to say here's an example for 15 to 20%. clearly it is a bad risk pool. it's not. it's about underwriting and bad plans screwing up. look at the overall national averages for rate can look at the overall rates we are seeing. i think what we are seeing in terms of the three r's reinsurance which is on the report that came out a few days ago, a lot of money went to health plans that was why the rates were so low in 2014. 2015 they are calculating what they will get paid for reinsurance, and 2016 is when we sit down and negotiate with plans. we look at the same trend, everything. when we kick the tires we did have one plan in 2015 that have big spikes. and stay tuned for later. it's so easy to grab a few numbers as if those are really meaningful. they are not. look at overall averages, that's what i'll risk pool story tells. the issue for consumers and so, if you're in a plan with a big rate job, it's a matter of

making sure that plan or that exchange gives consumers information that got the cheaper often -- the cheaper option. many exchanges to pasadena which is if you don't do anything we will keep you in the plan you are in. that make sense if your estate whose rates didn't bounce around but if you're in a state where last year you were the lowest silver and next year your plan is 20% higher, you could save a lot of money by changing. i think the issue that i think about variation and rate increase isn't about an indicator of the risk pool. it's an indicator of exchanges meeting to give consumers information to make a better choice in the next open enrollment period. >> i would just say some of it is bad choices or bad assumptions. some of it we're still in a transition period, transition plans. we have grandfathered plans. we have changes in risk programs

in the middle of the. we saw the reinsurance amounts going down about to be phased out. we just now got risk adjustment numbers, just now got reinsurance numbers. that carriers after are doing their best trying to figure out what's ahead and they got what all of doctors are, but we are still not there yet and that's one of the reasons we are saying some spikes. i would always caution on percentages percentages as a statistician teacher always told me his life to you to look at them carefully after its percentage but a percentage of what. what we are looking now they got where the dollar amount is not the percentage increase or decrease but what premium will be charged versus everybody else in the market and where is everybody coming to. i think we will see some settling down now we are getting closer to where everybody is in the pool all the rules are set still have this small group

change coming, we think maybe maybe not. we come everybody is feeling that way so we are us sing some of them but we feel like it will settle down in the future. >> and we always have to remember that even before the affordable care act we have large jumps in premiums and premiums all over the place so this isn't new. but i would agree with brian that we are going to a transition phase and probably three, four years out we will know also about where we are endless of course we decide to do something. >> i would just follow up on something that peter said about consumers making choices and changing plans. it was remarkable number of people change plans last year about 30% change plans which is a lot higher than you see in employer-based plans, medicare program. people really are exercising their choice prerogative on

plans. >> okay. well, thank you all for active participation in this come and for showing up in the middle of a week like this. i want to thank the commonwealth fund, especially sara and our colleagues for helping to shape and make good this particular program. also thank you for filling out the blue evaluation form that you were scribbling on right now. and i want to ask you to help me thank the panel for addressing most of the questions anyway. [applause] >> and my apologies to those of you took the time to write questions on cards that we couldn't get to in the time that we had to i don't think we are done with this project yet and the subject may be showing up in your schedule soon. thank you. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> this forum at the alliance for health reform will be available later today on our website where you can also listen to the oral arguments in the supreme court health care case and watch reaction to the court decision leslie. it's available in the c-span video library at c-span.org. >> and coming up in just under one hour at 130 p. eastern a russian journalist will discuss the state of russian media and political systems as a result of the ongoing ukraine-russia conflict.

>> during the july 4 break we continue with our congressional freshman interviews conversations that started at eight eastern. a lot of people have asked over the how i made the transition from car sales and car service to politics. i said truthfully that's a pretty short step. a lot of the skills are the

same. for example being able to walk up to people you don't try to find a way to be friendly and open and connect. find something of in common. a lot of it is sales. i've always had ideas sales is meeting people's needs that we sold 65,000 cars over the years. remember -- i don't ever remember pressuring a customer into buying a car. that's the worse way to do. the idea was to say what are your needs what are your priorities, what works for you and your family, how can we meet that need? in politics is much the same thing. want of the crises in your life, what are the things that don't function in our society? how do we move forward? trying to listen carefully. >> and we'll have more of those. you can see the complete idiot tonight.

