, freedom is still the number one attribute in this country and a unity ticket will have to address how they will make america more free in the months and years to follow. second. and i love this one because this is my journey. what i've been going through over the last few years. they don't want bullshit. they don't want lies. they want to know exactly the truth. and, yes, the number one concern about social media. about what they get on television. on cable news and what they read in the newspapers. is it the truth or is it biased or one-sided? only partially the truth? it is the number one attribute we want more of in 2024. you will see that as well.

i see hands are already going up. by the way -- what we are going to do is i want you to be focusing your question. focus on the learning part of this. wipe everyone's hands out. when we go to questions, we will start from there. this is what i do with my own students. i teach at west point. these young men and women, these young cadets are so devoted to this country, to the constitution, to doing the right thing for the right reasons. i know a lot of you have children and grandchildren, at universities right now, it really seems like it's hell, and it is -- at west point, they understand service, sacrifice, commitment. when i do presentations like this, i add the west point aspect in mind.

-- have the west point aspect in mind. third, the public is really frustrated with a lack of success and results from washington. if you want to discuss congress, which i think we should, it is more likely than not republicans lose the house and democrats lose the senate. there's going to be a turnover in both institutions on capitol hill. and that's because of frustration that has boiled over into anger. why can they get nothing done? the public will punish thema year from now . fourth, with all due respect to the white house, inflation is not transitory. it is still by far the number one economic issue and the fourth highest priority for americans right now. and it's very simple -- food, fuel, housing, and health care. the things that matter most

to most people are more expensive today than they were 2, 3, 4 years ago and the public is saying i can't afford this and they want something better. the candidate that has the best answer to make things more affordable is the advantage that has the advantage come november 5. this is related to number three, the lack of results and lack of solutions. the attribute of problem-solving. not a problem discussing. not collective action. but actually rolling up your sleeves and fixing what's wrong is something they think is missing in america right now and they are so desperate for that from their president in 2024. number six, the american people are not looking for oversight. because oversight is performance.

they are looking for genuine accountability. the idea that you say what you mean. you mean what you say. you do what you say. and if you don't, you are punished for that. that's what accountability is for the average american. number seven, people believe in climate, that there is global warming. they believe it is man-made. they want something done with it. but to the left, they talk about sustainability. that's not what the public is looking for. sustainability to the status quo. the red river will still be there, the forest will still be there. that's not what the public is looking for. they are looking for cleaner, safer, healthier, better. that's not what they seem to be getting. that's what no labels is about. this has never been a priority in american politics since i've

been working at it. which is 1989 -- actually 1987. the idea of working together side-by-side. the unity. the country coming together. and it's not as important as affordability or freedom. but it matters to people. and the last one is injustice. as you will see here, some of these are republican issues. more republican issues. some of them are democratic issues. but this is what americans so desperately want. these nine points will determine who the next president is. i will show a couple more things, than we will go to questions. we track this every single year. it's never been this high. this is part of the problem. i want to get at the root cause of why we are so divided.

why we are so polarized. why it is so poisonous. i want to challenge you. some of you want to blame trump for that. but it's so much deeper than just one person. the feeling we were promised something and it was broken. the feeling of being ignored, forgotten or betrayed is actually more important than any one individual. it becomes impossible to solve a situation like we have in this country when people are so angry, it is almost three out of four. i will show you one more question. this is the most important question of all. do you consider yourself invested in america's future? do you care what happens to the country? does the united states matter to you? two thirds of americans say yes. but then look at the bottom question.

is america invested in your future? does this country care about you? it's only 31%. and -- and that divide between people who are invested and people feel the country is not invested in them is what is creating this ugliness, this horrific willingness to abuse each other and to tear each other to shreds. in every speech i give, i actually begin the session with, we are not going to do that here. we are not going to behave like it-year-old children. these are serious problems that deserve serious solutions and a serious conversation. this is the reason why of all the things i'm doing, because i've cut way back on my workload, of all the things that i do -- nothing matters to me more than this. because again, guys, take up your hands. i want you to hear this.

when your fellow americans believe their country is not invested in them, it's not their fault. it is our fault, collectively. we have to do something collectively to make a difference. and that's why i've been having these conversations and looking at where things stand right now. because i believe this organization does a better job of including more people with greater diversity of voices and priorities and partisanship than any other. because in the end, we are not going to fix this -- it is crap if someone says that trump or biden have the answers, because if they did, our country would be far better off today than it is right now. we all have to do this together because we are all in this together. we will succeed together or fail together. with that, i'm going to take off these notes. i want to start responding to you. now the floor is yours.

i'm going to let you call on people first. i'm looking at my screen and the entire screen is hands going up already. >> our first question is from judy. >> thank you, dr. luntz. i would like to address your comment about, joe biden is unelectable because of his age. i would like to understand that. the formation of a unity ticket -- i've said this before. but ageism as the last ism to go and it's going to take a long time. is that the primary reason concerning joe biden? even looking at his record. in in terms of a unity ticket, someone over 75 years old, but they are competent, no gap

s, or minimal gaps, but people do not inject the ageism into it -- is not possible? -- is that possible? >> i will answer both your questions. let's do one question per person. because you can see how many people have questions and we run out of time. the ocean with biden is actually not his age. it is how he presents himself. at press conferences, he loses his place. he has trouble completing a thought. he was perfectly fine at the address. but he has not been perfectly fine at public events since that. one thing to consider, what will it be like in a nationwide debate a year from now, in september or october from next year? what will joe biden be like then? that's how people are looking at it. younger people pulled away from him.

african-americans have begun to pull away from him. i believe much of the black community will return. some will not. particularly black men. who see in donald trump victimization. they believe his narratives. they do not see that joe biden, even though he has appointed more black officials, they don't see him as necessarily relating to them. the issue of age, young people look at him and he reminds them of their grandparents. and that becomes impossible. and so, it is performance, rather than the numerical value that is holding him back. and if i were a democratic strategists, as i said, i will be blunt with you -- i will be screaming bloody murder saying, this man has transformed a country, he has done his job, but can you imagine him being president for five more years?

which is what you are asking people to do? i think that will fail. some of the independent candidates, joe manchin in particular, are older as well. and donald trump. someone on this call is going to tell me donald trump is as old as joe biden. he does not act as old. and you are not expecting him to be different. i think joe biden is an incredibly weak candidate. because of his performance right now. i know him and his son. i taught his other son. i really appreciate the family. that's why i will not make fun of him. but from a political perspective, the democrats are probably nominating the weakest candidate. next. >> we have a question from matthew r. >>, what state you are from -- >> tell me what state you are

from. >> i'm from pennsylvania. >> matthew, your state is the single biggest pain in the ass state from any of america. you guys can't count votes worth crepe. i don't know if this is -- if we are not on cnn, i would say we can't -- you can't count votes for shit. but we can't use that language. pennsylvania has to change their process. if you don't, you are going to cause another 2020 all over again. joe biden clearly won pennsylvania. >> on behalf of pennsylvania, i apologize. >> i don't accept your apology. fix it. [laughter] >> i will use my power -- my immense power -- anyway, my question is, i've been thinking about other elections in which there were third-party candidates who got 5% or more of the popular vote. there are two, one in 1996

for the democratic incumbent was reelected despite the third-party candidate, ross perot, and one in 1980 where the incumbent democrat, jimmy carter, lost, and there was a third party candidate, john anderson. what is the fundamental difference between years and which a third-party candidate helps a democrats versus those in which they harm to democrat -- harm the democrats? >> it depends on the candidates running. this is why i positioned this, this is a real pain in. i can't even say myself. this is a life-size painting of teddy roosevelt. and his election, he enabled woodrow wilson to win in 1912. it all depends on the candidates. depends on the economy and whether or not we are in a warlike situation. you can't say that it helps one party or another. because right now it is exactly --

i mean to their percentage points, that even between trump and biden and who gets help and who gets hurt. i don't know the answer to your question because i don't think it is answerable. >> thank you. >> bad state, bad electoral counting, but really good question, matthew. >> that's a thing i can control. [laughter] >> was next -- who's next? >> next question is from andrew brickman. >> northern michigan. the impediment to the unity ticket, i've heard from others, is, i don't want to "waste" my vote, that is the term used. i'm just trying, as a poster, one of the things -- pollster, one of the things that bothers me is the unity ticket will not be out in the public's eye until late in this process.