our conversations with members of congress start at eight eastern as they share the personal stories and reflections on the new members of the house of representatives. tonight on c-span starting at eight eastern. president obama announced today that the u.s. and cuba have reached a deal to reestablish full diplomatic ties and open embassies that were shattered by decades ago. this is a historic step in her efforts to normalize relations with the cuban government and the cuban people. keep the government said the two entities would be reopened on july 20 although the president did not mention a date in his remarks from the white house. is somewhat the president had to say about congress. >> americans and cubans alike are ready to move forward. i believe it's time for congress to do the same i've called on congress to take steps to lift the embargo to prevent americans from traveling or doing business in cuba. we've seen members from both parties begin that work. after all why should washington stand in the way of our own

people? yes, there are those want to turn back the clock and doubled up on a policy of isolation but as long as it is past time for us to realize this approach doesn't work. hasn't worked for cookies. it shuts america out of cuba's future and it only makes life worse for the cuban people. i would ask congress to listen to the cuban people, listen to the american people. listen to the words of a proud cuban-american who recently came out against the policy of the past saying i wonder if the cubans who have to stand on for the basic necessities for hours inin the hot havana sun feel this approach approach is helpful to them? of course nobody expects cuba to be transformed overnight. i believe american engagement through our embassy, businesses and most of all through our people is the best way to advance our interests in support for democracy and human rights. >> you can see all of what the president had to say by going to

our website, c-span.org. some reaction from members of congress to what happens with cuba today. opened the american embassy in cuba will do nothing to the cuban people and is just another tribute to tim for president obama took alexa shopping. pat russell ileana brost lightman republican from florida. senator marco rubio from florida, 2016 presidential candidate has said he would block the confirmation of a nominee the president put forth until cuba takes step to end human rights abuses and guarantees more political freedom for its citizens. >> a recent survey of likely 2016 boat shows unmarried women come one is an represent a majority of voting eligible citizens and the democrats face a voter enthusiasm gap. pollsters talk about the candidates and impact of the supreme court ruling involving the affordable care act and same-sex marriage.

>> okay. we're going to let the rest of our colleagues join us and progress as they say. thanks for coming. i'm david cook from the monitor. are just this point our stan greenberg and page gardner. stand is the chairman and ceo of greenberg -- greenberg quinlan rosner research who founded the company in 1980 after teaching at your mac or he won a guggenheim fellowship. as a bachelor's degree from miami university and a doctorate from harvard. he's been an adviser to president clinton, tony blair and nelson mandela, just to drop a few names this way. this is -- [inaudible] spent all right.

page gardner for our guest in the past as well. she's founder and president of the voter participation center army known as women's voices, women's vote. today she is here in her role as president of the actions and conversations goes to increase participation of unmarried women and other historically underrepresented groups. she has a high honors degree from duke. so much for biography. out onto the ever popular process portion of our program. i did much better with this before my stroke. i'm just kidding. we are on the record. please no live blogging tweeting. no filing of any kind while the breakfast is under way. to give us time to listen to what our guests say. there's no embargo when the session ends. to help you curb relentless self the urge we will e-mail several pictures of the session to all the reporters here as soon as the breakfast inns. regular attendees know committed

like to ask a question, please do the traditional thing and send a subtle nonthreatening signal and i will happily call on one and all. we will start off by offering our guests the opportunity to make opening comments. we will and that questions were on the table. since i guess the present the result of a bold opening remarks will be somewhat longer than usual. thanks again for doing this. >> thank you for letting us share our research here. we are here to talk about in part the rising american electorate millennials, people of color and unmarried women, particularly important our unmarried women and they will be central to 2016. they are the majority of people who can vote. in the past they have not been the majority of people who do vote. in 2016, for the first time they will be the majority of people who can vote.

so this new american majority will set a new american agenda and this research points that i. in addition to the horse race entrance of congressional candidates and presidential candidates we see the other underlying racist. there's an enthusiasm race, a women and family issues raise come and there's an overall agenda raise. enthusiasm race. one of the challenges that's presented to us as the rising american electorate looks to 2016, they are less enthusiastic about the race. to 48% scored 10 on a sliding scale of one to 10 and being very interested versus those who score higher at 67%. that's a challenge. the women and issues agenda. this will be one way to make sure the rising american

electorate becomes more enthusiastic about the race. these are issues like paid sick equal pay, child care affordable childcare. these are the kinds of issues and begin to excite particularly unmarried women and get the more enthusiastic about the race. finally, is a broader agenda peace that we're going to discuss today and this includes things like college affordability, infrastructure and jobs. most importantly this broader agenda is combined with elements of reform and this reform takes to pass it. one is government reported is the government working for you? the others money and politics reform. you have two pieces of the reform agenda that the central to combined with an overall economic agenda. as we go into the race we see the horse figure and we also see these underlying agenda items. without i will turn it over.

>> thank you very much. thank you to the monitor for the long tradition of inviting us to share our findings in real-time. misrepresents the public really and everything we are releasing, everything is public, the full survey and you can have access to all questions, all part of the. it's one of the things that believing transparency as to the credibility of the. we've had a lot of polls where you struggle. this is not one of those. this was completed before last week. we assume the president standing will rise though in this bold we have a president standing right. we are focused on i think a much bigger picture. this is an electorate in which

the republican brand has become so toxic and increasingly toxic, ma led by the leaders of the congress. ulysse in the data that is presented that they hit a low point. that combined with a cultural shift that is reflected in other polls in terms of the number of people who call themselves conservatives in the country. so it's producing an electorate that is producing big margins for democrats and big margins, bigger margins than we had before and in some time. but there is a huge enthusiasm gap in the polls. that is stunning in the degree, given what happened even though we don't and the presidential election expect what happened in

2014, but there's no doubt that republicans have been engaged in fighting the trend in the country, that has engaged in. that's still evident in this goal. when you do focus, you see the results in your and when you do focus groups, there's a deep alienation from the political class amongst our baseload come and working class voters generally. who see political class operate its own interest, dominated by money, gridlock, and which we believe contributes significantly to the since the country is on the wrong track pessimism and disempowerment. that sets up that tilts us back toward the republicans despite being poised against the trends that we talk about. however, this poll now like the

third poll confirming a trend that we just know have taken, now a law, that is and that is that the democrat progressives did heard when reform of government and politics is essential to the message as their economic agenda. as he was the we produced a syndicate shift in enthusiasm particularly amongst unmarried women, white and unmarried women. that comes as a consequence of an agenda that's a very broad agenda with activist government but combined with going after money and politics and making government worth it for people who are struggling. we don't believe progressives ought to be cautious about changing government. in fact, they will not win elections or have the scale of participation and less people they vote for change and vote

for change means also changing the way government operates. >> let me just highlight some of that with a few graphs. there are more craft are unlikely to present all these, and you have the full set of graphs. if you go to graph seven, this is the line where we track the parties thermometers for obama. but at the bottom right you can see the republicans in congress that's the stuff that change is the biggest in this poll. if you look at grass aid in which a look at the favorability thermometer rating from barack obama, net plus 12 two hillary clinton, minus four and has gone down, to the republican party minus nine to the republican congress, minus

25, and then you get to the leaders. john boehner and mitch mcconnell, who have staggering numbers in terms of how negative perceptions are. if you look at slide nine you can see that trend is the second lowest point since we have pulled on john boehner, the lowest point for mitch mcconnell but they are clearly driving the republican brand into negative territory which is setting up a strong vote both presidentially and congressionally. when you look at the focused strips, you can see it's about it's a combination of gridlock and being for the wealthy. it isn't a huge change in the perception that the republican party is up for sale. that money is playing a huge part of that and that permeates perception about the congress, both gridlock and who they are

for. the other things going on is the pullback from conservatives. graph 11, you see that the red is the percentage identify as conservatives. that's now dropped that's 35% in our poll. it was liberals have moved up steadily through all cycles, even through the off year in 14 but you seem kind of like a steady trend. driven both by the presidential campaign and by the congress. you see in 12 our thermometer tracking for pro-life groups, nra, undocumented immigrants, gay marriage, all the cultural issues we tried. is one of them is on a trend toward a more liberal trend that you've seen in other polls. these choices are taking place