meaning the primaries will be going and things will be -- decisions will be being made. >> can i ask you a quick question? >> yeah >> the no labels candidate will be chosen when? >> march. >> ok, the election is? >> it's a fair point. my question is -- i feel like it's important to that the unity ticket polling well so people don't think they are wasting their vote. >> unless they feel their candidate has a chance, i don't know that they will vote for a unity ticket. andrew, no more something is out there, the more negative it gets. biden numbers have been coming down. the closer to the election we get, the lower his numbers are. trump is no better off today than he was six months ago. and joe biden is worse. how much longer?

how much more evidence do you need? that the public doesn't want either of these people. numbers, the percentages, every month they go up, the number of people who will consider voting third-party. who want to vote third-party. it's plenty of time. when is the debate? when is the first debate between the leading presidential candidates? september. we are the only country on in the face of the earth that does elections that last an entire year. that no labels candidate will have plenty of time. plenty of time to get beat up on and be held accountable. you are reading the press coverage. this organization, because there is no candidate, people are slamming this organization. this is ridiculous. this is what i want you to tell me what state you are from. i want you to know,

this is america. i am looking at the average age of the people on the screen. you are a little bit older than the average. we need more sams. that said, this is every movement, every ideology, people on the left, people on the right, and that individual becomes more electable the longer that we go. so don't rush it. middle of march is perfectly fine. and don't forget. if donald trump doesn't win the nomination because he struggles in new hampshire, a key state -- by the way, there is no reason to wait until tuesday. if he wins iowa and new hampshire by more than 20 points, he's been on many. -- he is the nominee.

so it is what it is. i don't think you have to rush it. i don't think you have to choose somebody right now. it's important to the people who want the nomination to go out and earn it and deserve it by their positions. , please. -- next one, please. >> our next question is from al g. >> from michigan. >> this zoom call is dominated by michiganders. [laughter] >> according to polls, the biggest uniting action that the american public feels is getting money out of politics, because of the supreme court decision which makes it very difficult to reform money in

politics, what do you think -- if both of these candidates would promote an amendment to the constitution to regulate money in politics, because it is extremely popular by both independents, democrats and republicans. >> i do believe that it is overwhelming and bipartisan. that the public thinks it is a problem. i don't believe you will get congress to do anything about it. the democrats are very hostile to money and politics until they started raising dark money. until they had their own donors that started writing not seven, but eight figure checks. there will be too many republicans that like the current system and see money and

speech. i see your question but i don't think it's possible. i would hope that a unity ticket would support a limits of democracy -- elements of democracy that brings the people's voice rather than the people's checkbook into the political process. you are on the right track. but that is something for that third party unity candidate to address to strengthen democracy. if you actually listen to voters, they are not seeking democracy for democracy's sake, they are seeking a better democracy that actually works, so that it functions, so that if you have a problem with affordability, they can address it. -- washington can address it. you have a problem with ukraine in the middle east, the members of congress can vote on something and get stuff done.

i don't think there's a person on this call that does not see the crisis at the board. cities that never had immigration issues now have immigration challenges. but we are incapable of fixing it because our democracy is broken. and that is what the public wants more than anything else from a third party candidate. to get it done. not to talk about immigration, but to resolve it. not to complain about inflation, but fixed it. -- but fix it. to me, the most important aspect is not the policies. it's demonstrating they have the character traits to dowhat they say. good question. >> i'm going to go to the former secretary of the

interior. governor. >> how are you, frank? sorry to hear you had an issue with health. happy you are back. >> put me in a room with 774 people. i'm going to wake up and be normal. you talked about service to the country. he not only represented this state, but america with dignity and purpose. we don't have enough people in washington right now. that means so much to hear you say that.

-- i'm afraid we have let them go. i'm afraid there's going to be an entire generation who only sees politics through the lens of a supreme court decision that they oppose and through the lens of people yelling at each other. that is not a higher calling. you are correct.

it's no longer the partisanship. it's now the poison. frankly what we should be doing is having a discussion of education on this whole. -- on this call. so your concern is what keeps me awake at night. it is all in here. this is the last opportunity we have to fix it. >> appreciate that very much. >> thank you. appreciate you. next question, please. >> our next question is from matt.

i appreciate you coming here today. that keeps me awake at night. who wants to work in politics and run one day. how do we start being optimistic again about the future and run on that? >> my cadets at west point give me a hard time because i am negative. the problem is all i do focus groups. all i do is this is an interesting division we are about to see them. i listen to the public as i traveled across the country. i have done focus groups is

called. you can either analyze the call as being the best of times, because we are tackling the problem we need to, or, the worst of times because the problem has gotten out of hand. either this is the day, december 27, i think, that on this day, 800 of us got on a call to fix america, and that is awesome. or, you can look at it as on december 27 800 people discussed and lamented about what is wrong.

this organization is literally trying to solve the democratic problems created by others. y'all have stepped in. these are not your problems. you did not make this happen, matt. nobody is stepping up to say we can do better. it is so infuriating to me that

major mega politicians, chuck schumer, if you are a democrat and chuck schumer is your majority leader you should be furious at him for telling the country that they do not have a right to vote for someone else. they do not have a right to reject politics as usual. i don't understand that. i think that is one of the worst developments. i believe that wholesale. in the end, no one is voting for or against labels. they are voting for or against donald trump, joe biden, and a unity ticket. i think a greater number than ever before are going to get that unity ticket a second shot -- give that unity ticket a second shot. i believe that as young people engage in this effort and say enough is enough, you can make a difference.

by the way, for those taking notes, that's the key to this entire discussion. the word enough. that is what i believe will be the most important impact if you guys go to fruition. if there is a ticket. that presidential nominee -- i cannot see myself so i don't know if i'm doing this on screen or not. but they will hold their hand up to president trump and hold their hand up to joe biden like this and they will point to the two of them and say, enough. enough partisanship. enough coercion. enough polarization. enough division. another anger. enough with the crop you have created in this country that has set us against each other. enough. if that person gets a chance to do that, you just may save democracy. that is why we are here on this call. i do not know if one election

does it. i know that having that moment on stage, where probably 70 million americans will be watching live, that moment is essential for this country. i want to see that happen. that will happen, i believe, because i've calls like this one and this organization. next. >> brad, from indiana. >> i wanted to thank you for the q&a you did yesterday with ed. that was a helpful dialogue you had with him. my question is, if with the five or six or seven truly swing states, if the 20% number you talked about is truly like that

unity ticket third-party option, in those states might've that number actually be higher? could it approach one third of the vote in the swing states? >> it could. because everyone will be paying attention to those states. what might be interesting is, if you are not from these states. it's michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin. north carolina. new hampshire. nevada. i know i am missing one. georgia. donald trump cannot forget georgia. those seven states, we should hear from people from those seven states. because they will determine america. to make it even smaller than that, 80% of americans decided

to change between trump and biden. it was only 12% that could still change their minds. when you look at those seven states knowing it is only 12% of the seven states, you realize the entire election is over 1% of america. yes, it really does matter. if we can get people, raise your hands because i will call on you from the hands that are up. from one of those seven states. donna, i will go to you but you are so low down with your camera i cannot see you. >> let me say one thing. we are tired of accepting we are in a fear tactic going for the lesser of two evils. this is an opportunity for us to stand up and say we are not

proud of the two options before us. this is everybody's opportunity to say that we are tired of the two options. >> we agree with that. what can i answer for you? >> is sad. >> we honor the statements. i only have 18 minutes. anyone, what can i answer for you? i will give quicker answers and not filibuster. >> the next percent in the line was todd sorensen. >> i am currently residing in costa rica. according to what i understand, more than 50% of the electoral vote a decision gets made by congress.