in that context. the other these come on 13 obamacare, this is before the supreme court decision. we've watched a slow rise in its stated that this was the first goal we have had in which the negatives -- first pole -- negatives and positives are almost equal after it's been a a sharply negative by unlocking earlier period. so a whole range of things appear to be moving in ways that are creating a fairly positive environment. you then have an election in which 16 were hillary clinton's lead is a stable and powerful and i think impressive given you will see that from personal they have got more negative but it has not translated into a boat. but what defines that is what defines your position is

overwhelming support amongst unmarried women and the rising american electorate and minority voters secular voters, the vote had been voting democratic are voting for in big numbers and she has a database number. keep in mind you have to understand basis. page talked about the rising american electorate but they will be 55% of american electorate in 2016. in the presidential electorate. and if you include the people on top of that you're talking to 63% of the electorate. when you're talking about these kinds of numbers with groups that are forming a big majority of the electorate, it's possible to win unless you have an enthusiasm problem that i will talk about. i'm going to go past that. you can look at the actual vote but i think the more important

thing is to look at the challenge that comes on july 24 which is the enthusiasm measure whether you're extremely interested in what's happening. you see a huge gap between democrats and republicans. seniors are very high but two-thirds giving highest ratings participation and then you go down to minority voters the rising american electorate. unmarried women at 46% millennials at 35%. that base of the democratic party begins quite negative and drops. so the issue is going to be how you get them engaged. if you look at 25 you can see some of the focus group results on how much politics have dominated by money how distant

it is for average people. i will let you read those quotes and use those quotes. there's a reason why they think, even though they're giving democrats big numbers their lack of enthusiasm is grounded in an analysis the way the political system operates. if you look at 27 you can see when we look at whether the country is in the right direction or not, unmarried women are 55% wrong track. these are based democratic voters. with a democratic president who are voting in large numbers for a democrat to succeed but nonetheless think the country is in trouble. i didn't unmarried women are 25% of the electorate and will be 25% of the electorate for sure. so that, and a high proportion of democrats. been having this attitude is is quite critical. so how you change about is move

an agenda that is a combination of taking on the way politics happens in taking on the way government operates and to government works for. i have to tell you the digging of the focus before we introduce any subject, they start with talking about money and have the money, they think politicians are being corrupted personally. they think the big money they believe the politicians are lining their pockets and all about money. this is the data. we tested and we rotated, what he began with reform the economic agenda, broad social economic agenda. >> you are on page 30? >> right now i'm on page 33. you can see the huge support, and these are pretty basic. all these agenda items have gotten bigger and bigger. it's not small government.

making sure that working women get equal pay same work and the companies start opening up opportunities to women at all levels. medicare, seniors to pay more don't raise the retirement age. seniors depend on their check despite its broader than just don't cut medicare. each one of these are bigger. if you want and you can see in 34 that the ones that drive the vote and drive the agenda or drive, favor democrats on the economy, our data with working family issues and it was equal pay. these policies are much from like 10 points stronger than all the republican politics. there's a huge agenda difference between the parties. and then on 38 you will see me

go to two pieces that open up the political process, transparency on money and limits on donations, empowering small donations. what's interesting, because people always of you do these things issues and not things that people really vote on. we put them into the list with the other issues on the agenda. these are much higher than republicans but they are in the middle or in the upper part of the list that is attacking the way politics is done. left..

you get a significant push up on the agenda and it's more for democrats than republicans as the agenda moves to his enthusiasm and it's greater for the women who've heard of them asap fair. happy to go through any part of days. but there is an environment that's very strong for democrats. given the structural advantages which seem to be growing. they'll translate. whether they will be deep enough and broad enough and also bring

the congressional long requires looking at this in a much more fundamental way than bringing an agenda that addresses the reform and that's against the unmarried women enables you to win the level to effect things. >> let me ask one or two and then we'll go around the table. miles benson. given what you have said the impression would be this might not be -- this would be a better climate for bernie sanders and hillary clinton. >> no. [laughter] >> why not? >> before this, she did make one of her pillars, key pillars of

her election with campaign money and raise the issue of constitutional amendment in the context of money. so she started it i was interesting of looking at the "washington post" today on money and pay to play in the bush world. i think there's going to be a broad sense of that is the way politics works. i will push for being even stronger in your advocacy on going after money and going after government works. >> can i ask one another and jump in at any point here. i was struck by "the new york times" piece a week ago now about election polling a near price is in a number of homes