according to the second graphic, if those go according to the graphic, the labels would be maybe 20% and two major candidates get 30% each. at what point do we then give our votes away to congress to make those decisions? >> we don't know who will be in congress. this is difficult. this is not appalling question. it suppressed no question. i agree with racquel. she's correct. the american people are tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. that said, i do not have a good answer for the question of, does it go to congress? the last time an election went to congress was 1876. other than a few people on the call, no one on the call has been alive since 1876. there is no way to address that.

at this point i think teachers should be teaching that you vote for the best candidate not the lesser of two evils. but since i cannot answer let's go on. >> frank, we worked together in the past. i don't know if you remember, it was in ohio on a childcare thing. i want to know, can you name the three or four key things that are important about the head of the unity ticket, whether they are characteristic, are they conservative republicans? are they people that can talk well? give us the three or four things you think are most important to windows votes? >> number one is they need a record is a problem solver, nothing more. that's why the label of the

problem solvers caucus was so important. number two, they have to be seen as being truthful because the two presidential nominees are accused even by one side or both sides as not necessarily speaking the truth. they have to have a track record of getting things done. they have to make processes they are able to deliver. that suggests a governor will be better than a senator or a man. it will be someone that has actually done stuff you can look at point by point. they made the pledge, the commitment, and they got it done. a problem solver, a truth teller with a track record of success. those are my top three. good question. next. >> chuck walsh? chuck, you are muted. unmute. >> thank you. thank you, friend. i am glad you are feeling up to

being here. i am sad to hear you had health issues. one thing i would like to ask. there is likely to be something happening during the course of the election. you cannot know what that will be. it does seem like there will be some kind of strike back against what is happening in the middle east. there is also, according to the fbi director, a very significant terrorist watchlist happening in the country these days. what kind of impact will something dramatic like that have on the election? and whether or not a unity ticket might survive? >> that is why there has to be a demonstration of leadership. that has already happened. it has to be dumb on a global scale. i agree that there will be october surprises, what they call it. there might be a mason prize or a june surprise. maybe multiple. is that individual unity ticket has to have not only natural --

national experience, but global experience, to be particularly successful. in the end, i think we have become so polarized that if you have an attack on american soil i am not convinced it would bring america together. if something happens on american soil and think you will have people trying to blame one of the two candidates for that happening. we came together on september 11. we were not republicans or democrats on september 11. we were americans. we were attacked. i question whether we are still americans if that attack should take place in 2020 four. so, -- 2024. so, that makes the attributes of the unity ticket even more important. good question. next. >> thomas horton. >> i'm from kentucky. thank you for your feedback today. what are your thoughts about if

someone not in politics already, i.e., an admiral or general, ran at the top of the ticket. what could they do to inspire other people to run? at what seems to be a key point? >> i have two favorites. i think admiral mcraven would be incredible. make your bet. that would be an amazing statement when we -- when we do not do the small stuff while. frankly, he does not want to do it. he will kill me. if this is on c-span, and i do not know. i know it means i will never be invited to a dallas mavericks game. but it is completely solution oriented. the skills we need. in international and global business men and a success story. both of those two individuals have character.

both of those two individuals have sacrificed. i think that is really part of what we have been missing in america and they can handle themselves on the global stage. i agree with you. next question. >> our next question is david's burial. david, unmute please. >> frank, i sent you this question. i think it is really important it gets an answer. you have the media out there both on the left and right. they are really invested in another donald trump presidential run. i think he is the anointed candidate for the republicans. i think he generates lots of writings and lots of money. it's a form of drifting on both sides.

i do not know how you cut through that noise. i watch media. i am sure you watch media all day long to try to figure this all out and get a better perspective. >> now i will do to you what i did to my students. you asked me a really good question and you could have stopped 10 seconds ago. i don't mean to be rude. it's a great question. i think the media is mishandling trump completely. i think the town hall held by cnn was a failure. trump talked over the correspondence. he said things that were not true. i do not think they handle joe biden well at all. they are protecting him. they are not showing him in the various events where he has not been doing well. i think the media has fallen down on their responsibility to the public. when people ask me where i get my news, it is very hard to find a place that is not directly engaged.

the problem is, there is nothing we can do about it. you cannot change msnbc, fox, cnn. you cannot change the new york times, the wall street journal. you cannot change the bbc. it is what it is. for those of you that want to challenge joe biden, i will give it to you in icing a sentence. if he is having this much trouble now in 2020 three, imagine the child and in 2028. for donald trump, the sentence is, do we want to elect a president that has been facing 91 felony indictments and now has five trials in front of him? is this the best we can do? you can do this until the end of time. in the end you will have to promote why your candidate is better, not why the other two

candidates are worse. i can give you all of the language. it won't elect a unity candidate. the only way a unity candidate gets elected and it can work is to be positive and focused. to differentiate why they bring success rather than of why the other people bring failure. next question. >> our next question is from linda. whenever you are able to unmute. >> i am from williamsburg, virginia. i have a simple, basic question about your data. i like that it seems like a unity ticket would take equally from both candidates. but, i am wondering what your base was. what your sample was. is it registered voters? is it likely voters? is it national when we vote by state and at the electoral college? >> good board.

-- good point. i did and the national polling numbers do not better. what matters is the senate and what is happening there. these are national samples. of likely voters. we have now done maybe 15,000. there is just no margin of error when you are doing 15,000 people. but it is overtime. we have done this every month. i am watching it individually and seeing the shift. without a no labels candidate, to donald trump over the last 90 days. that shift is noticeable. the fact is, when donald trump is beating joe biden by 10 points in nevada, y'all should be screaming at what that indicates. that is a big deal. not these 2%, 3%, 4% increases in wisconsin. biden is up in wisconsin. trump is narrowly up in

pennsylvania and neroli up in georgia, arizona. -- neroli up in georgia, arizona. nevada. when the most recent polling there has trump up by 10 that shows you the election is moving away from joe biden. that has nothing to do with no labels. it is a distraction that the democrats are trying to promote. as you can tell, it's very upsetting to me. next question. >> can we go in extra five minutes? >> yes. >> the apparent fact is there is a tremendous lack of trust in senators and congressmen also.

how will their -- that satisfaction change even if we do elect a third-party candidate? >> i will show this to you. this is the perfect question. we did a word cloud to indicate where the public is on democracy and we asked, what is the word they used to describe democracy at its best? freedom, equality, people, united. then we asked, give me a word to describe the american democracy right now. broken, troubled, chaotic, upt,hreatened, horrible. here is the one that is important. we did the same thing for congress. this gets to your point. what is the world they would use? i look at this world cloud and it describes him. honest, knowledgeable, gerbil --

charitable, trustworthy, good. then we asked, give us one word to describe the typical member of congress. that is what they gave us. corrupt, greedy, crooked, liars, selfish, political, incompetent. i showed this to a group of members of congress and they started to laugh and i lost my cool. i was so angry at them. they looked at this and thought it was funny. is not funny to me at all. you are correct. the american people are saying right now, it's time we start again. that's one of the reasons why the republicans are so -- the majority under the house is so much in jeopardy and wife are the democrats it is the same. -- why for the democrats it is the same. the americans usually welcome and incumbent. this time i think they will vote for change. this will be a change election.