that a client and a number of people willing to answer surveys likely voters. and they said polls and pollsters will be less reliable and they will not know when they're off base. given your long experience >> this being the only problem and the reason -- i'm not saying that rhetorically. the reason -- >> 60% on cell phones. >> and the ideal that one who did the national poll. we are only dealing with people

who voted in the prior presidential election or if they are new registrants have a very high probability of voting. our list to start with our voters. so we are not trying to guess to voters sorry. these are voters. two thirds of the people we are interviewing have voted in a prior presidential election. that is expensive. we fortunately have -- >> or adjustment in the numbers to prove it right. >> fortunately we have people who support this. >> i obviously didn't mean this as an attack on you. the industry as a whole when given that we are coming into a heavy polling era should voters and news consumers be more

concerned? >> some of the news organizations we work for only do pull for npr, but there is an increasing number of those. "the l.a. times" is by far the most accurate. they thought they had serious apples off the voter file with representation. all of them are moving to internet and web-based. so i think our challenge will be even greater. i think our problem is not the landline. because of the cost people are moving. we have in britain the labour

party was always with random digit polling. this time the labour party would only pay for web based polling. we had a poll that did show the race election get it closer. it turned out to be right and it also turned out there is not any real distance between the web-based polls and the british election and the ones that were done by regular phone samples. i think we are in the middle of which country. my experience with the u.s. is the databases are not as strong as in britain at least. >> we are going to go and start.

>> hillary lost women to obama in 17 states and is significantly less well amongst unmarried women. she's always had a problem generally attract teen unmarried women at least in that election. how do you overcome that now? women won't vote for her because she's a woman. how do she overcome that now? >> first of all first of all we didn't poll in the primaries so we don't have our own data. i would be surprised if she did less well than obama. get high portion of african-american the problem was that a racial rather than marriage effect. if we look at her position right now she is doing well with white unmarried women.

i believe with white working-class than obama did. she's doing much less well in the poll are not resolved. >> we didn't take a look at all the primaries. we did some and we did see as the race was joined there was movement. getting back to a sinless talking about earlier i think you see in terms of the four pillars she has put together something that addresses the lives of i married women significantly and their concerns about a government that works for them and economy for the future. i think there will be a lot of excitement around unmarried women for her candidacy msdn has seen and we are seeing white

unmarried women are doing quite well for her right now. >> i have kind of a double-barreled question. when you talk about this group in which the bcs and you said that is high, but the turnout rate is low, do we know what the actual turnout rate has been to this entire group that you designed in which he batted speculators to better reflected here. can you say in those groups individually or in combination with the turnout rate has been? >> in 2012 or 48% of the electorate. just even though and 2012 the majority of people -- >> the speculators --

>> or projection is based on the trend in presidential voting rights. 63% -- 55%. 48% to 65% project did. >> in the second barrel on this is why the democratic bench so big >> voting groups? >> we're talking about candidates. >> we have a thin bench. >> first of all hillary clinton is a very strong candidate. we are looking right now. i'm not sure i've all but the republicans have. the lower the standing of the

republican party. clearly they have a large bench. hillary clinton is a strong candidate. i she has been broadly dealing with the range of issues. if estimation is a very strong candidate. i think they will be aided by the primary process and will move more quickly to address the issues and the consequences of that. if she were not there there's a whole range of candidates that might emerge as candidate. that is not so interesting because it's likely to win the nomination. >> other than friendship is there a relationship you have with hillary at the moment? >> craig gilbert from the milwaukee sentinel. >> what should they be telling

republican candidates on how to put together a winning presidential coalition given the electoral landscaping and the shifting electorate. >> pre-fundamental and my kind of backdrop or what the new democratic reformers have to do to win both the party and the country. there really is a pretty sustained party for democrats nationally. it is a huge hurdle for them coming in to bat. we have a presidential electoral disadvantage, democrat for a long time. it's a tumultuous primaries in which we battled -- we didn't wait until after the primary