>> steve haney, please. >> yes. i'm from texas. my question is, isn't there any shot that either of the candidates will be defeated in the primaries, specifically, recent polls showed nikki haley within four points of donald trump. is there any shot she might have? >> because of how the political system has changed so much and because of social media that takes the message into people's homes, even if the networks are not helping, you can never say never anymore. i am saying if you want to visit new hampshire come see me. i will be there for five days

before the election. i believe new hampshire will be ground zero of american politics starting january 23. it's possible. it is absolutely possible. it still is not likely. and, should she make it close their, it does not mean that will upset all of the other states. it does mean it will be possible. on the democratic side, i do not see that. he does have a member of congress challenging biden. just as bobby kennedy dropped out, and he is not discussed on this call, but bobby kennedy taking two votes from joe biden for everyone vote he is taking from trump and you don't see democrats screaming about him because he is afraid of them. he does have grassroots support and his name is gold in the democratic party because of who

his father was. yes, you are correct. it is possible. but, it is still not likely. i still think we will know who the candidates are by super tuesday. we are at time. let's do four more. it will take longer if you guys are ok with that. go to my twitter and sign up to participate and i my focus groups. i do this commentary every day. five or six times a day. i believe it is some of my bowling on twitter. if you go to my website fil.com you can sign up for a focus group. i want to give americans their voice back and i want to hear from you. please, come sign up. >> speech styles -- pete styles. but my -- >> my question is a

little bit repetitive of one of the earlier ones but today katherine harris predicted a black swan event in 2024. christopher wray seems to think the same way. our border situation has been a disaster. does this impact biden more than anything else? >> it impacts biden unless trump is involved in the policy when it happens. there is nothing we can do. we will go to the next question. there is no one on the call that can prevent or engage in a black swan event. so it is in the next question. >> eli. >> i am from oklahoma. in your list of concerns you started with -- and you may have addressed this.

how important will the border crisis be in the selection? >> it will be critical. it will be critical because at this point now they are going through a decision whether to have some sort of compromise. the fact we have people streaming across the border, we cannot solve it. that is the proof, the evidence people need to see the system is broken. our two parties cannot handle it. we have to find a different approach to it. i think it will -- it is an issue for republicans and way down among democrats. it is an example of why things are really broken in washington, d.c. and why a no labels candidate is not justifiable, but, for some people, preferable. >> i am from georgia.

we tried. if we assume donald trump will be the republican candidate, is there any chance that someone with the credentials of nikki haley in particular running on a no labels candidate and being successful? >> there is something that prevents candidates that have sought the nomination under a party label from seeking the nomination as an independent. it would prevent the capability for someone like haley or chris christie to run. i would think you would want to go with someone that is not seen as that political. as a partisan. that it is better to go with

someone with a record of working across the aisle rather than someone just seen as courting a nomination. >> one last question. jeffrey davis, one quick one. >> i will take it up to 2:40. let's do 2 -- three more. >> i am from new jersey. i have a quick comment and then a question. >> i want to give people a chance. >> here is the question, frank, thank you. should the no labels union ticket when, how does the unity ticket vice president and president handle congress, mostly democratic and republican people? >> yes, they open the doors to everyone who wants to speak to them is the idea. i have to use my hand gestures to be completely inclusive. to invite people in to resolve the challenges facing america. we already have the problem solvers caucus, 60 house members

and maybe a dozen senators. it allows you to reach out to more people. democracy is stronger and i think that people will respond to this more favorably if you open your arms and invite people in to join in the effort to solve problems rather than shutting people out simply because they have an hour or a d after their name. that is the way we have done is for the last 250 years. and we have been failing probably for the last 15. i know we can do better. join us, participate. what a wonderful thing that would be. people who have like minds different partisanship, that may feel like part of the solution rather than part of the problem. >> are next question is from dave walker.

>> frank, thank you for doing this. i live in virginia but i am calling from north carolina. when i saw your polling data i did not see rfk junior. he is a as an independent. how does he affect the outcome. >> the polling frame is very wide, the disparity. some people have him as low as 4%. some have him as high as 11%. it fluctuates. the polling is only an indication. do not get hung up over my professional you are making a mistake. our job is to tell you where things are now. we have to find a better way, a more precise way to focus on the future, not the present. at 4% rfk draws 2.5% from biden

and 1.5% from trump. that 1% differential is probably three states, maybe four states. when he is calling him 11% it is drawing a higher percentage from biden. that is flipping the election. they will try to marshall lies him. i have issues with him on actsing's and other stuff he has said. but, he draws a fair number from biden. if you are a democrat and you want to prevent donald trump getting elected you already have a third-party candidate. you have cornell west and rfk junior. you have better have someone else or you have a problem. 2:37. two more. >> francis. >> the question is, how important is it to have masses

of people visibly supporting no labels in terms of being able to get more traction around the unity ticket and how would we do that? >> no labels disappears. no labels disappears the day after the candidate. from that point on it's not about to you, it's about them. truth is it is not about you. they are trying to make it about you because you can demonize an organization but it is harder to demonize a person. on march 20, whenever you decide who you nominate, within 24 hours you all cease to matter. it is all about the candidate. in terms of drawing attention, that candidate will have 100 tv cameras surrounding him.

that candidate will have 200 or 300 workers -- reporters following them. all that will happen. on the day after it is all about hogan, tulsi gabbard, whoever the candidate is, huntsman, mcraven. you all can play an important role by getting on the ballot, by getting enough signatures. so that you have the opportunity to be that voice. that is what matters so much in the next 90 days. i know there was a lot of negative publicity. ignore it. it does not matter at all. >> last question. john friedman.

my question is, are we going to have enough money to get the message out? >> yes. it is your money to get on the ballot. it is your money to get the signatures. it is your money to get us to that point. at that point it's about public preference, not public daughters. it will determine who wins. that is a great way to wrap up this whole hall. this enables you to speak loud. to have impact. to have influence. and, to basically challenge the two parties who have billions of dollars. in the end, the selection will not be determined. it will be determined by who has

the better solution. by who can approach the american people and empathize with them. and understand their fear and the concerns they have. understand that they do not want a majority of americans -- the majority of un-american do not want the two candidates leading the respective parties. there is no partisanship on this call. a couple people complained about trump and a couple people complained about biden, but barely. this is unity, right here on this call. this is exactly what this is about. about americans coming together to a knowledge we are hurting, to acknowledge that we have not done things as we could have entered try to do it better. this is a success. nancy, i hope you are -- i hope your heart is a little bigger this afternoon.

i have to tell you, john, every time i do c-span on christmas day or thanksgiving it depresses me because people call in and just rip the other side. there was none of that on this call. this was a solution oriented call. this is brilliant. this is america at its best. >> thank you so much frank. is dr. shea this here to say the closing word? >> we all owe dr. frank our gratitude and appreciation. his clarity, his truth. really, it's encouraging us to go forward in 2024 with strength and more representative of the majority of the american people. thank you on behalf of no labels. >> thank you celsius for creating the peach vibe that enables me to get through this phone conversation.

thank you nancy and dr. chavis. you are special and we need you to stay healthy and strong and be heard. for all of you on this call, thank you for giving me some hope, at least some. for the future of america. i will see you guys. >> donald trump's name is set to appear on michigan's 2024 primary ballot in february. according to the washington post e michigan supreme court said it would not hear an appeal allowing the lower court ruling to stand. the decision not to hear the case comes one week after the colorado supreme court said nald trump engaged in an insurrection on januy 6, 2021 and is bred from running under the constituon. michigan's presidential primary is set for february 27, while

colorado hosts its primary on march 5, or, super tuesday. >> c-span's campaign 2020 for coverage continues with the presidential primary. watch live on the c-span network as the first votes from the country are cast in the upcoming presidential election along with candidate speeches and results beginning with the iowa caucuses january 15 and the new hampshire primary january 23. campaign 2024 on c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the days biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics at your fingertips.

stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download it for free today or visit c-span.org/c-span now. c-span now. your front row seat to washington anytime anywhere. >> c-span is funded by these television companies and more including wow. >> fast, reliable internet connection is something no one can live without. we are there for our customers with speed, reliability, value, and choice. now more than ever it all starts with great internet. >> wow supports c-span as a public service along with ese

other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. during a year and a news conference, ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy said his commanders want to mobilize up to 500,000 additional soldiers in ukraine's war against russia, but, he wants more details before approving the request. in addition president zelenskyy said he's confident the u.s. ended other allies would continue to provide military aid. though, he admitted he did not know the war would end. this portion of the news conference is about 45 minutes. >> [speaking another language] at the end of november you stated you instructed military and government officials to prepare a comprehensive plan on mobilization in ukraine.

do you have the draft plan? can you share the key details? >> well, that is a question to be decided by the commander in chief. this is a very sensitive matter. i believe they should raise this issue in terms of the counteroffensive operations at in terms of the deficit. there view -- their view at headquarters,'s they have suggested to mobilize an additional 500 something people, which is a very significant amount of people. i told them i would need to have more arguments to support that, because this is primarily a question of people.

it is about justice and fairness. it's about the defense capacity and a question of funding. as for the people, i need specifics. because what will happen to an army of one million people? what will happen to those people who are already our country for the past two years if we have matters of rotation? we should have a comprehensive learn now. in this mobilization war, you have to give answers to the society primarily. so they have started working on this. on this plan. and so far, i haven't seen any matters of demobilization, even though i believe this is the question. it's not the question of what is the process in terms of legislation -- maybe it

shouldn't be called demobilization. but there has to be a process like that with regards to our powerful soldiers. it is very difficult. i have been on the front line many times and i would really want all the military command to understand the challenges. we should not risk losing the most brave, the most courageous people. i am grateful for their resistance, for their sustainability. but we have to think of the demobilization processes as well and that has to be done in a straightforward manner, with specifics and with great respect to soldiers. that is why i have asked to have many questions. as for the business trips, holidays, and the transition from one position to another,

different. all the requests coming from our armed forces have to comply with challenges. which is very important. and they have also asked about a number of aspects with regards to the military of defense. they also raise the number of aspects with regards to the digitalization of something because their people inside ukraine and outside ukraine, so it is a difficult process. for me it is important that if there will be class 440,000 people for the army, who deserves the right, in this case, for the rest? that's an important moment. it will not work other ways, at least that is my personal point, but that is the issue to be raised and discussed.

then they will have to prepare the draft and present it. because if that is the amendment to the legislation in ukraine, we would have to find an agreement. so the question is very sensitive. you cannot lose the resilience. but we need to have fairness. as for the funding aspect, demobilization in that format would cost an additional $500 billion to ukraine. so as the president of ukraine, as the person who spent a lot of time searching for financial support for ukraine, i would like to have an understanding from the prime minister, from the prime minister of finance, where they are planning to get the money for that, thank you. >> thank you.

the question is from kyiv independent. please rise so the people can see you. reporter: good. hopefully you can hear me. francis, kyiv independent. just recently you took a decision on the construction of the fortification facilities along the front lines. can you tell us whether the scale of this work will be similar to the fortification constructions of russians, and why ukraine is working on this now. pres. zelenskyy: it's not just the beginning, it's the continuation of the fortification. there are state regional administrations and it would like to extend gratitude to them because they were doing this

work from the beginning of this war. i am just saying they have done. i can see in the kharkiv region what they have done. i am grateful to the region enter the city for how they have united together with military experts and construction companies and they have compiled together with the business is. what they have done there, i think, is powerful. now if i can see it there and he can see that in different regions, if i ask a very specific question to our military, to locate in different directions with her this is sufficient, yes. why is that here? it is weaker than in kharkiv region -- i don't want to give any specifics about different conditions. yes, sometimes they are saying it would be better if we would have that level. so my question, my task is the same. we need solid defense. thank you.

>> next reporter please, to the right of the center aisle. reporter: thank you very much for having me. my question is, on the battlefield, the ukraine armed forces seems to be suffering serious shortage of artillery, shellings. some say that ukraine military is forced to change their tactics and the persons because of the lack of gay nations. what is your opinion about this? -- because of the lack of munitions. what is your opinion about this? second question is, western military support seems to be decreasing. without western support, ukraine

can be losing. what is your opinion about this? thank you very much. pres. zelenskyy: i thank you for the question. as for any possible defeats and what i think about this, i know about all of this. as for the battlefield, russia failed to achieve any results this year. they are not talking about the year of 2022, i am talking about 2023, russia failed to complete all its tasks. and the messages of the kremlin are still saying that the goals of the special military operation are the same. and one of them was the occupation. the other goal was that they

should be reaching the borders of the ukrainian donbass. they failed. we are not talking about three days, but two years. our soldiers are wonderful. . our people are great. . i am very grateful. as for financial support, we are working very hard on that. i am confident that the united states will not let us down. and what we have agreed in the united states will be fulfilled and sold. as for the european union, -- will be fulfilled in full. as for the european union, the stakes are very high. we have acquired one victory from the e.u. as for the 50 billion, i am confident we have achieved that. now the question is about time.

the first one point 5 billion hopefully will arrive this week. as for the 50 billion, i believe and i am confident that the decision will be taken in the nearest period of time when they will be having the session. there is some administered aspects, nobody would be able to introduce any obstacles. and today, we have mechanisms that even if there would be support to the 50 billion package minus one voice, there will be possibilities found in order for ukraine to receive this money. the united states are also working on a very powerful figure. surely in the united states, they know the details of such support and how it will have an impact.

the impact of any details. they know about our insistency, they know that it's not artificial. that is required to have the resiliency of our economy and of our defense, and the people of ukraine, i believe, have found the proper understanding with president biden and with the senators. we have had a meeting with both parties, so let us see. i think the matter is about the details. the dates. as for the reduction of support, talking about the shells, whether it has had an impact, the uncontrolled airspace around -- over ukraine, that had an impact on the operation in 2023. we don't control the air. we don't have the proper ammunition, but that does not mean that we shall find a way out or that we haven't found a

way out yet. for that, we do need support because some of the aspects, we have issues. i mean, we don't have some ammunition, but we are working on that. >> next reporter please. reporter: missed, -- -- mr. president, -- pres. zelenskyy: >> [speaking another language] [laughter] reporter: i have one question and then i want to follow your previous response. western leaders, like german chancellor scholz, the need to secretary-general mr. stoltenberg, they say the war could go quite long.

the chief of the military in the country says it could take years. do you think the war may not end in 2024? and following up on your previous response, if the assistance from the west, financial, military, dwindles materially next year, do you have a plan b? will ukraine have something to fight with and live with? pres. zelenskyy: i am thankful to all our relations with the european union. i am missing some details now. i would say, the european countries, who respect us a lot, who are proud of our people, we have built special personal relationships with them.