process to make a turn in order to say were different party. we had a huge war. we've got all the passive though. some positions that will reformat to balance that it is really a true liberal than take up their positions. the special-interest tuning controls of the party and the future was a fundamental battle in the primary. that was true of bill clinton too. we beat jesse jackson and the primary. the welfare reform in the primary so when they came out of that, we were able to say to the country now we are a different kind of party or a different kind of democrat. they need to have a defeat like 84 i believe with a candidate that is the mainstream of the

party. someone like a walker. and then go through a process of reform. i don't think you can get it tactically. we took off a few issues that will work better in the general election. you need a big title. the problem here is you have unmarried women growling and you've got a big change in the country. but they are fighting those trends. it is not just that there is a trend. they are defined by their battle. we are not just talking about a line. we are looking on a line which they view as something they are trying to forestall or keep the majority from governing and it don't mean. >> i would just add to that if you look at what is going on now, not only in terms of

demographics, but in truth of the lives of lost americans, and they don't understand why the candidates in the republican party don't get it, fundamentally don't get it. whether it is equal pay men and women together you know, paid sick days, affordable childcare. fundamental issues make the lives of working americans strong good a little bit of tone deafness around us. >> when we tested the republican agenda first of all they cost about 10 points lower overall. if you look at the bottom of the things that are really low 22%. it cut regulation and weakened unions reduce the deficit and repeal obamacare. you want to take the issues at

the bottom of their list. it's what they care about. it's what they talk about. >> thinking about the enthusiasm for a democratic candidate to follow a character president into the white house and thinking about the busiest in gap, hillary clinton's agenda so far is not that different from president obama. so what is it about the democratic candidate agenda you would suggest might be missing what i'm thinking if voters are somewhat demoralized or down read about the idea a democratic candidate is working to spend blockaded on the issues they care most about. so when you think the democratic candidate can say to voters to

persuade them not to just be enthusiastic about the gender but that it can actually be fulfilled. >> i think that's the heart of the problem. people don't think any of this is going to happen. it's not because they are following obama. washington is so corrupt and gridlock. it is the main problem which is getting to believe change can happen. but not because it is a third term for barack obama. it is uniquely corrected. the old patterns of two-term presidents are following. the only thing that matters is that people have in the country

politically and economically. that is the context. i would still take the step that is hinted president obama as you get to the end of the term will continue to improve in macro terms. probably a perfect 2% approval. certainly desperate and so i wouldn't mind that. but i would dispute that the president was on the agenda. the country was dealing with the agenda. the first time he talked about as within this year's state of the union. he's been talking about a strong economy that is working that we've created hundreds of thousands of jobs.

it was not about what was happening to the middle class. briefly in the reelection. this is not his agenda. whether he has a big opportunity >> i would also add ms research use the one of the signs of who is working for you. she and the democrats in congress have a big advantage on that. i agree with dan in terms of the quote, unquote pattern. right now, who do the american people think is working for them and you see a clear advantage? >> just to follow for the democratic candidate for hillary, is there anything she is not gained that she should as a candidate stressed more based on what you've discerned? >> it is early.

if i look at her speech on roosevelt island come i thought it was very much in line. she's being drafted the questionnaire. it seems to me those are pretty bold issues very much aligned with the boldness of these issues, but she is also talking about what is happening with families and working women and also cleaning up money. to me she seems to be moving toward this direction. >> or re-show for mcclatchy. >> i wouldn't say the decisions outside the supreme court of the movement of the country last week in terms of enthusiasm on obamacare and on gay rights and to some degree to the racial sent activity from charles in.

does that have the effect of dampening the enthusiasm gap in a bold and republicans who are so inflamed. i was listening to mark levin this morning on obamacare. >> this is totally without data but it seems pretty hyped up and energized by the position. so i think if there's a perception he is a successful president, i think democrats progressives are energized by that. again, we are watching a trend line on ideology and on the different cultural symbols that are moving in a particular direction and it looks like one side is winning that has to give energy to those who appear to be

on the winning side. i think it's more an affirmation of your values and i'm assuming there's more disgruntlement in the sensor leaders are failing you in defending your values. i don't know how that plays out. >> cannot take from these decisions enough to generate enthusiasm on their side? >> i don't see the logic. for those who want to argue for a different party in a different direction, you could make an argument. maybe they'll say this was a turning point. the party has moved to a different place. we don't worry as much about the polar as we should. maybe, is a different perspective. certainly by the media was well