the long-term aid, i think definitely it will be the leverage you have in mind. yes, it will be a risk, but i don't think we will be betrayed by our partners. at least this is the result of my visit. what we have now, 1.7 billion from dash, 2.3 billion from denmark, korea, lithuania, netherlands, hundreds of millions. norway, 7.5 billion. france, 2 billion. germany, eight billion. sweden, a bit more than half a million. in the huge, huge aid from japan. this makes for a strong basis. so if there are some risks, these amounts will be counting. it's about the multilateral

support for a variety of objectives. some will go for humanitarian, some further economy. others for social benefit payments. but again, a great deal of assistance from those states. it is about military assistance. so i am very confident of our partners. we did nearly everything and the year is not yet over. now, on the war ending into a 24, i think no one has the answer to it. even those reputable army commanders here in the west, those who say that this is a multi-annual exercise, i don't know yet if it will be. yeah, we have dialogue. we have talks. thoughts and ideas can be far from reality. sorry for revisiting the example

of the guy dreaming of being triumphant in just three days. his ideas were ideas. and they flopped. i am not going to compare in any way the ideas of that person with respectable partners had in mind, but again, just to be more specific, the war, a victory, failure, stagnation, these depend on various factors and decisions. from different risks. from different areas and domains. but for the most part, they depend on us. ourselves. if we lose our resilience, we will end this war faster. if you -- if we don't fail

in our resilience, we will end this war faster. you can remain skeptical about everything and you can lose the country with it. i am not ready for a. and they do know that there are many more of us, millions like me here for not ready to give up, to let go of our country. from day one until the last day, this is how things would happen. we will keep all of our objectives. everything we are capable of. taken together, we are capable of much more than individually. i think we can make this victory closer. >> bbc world service, please. just please, stand up for us to see you. reporter: president zelenskyy, you are facing a lot of problems

at the moment -- we western support, manpower shortages as well, and russia is on the attack in some areas, so i really want to press you on this. is there a danger that ukraine could be on the of starting to lose this war? pres. zelenskyy: no. i don't think so. we were in a most complex situation. occupied practically completely. even the central regions of our nation. infrastructure facilities, logistics of our nation -- roads, railroads, food supplies.

the economy, completely destroyed with cyber strikes and physically damaged and destroyed cities. we were completely blockaded. yet, we broke through it. we, our partners -- i don't know who did more or most of it. this victory takes exorbitant cost indeed. i know the system. i know every bit of our defense. i know every moment of things coming to ukraine, missiles and other things. we are fighting from each defense system. i do remember the other winter we had.

but now, the situation is different. and i agree, we have challenges with the amounts of aid, with artillery shells, with antitank grenade launchers, with 955 millimeter artillery systems, with the timely repair of those systems. but hubs are opening to maintain them. there were times when we couldn't reach the hub because of the politics involved. but everyone understands that it is simple. there are risks indeed, you right, but we are living creatures, we are people. we live here in ukraine and we fight and we believe, with words, but with deeds. this is what we need to do.

at least not to be ashamed afterwards. >> thank you. reporter: from npr. thanks very much. has viktor orban or any other leader pressed you to accept an armistice that includes giving up occupied territories, and if so, how have you responded and how would you respond? pres. zelenskyy: i never spoke with viktor orban about russia or his dialogue with two or anything like this. never. maybe he is raising up these topics with his friends or some leaders in the e.u., i don't know. in europe, in the united states. he spoke in his speeches about

it, but i don't know, for me, is something strange. sometimes his politics is not very friendly to us. and he knows it. this, he heard from me. yes, i said to him that, because i had a lot of questions to him. but anyway, we are neighbors. even with all these challenges. and during all these years, the two years of full-scale war, this experience of direct dialogue didn't give us the possibility to feel that we are strong neighbors against russian patient. but anyway, we are neighbors and we are trying to find a solution to our questions. for it, we need to organize

meeting. less time in argentina, i told orban,. give us one reason you are not supporting us in the e.u.? it was before the decision. he could not tell me. the second time, i asked him, tell me one reason we can organize an official meeting between us. he also couldn't find the answer. but i think we found a solution, a very diplomatic one that our sides will work on it. that's great. >> ok. nrit, to the left of the center aisle, please. reporter: thank you. i would like to ask, how does the war in the middle east is influencing the war of

russia-ukraine? and do you plan on going to israel's own? -- do you plan on going to israel soon? pres. zelenskyy: the war in the middle east, just as any war and challenge in any continent, there is a presence or the influence of the russian federation. it has an impact on the support to ukraine. the middle east is not an exclusion. this is a fact. this is not new information. there is a decentralization of focus or consolidation around ukraine or supporting ukraine in different international platforms. a.d. consolidation of the informational space around ukraine abroad. all of that in a comprehensive manner is affecting the support

to ukraine. what i can tell you, we know that this is a tragedy. this is a challenge. for the middle east, surely, i understand this. but we also have to recognize that we have a full-scale war. yes, there is a tragedy, and my condolences to all the people who lost their lives in the middle east. but in that case, russia has exceeded. while they have certain success, they don't have success on the battlefield, but russia has certain successes on the diplomatic field. that is a fact. because some countries are starting to sink, they are starting to balance who they

should prioritize the support for. ukraine, or israel? ukraine has a full-scale war. others would say, ukraine is already receiving support. now israel is facing a significant challenge. those are the voices we have heard in the beginning of this tragedy. that is why this is definitely not having a positive impact on ukraine. as for my visit to the region and to the middle east, i was ready in the very beginning -- this is a fact -- and that was my direct signal to their counterparts abroad. well, may be had different priorities. i can't play a lot with my own agenda and priorities, because i am leaving the country at war now. >> now, the associated press,

close by. please get up. reporter: good afternoon. could you tell us please, if donald trump is elected as the next president of the united states, his policy would be an attempt to freeze the war and reduce support. do you think you will be able to convince him? thank you. pres. zelenskyy: thank you for this question. i think he will have a different policy. he is a different person. if he were elected as the president -- it's not for us to elect, the people elect their own president. i am not sure that the national policy will be changed towards ukraine. but still, we have to understand

that the leader has an influence. and every leader, right after the election, because he got support and most of the people said "yes" to him, so the first signals in the policy had different leaders. no we are talking about the president of the united states. his first signals will be very influential. now the policy of the next president, whoever he or she is, will be different to ukraine, if that policy were colder or more kind of inner-oriented, if they would economize more, i think these signals will have a very significant impact on the course of the war in ukraine. because, the whole world, if one

powerful detail is left behind, then the mechanism starts dismembering. starts breaking. so if we let the leaders of this support to move out of this mechanism of support, that would have an impact and surely not positive, from the assistance from europe. thank you. >> now, next reporter. to the right of the aisle. reporter: >> [speaking another language] pres. zelenskyy: well, the interpreter started interpreting me. [laughter]

ok. as a result of the israeli attacks, around 20,000 civilians were killed in palestine, including 8000 children. do you see any similarities that has happened to the civilian population in the gaza strip and what has happened to the civilian population in ukraine? can you call the death of the civilian population in palestine as butchery? do pres. zelenskyy: you condemn that? pres. zelenskyy: thank you for the question. reporter: -- do you condemn that? pres. zelenskyy: thank you for the question. we recognize the policy of both countries. we recognize the tragedy. we also recognize that the humanitarian consequences are horrible on the territories of both countries. and we recognize the independent

nation of israel and the independent nation and the people of palestine. but i cannot compare this to our war, and i will tell you why. the occupation and the invasion of russia into ukraine did not start with the terrorist attack of people with ukrainian nationality on the territory of russia. nobody did this. we lived in our independent country, and in the end, they came to us and started killing our people. these are different things and surely, i would like to offer my condolences. reporter: mr. president, my question is about our bank

tomorrow. definitely it will come. but the question is about security, as being in nato. in terms of security guarantees, we have this declaration since july. we have lateral negotiations with countries. but what are the result of these negotiations? maybe it is about britain, the u.k. being the first to assign the military document. what about nato membership? will ukraine join nato? russia with its tactics taking away bits of land to prevent the country from doing it, how will we deal with it? pres. zelenskyy: thank you. on security guarantees, the process is a bit slower.

initially i had an idea of it and we had a meeting of my team today. also matters of security guarantees and how to make it come faster. a lot depends on us ourselves. we tend to put the blame on our partners on satyrs, but let's do justice, a lot depends on us. the headquarters of the army, the ministry of defense, the military, we have to be able to -- our vision to our partners. this is a very powerful core of all those security guarantees and related negotiations. we are yet to send this information on this vision. i understand lots of challenges around it, but we still have to

do it. this is about security integrity. now, concerning nato, this is the most powerful option for us. we have not been invited there. signals regarding some partial membership -- i think this is nonsense. without being rude to those voicing this up. there are some messages being floated. but at than we have never been given any such proposal from any of our partners. and even if it would be really hard for me to understand how this could happen -- just imagine someone, a human thinking that he is a human. this guy is sitting in moscow and he says that the special

military operations objectives remain unchanged. to say that he doesn't want to change anything, he wants to go right to where he intended. now what will happen, or would happen if ukraine, a part of it, is in nato? i think it will bring huge risks. i think if parts of ukraine are in nato -- you heard signals about finland when it was working on that, there were rumors that he would invade finland to fight that. so the question is, will nato countries fight for the bit of ukraine remaining without clear statutes? we will not recognize the occupied territories as the russian ones, and that will mean that we are kind of not entirely in nato.

we are a country, a part of which is in a security part of nato and another part which is under russia. so i think it is a fantasy. you know? speaking of the u.k., the maritime component is under discussion. but again, we have to revisit the topic of our homework that we are yet to deliver. thank you. >> ifp please, left, closer to the aisle. reporter: thank you, mr. president. my question is, given the lack of breakthroughs on the front line, would you consider changing your strategy, including the goal of returning to 1991 orders? also, what about changing military leadership for for

example, removing --? thank you. pres. zelenskyy: thank you. this strategy can't and shouldn't be changed because it is in our constitution, our tactics. tactics can change after careful consideration of the result of our activities in the south of ukraine in 2023. so until the end of this year, we will get this understanding as well as understanding of our further plans and steps. >> "new york times"? at the very end of the hall? i think there will be more questions later. please, would you just rise? reporter: mr. president, could

you describe your position on negotiations, when and under what conditions would negotiations be under ukraine's interest? thank you. pres. zelenskyy: we have the peace formula. this is the only platform today which is in working order. the last meeting in malta was quite good. nearly 70 countries there. we will have a meeting in switzerland. the platform of the world economic forum will also have a very important segment on that and we will be working to see that the meeting has representatives from other continents, including the global south.

we would love to see maybe 80 countries, may be more. we are not chasing numbers, but the numbers do matter. political or geopolitical isolation of the russian federation will depend on that. after the meeting, we will be working on how to organize the summit already at the level of leaders, because the meeting will finalize the last five points of the peace formula. the last five points were discussed by the security advisors during the meeting in malta, and the last five points will be finalized at the meeting in switzerland. after that, we will organize a summit of leaders, and when it happens, i am sure we will have to do everything, given the

de-focusing on the ukrainian situation, given the conflicts and wars around the globe, i think we will have to focus on the story of ukraine. our recent visit to the united states and latin american countries in europe rekindled a bit the world's attention towards ukraine. we see the direction. we see it has started to change. it's very important to see that attention is being restored to ukraine. we have switzerland on the way. not to say that there will be a full stop here, but it definitely will be a pivotal point. the platform they are will offer an opportunity for countries to reach on some fundamental things with which we will be working to prepare a relevant document. when irrelevant document is ready, then we will be prepared

to send it in certain given formats to representatives of the russian federation. when all the countries will unite around our document, we will be ready to send it on. likely had it and set it with the u.n. and other repeatable leaders, we will send it to another party. and if it is ready to accept the document, it would mean that your question on the terms and conditions would be relevant. it is not relevant at the moment because we don't see any request from russia for that. we don't see it in their actions, in their rhetoric. we have just brazen willingness to kill. >> next, bloomberg. could you please arise? reporter: mr. president, greetings. thank you for the chance to ask this question. we know that the legislators are currently working on a new draft

law on mobilization, and possibly do contain a series of unpopular decisions. we, the society, we partially are aware of those, but still the question is as follows. these decisions could be providing for the mobilization of people. navy women. can you tell us whether you will sign this law, if it is approved by the parliament with norms like that? pres. zelenskyy: for the women, no. as for the age of 25, if all of the substantiation's will be >> this week, watch "washington journal's" special authors week series.

thursday morning, the reverend wheeler parker junior discusses his book on emmett till. watch "washington journal" live thursday morning with our special holiday authors week series on c-span, c-span now, our free video app, or c-span online. the house and senate have recess for the holidays and will be back in the new year for the start of the second session of the 100 18th congress. the senate convenes on january 8 and the house on january 9. both chambers face two upcoming funding deadlines to avoid a shutdown. >> the subcommittee on appropriations are ready to do the work, but we are waiting for the other team, the other side of the chamber to come forth with a number we can agree upon.

>> neither mcconnell nor i want a shutdown. >> follow the progress when congress returns on c-span networks, c-span now, our free mobile video app, or c-span online. >> up next, richard haas, former state department official and president emeritus of the department of foreign relations talks about the future of international relations as part of the "wall street journal" ceo council summit. this is about half an hour. >> thank you for being here. in preparation for this conversation, i went to my bookshelf and pulled out a book titled "a world in disarray" by richard haas. this is written in 2017. if the world was in disarray

then, what is it now? what is the title of your sequel? >> "disarray on stilts." interestingly, when the book came out, i was criticized for being too negative. in retrospect, i think i actually was not negative enough. i think there will be a big debate one day, to what extent was this inevitable? i think historians will have a field day with the question. >> i wanted to start there. there's disarray, as people can see, but i wanted to start with why. there's a dictators versus democracy struggle. there is one could argue a declining american influence. there is the rise of china. that's unmistakable. which of these factors are contributing to this disarray? >> all of the above. you've got the rise of china

which represents a shift in the balance. a shift in power in various forms moving around the world with its economic forms of power , military power in many more hands than we are used to.