within. but it is theoretical. i don't think the logic of that with the republicans or conservatives to have more energy. >> in the final 15 minutes we look at to rick from abc news. >> you make the comparison around republican leadership with boehner and mcconnell's terrible numbers. if that didn't matter to voters in the 14 midterms when their leadership is in question and the big thing on the ballot in gaining grounds, why would it matter in 16? related to that and they won popular presidential candidate away from turning that around? does not work in reverse. >> you're absolutely right that

i've watched and hoped for the kind to play out certainly in the presidential elections. they also did not congressional in 2012. it was harder in 2014 given the nature of the electorate and their success doing the opposite which was nationalizing obama. not congressional leaders but stopping obama. there is some evidence in this poll that for some groups in our base are beginning to lineup the congressional vote in the presidential vote as you look at 21, one of the things reflect it in the vote which had a strong

digital margin for hillary it also had a stronger democratic vote then they cut before. that was produced by some groups but unwed women were you see the margin between the vote for congress and president pretty small. we are beginning to see not only a strong vote for hillary in certain base groups but by the way it's not a generic though. ours is a named ballet. in each district we ask the incumbent's name and then a generic opponent. the name in our congressional ballot we have shown a shift. there is some evidence here that hillary is actually attacking the congress unlike obama where he was much more making the case

for his own presidency in the direction of it. very much attacking what republicans are doing on education spending as they produce the reauthorization of the education and she was talking about the cuts in research budget and federal government. he seems to be burned in the congress and the narrative more than obama did and maybe that's beginning to play. >> "washtington examiner." >> 52% on the enthusiasm gap has really got my attention. the poll shows that generally they like republican leadership. hillary clinton in her speech pretty much mouth this agenda towards working people and republicans generally have been mounting what the public doesn't really like.

so how did they get to 67%? do they not like obama? is that it? >> they don't like obama. they don't like hillary clinton. they raised the stakes are incredibly high. when i watch the supreme court which may be the point you're making earlier. and on gay marriage and other ratios in the affordable care act. the only thing to stop them are the republican presidential candidate who can win an election and stop them. the issues that bad and they are trying to stop them is supposed to democrat who are needing to change the government reformed in order to be able to bring change. the more complicated argument

for democrat. >> also lets you go over time, if this argument are articulated from now until the end played out as it is played out here come the ecb enthusiasm levels rise significantly. there is a chance that there will be a rise in tuesday as the minutes just a matter -- not just but a matter of articulating an agenda that seeks to their lives that includes their economic lives as well as getting something done to make government work for them. >> for the follow-up, the republicans are overdue. data one of the over three. is this a floor or ceiling? >> it is a floor. they just elected a congress in which they have republican leaders of the congress for the

first time in a very long time. they have the start of a presidential election with many candidates. you can see why they would be more attentive in particular. and democrat as a lot of our base, particularly unmarried women in the wrong direction have fairly mixed views and the approval rating is a pretty big disapprove. and so what this says is given agenda and the evidence here is that a smooth and went to advance an agenda, which shows the positive change in government work as follows economic policy. >> there's also another piece of that increasing enthusiasm but also increasing optimism particularly among unmarried

women. you saw how pessimistic they currently are. there's a lot of movement there. >> i'd like to ask your view of the republican field. your polling shows hillary would do better against walker then rubio. is there anything to that and also related to back, we are seeing searches for candidates like ben carson. trump is doing well in new hampshire. do people on the republican side just not really know what they want yet and are not really familiar enough with candidate or do you think there is something in these numbers about telling us what the republican voters want. >> first of all the different is here is a half sample and so we view them comparable

strengths and will probably still rotate either candidate into our testing. we didn't come out of this saying one was stronger. we didn't poll the primaries. as i looked at what happened in 2012, any of the candidates -- >> a couple minutes left in this event. you can see it in its entirety. live now russian journalists will discuss russian-made and political systems as a result of the ongoing russia conflict taking place at the carnegie endowment for international peace just getting underway. >> it is a very different career path. people in the russian studies failed myself included were still his students. i start my dad drive to work and

when i go home a very much creates a filter and a source of information. in this environment still turn things over in terms of our discussion now. the filters are getting very confusing. we are in a period of unpredictability and uncertainty of what happens in russia and internationally. when you look at the level of uncertainty and unpredictability have a few facts you keep reminding yourself of. the one i remind myself of this we are in it are like atmosphere at least inside russia. does it feel about radio? >> thank you.