russia, iran, north korea, china is not quite comfortable with that. i was in china a few days ago. china is not totally comfortable there. nor is it totally comfortable, as i read it, with their neuro-limits relationship with putin. that is not china's future. they don't mind the authoritarian cabal. they don't mind united states being tied down militarily, but i think there is a difference between russia, north korea, and iran. >> they are not comfortable with a friendship without limits despite the proclamation a couple years ago? >> i think there are some limits. there's a lot of grumbling in china about what putin told him, if he misled them. i think china has not complete limits but some limits on their relationship. we don't know what china would do to help russia. we may never find out, but they

have accepted some limits on their no limits relationship. >> stepping away from ukraine and looking at china as china, there is a question, in my mind at least, if china is the rising power of popular reception or if it's a big power that is in some trouble because it has an economy that's not performing well and a picture that's not necessarily healthy in the long term. >> short answer is developments of both, still rising in absolute terms, but i think the pilot problems, you mentioned the demographic, long-term problem, china will probably go from 1.4 one million to maybe 800 million people over the next three quarters of a century, which is a tremendous shift. the near-term economic problems from youth unemployment to bubbles, to try to switch from an export-led economy to a consumer-led economy is

enormous. a lot of younger people are voting with their feet. a lot of people are voting with their wallets. there's theory out there about peak china. i'm not ready to cling onto that, but the idea that china is 10 feet tall and inexorably rising, that theory is clearly off. it is much slower economically, and i think xi jinping has made a determination. he places primacy on political considerations. he is willing to pay an economic price for political control, and that is where china is. for so long as xi jinping rules, and i think the question people like me grapple with, if and when china slows economically, to what extent and how does that manifest itself in its foreign policy, and my view is i don't

have a great answer to that. i just want to discourage china from ever thinking that if they have problems at home, the way to scratch that itch is venturing abroad. >> that takes us to be taiwan question. you staked out an interesting position on taiwan. the traditional american position has been strategic ambiguity. we don't say it will or we won't , the argument for that being if you say you are against taiwan, you encourage the taiwanese to take reckless actions and if you say you will not defend them, the chinese will take reckless actions. you have said ambiguity is not the sweet spot anymore. you have to say explicitly we will defend taiwan. why and why not is that dangerous? >> it is not dangerous because it is a unilateral determination on our part. it is not diplomacy going back to nixon and kissinger.

it does not change anything about what you might call final status. our view is simply it is up to china and taiwan to work it out. we just don't want it to be coercive. we don't want either side to do unilateral things. i think this discourages the use of force and let's china no that we will do what we tell taiwan. this is not licensed. every one of our allies in the region assumes we will be there for taiwan. if we are not, including the taiwanese, and if we are not, specifically japan and south korea and others, that would be the end of the american alliance. i don't think it is impossible to think about we can make this work at an affordable price. china knows if he uses large-scale force against taiwan, it is expending the future of the communist party,

they know the consequences could be draconian. there's not one chinese general that has ever been in combat. let me just point that out. no country that has not gone to war since vietnam, and that did not turn out so hot. gray area scenarios, what if china does this, and you could have that in the next year. china -- taiwan has an election in a month. i would not be surprised if we see more muscular stuff basically telling taiwan just because you have a new sheriff, we are still the bigger sheriff, and i think there will be a little bit of that going on. >> you think xi will play out his pressure on taiwan in the near future? >> yes. we could change it, but to change it would be a dramatic shift in ability or willingness to come to taiwan.

by the way, every one of our allies and partners is asking that question, as well as if you are vladimir putin, you want to see what happens here. i think china wants to see what happens here in november and -- what's it called? unaffiliated. whatever it is. no party affiliation. i hate it

what do you think his endgame was? >> is endgame is a perpetuation of the status quo in israel. it has never been part of the settler movement in a serious way. it has been a sideshow. what israelis want to do is avoid a palestinian state. this coalition by netanyahu and

his colleagues, what they want is essentially what i would call the one-state nonsolution. they want to continue in israel that settlers on beauty -- on bibi's watch have grown threefold, fivebold, whatever, and that's what they want. you don't want to incorporate all these people into israel because then you have questions of citizenship, of jewishness. what he stands for is a policy of drift. i think he wants to avoid making any final status choices, but he wants a version of the status quo. >> you worked inside a u.s. government that for decades has said no is the answer to the two-state solution. is the two-state solution as we speak today more alive or more dead than it was? >> it is more dead. it's on life support.

the reason is as sad as israeli-palestinian relations were before october 6, they are worse now. what happened in gaza has not created a lot of doves or people interested in coexistence. i can make all the arguments against the feasibility, but it is almost a version of churchill. it is the worst approach to dealing with this except for all the others. it is the only way i know to deal with legitimate palestinian aspirations and to keep israel a democratic jewish state. >> when the dust finally settles from the current conflict, do you think that thinking will reemerge in israel? >> not by itself. i believe it only has a chance to reemerge -- to me, the most interesting possibility is a u.s.-saudi initiative to basically put back on the table and have the saudi normalization with israel.

let's have a debate in israel between what i would call a greater peace and a greater israel. let's do that. i think the united states needs to work with saudi arabia to put that on the table, probably go over the head of this is mainly government. jerusalem is not ready for this conversation given the trauma of october 7, but in a few months, we need to put that out there because we need to see an israeli election taking place in that context. >> i want to open it up for your question. let me ask you one final thing -- put yourself in the shoes of leaders like the people in this room. you are being paid your usual rates here today. >> i thought i left the nonprofit sector. >> what is your advice to a business person trying to figure out how to navigate this world? >> the first thing to say is if you are looking through the windshield as opposed to the rearview mirror, the future is far more turbulent than the

past. i think we will look back on the recent past as a kind of golden age of stability and predictability, far messier now, and one cannot make long-term decisions on just about anything without factoring in the kind of stuff we are talking about. geopolitics are now anywhere and everywhere. i think ceo's have to basically find ways to insert that into their calculus. you and i talked about it before. we are seeing new paradigms about the relationship with governments to economies, but all things being equal, a more turbulent world, and regardless, or as they like to say in this city, irregardless of the next election, i think we are moving into a world where the united states has less sway going

forward, so it's going to be a messier world. you are going to be operating in a world of greater, not less disarray. >> questions? start there. >> thank you very much for your thoughts. i'm curious. we are at a moment of time where ai is at a moment for national security. there's a great amount of urgency for regulating the industry. your health -- europe has had its legislation, but when you look legislatively at the other giant in the room, china, they

are pretty much even with where we are but for the hardware aspect. i would be interested in your view of just being cognizant of a kind of wet blanket on innovation. >> i'm not very upbeat, if that's the word, about the ability to regulate ai internationally for a couple of reasons. it is extraordinarily difficult to regulate something that is changing by the hour. second, there is no consensus. the idea that the united states and china and others can be able to agree on what is desirable and to limit certain things that are undesirable, may be the edges of certain things, but we should not kid ourselves. there will be ways to exploit that. there is also not a neat line between ai and the military sector and ai in the civilian

sector. ai is an engine of the higher levels of economic performance. zero chance you will be able to regulate it, and by the way, zero chance you should want to introduce certain types of regulation. i assume it will largely have an unregulated international future just because people are not going to want to preclude the upside, and there will not be all sorts of abilities to agree, much less verify that certain negatives are not being done. this is not nuclear weapons 2.0. this is a far more centralized, dynamic reality, so i think a lot of us thought of ai arms control do not quite understand what is different about this technology in this moment. >> [indiscernible] >> no, well, i agree. i think premature regulation is questionable.

there may be enormous upsides we have not figured out. a lot of those speaking and writing on this may be really smart about science and technology, but they are really dumb about politics. can i say that? i think i just did. really, i find this debate truly unsatisfying. >> on that happy note, i think we have run out of time. >> i am really dumb on the technology. it is one of the problems. we have found very few people in this space who can handle both sides, who understand the technology and the policy. it is almost like they were either in the engineering department or the political science department. not a lot of people got double majors. >> go to any senate hearing that deals with social media, and you

will see the divide. thank you very much. that was very enlightening. [applause] >> this week holiday author series, featuring segments with a new writer. on thursday morning, the reverend wheeler parker junior discussed their book a few days of trouble, revelations on the journey to justice for my cousin and best friend emmett tell. watch 7:00 eastern on c-span, c-span now, our free mobile video app, or online at c-span.org. for the next hour we are going to continue one in the series we've been doing your washington journal. we feature top writers from a variety of political spectrums and talk about