>> translator: everything is the bowl. that is how the vision of the president and leaders will integrate between russia in the united states of america. ukraine is a territory where it took place. [inaudible] not ukraine, not luxembourg. this is the territory -- currently according to the poll

and that believes it has been to russia and the united states. it was about 50%. our mentality is very militarized. [inaudible] [inaudible] and the statement as journalist

is in charge. everything is quite clear. >> you spent a lot of time one-on-one. one of the most striking stories i remember hearing about is when he explained the difference between an enemy and a traitor. he said you are an enemy. can you explain what he meant by that? >> translator: it was the year 2000 the president was just elected. i was just as journalist. i came to this city -- [inaudible] he was very nervous.

later he spent two and a half hours talking about the media about what would have been. and at some point -- how do you classify your enemy? and he said the two categories are traitors. they are those with whom you fight a world and then conclude an armistice and then you divide

again and we look in their eyes and he said people people who were inside from behind. i have no mercy for them. is that you, just an enemy. it was almost like a metal. [inaudible] >> so who is barack obama. >> translator: i believe that he is a rival. he is a competitor. he is an enemy. any american president in this black-and-white picture --

[inaudible] but there's no element of truth here. >> at the look of that dynamic weather so much attention in ukraine and the sharp nationalistic turn in politics in the sharp isolation of russia from the international community. do you feel this is a political strategy as much as a reaction to the events in ukraine in early 2014? >> translator: i believe the confrontation between our nation is unavoidable. we have contradictions but the

mentality and psychology of our president. i believe currently president putin feels very good. when it came back to his ear as he became young again. [inaudible] of the british tbg at this time of the cold war and the two superpowers and what to do and how to conduct. the restart relaunch was very complicated and he didn't feel comfortable himself. i would not say he did it on purpose. the fact is that he is the enemy

with the temporary allies it is very clear he feels much more comfortable. >> if you look at the logic of russian domestic politics it's different. i've been inexorable enemy that justifies tightening the screws at home that justifies a deepening of the monopoly on critical authority, having the atmosphere is basically a formula for putin's survival. it is hard for us which component of this is the natural result of tensions over a situation in russia's immediate neighborhood and how much is about the long-term political survival of the regime. how would you wage? >> translator: it is a joke even though the foreign policies

put into domestic policy. i don't know any politician -- managing to convert the foreign issue. but we are talking about the issue in the echo is very hard and it's more comfortable to say the truth. the fact that the president goes with the competition. everything else is a byproduct.

our country in political rivalry is the economic competition. it is also a moral competition reduced to a traditional ones. for example during your reaction and the president two blocks to the tea party. he will pull his own ideas to deprive the congress has the authority and the supreme court of its authority. they have certain songs. this means the country is

turning into a nation which is incapable to compete. it is the official one. they are going to lag behind again in different areas and eventually -- [inaudible] only because the status to him. >> what is the goal -- people today are very much focused on the pre-election -- i'm sorry. someone's headset is making a

terrible static noise. can you all please check. they all are. i'm sorry about that. >> this goes off and not the result we have static noise. people turn off the sound would never use the english, that would help. >> keep your head sets off all items in english, we won't have this noise. i appreciate people cooperating. again, turn off your heads that's what is going on in english and we will lose the interference. sorry about the technical snafu. what animates the government now? are their goals or assists all short-term political calculations to justify what has been done in the past year and have or keep the political

landscape so favorable. is there bake some -- some big agenda that drives this? >> translator: i believe that brescia is widely popular among the post-imperial syndrome. after world war ii we were rich. we were strong. everybody respect to s. the collapsed. we became poor. we became weaker. [inaudible]

the current government tries to take advantage not to the extent the united states. whatever we can grow and this has left the mood of the population which like me used to be in the soviet union for the generation of what a great nation and how people of the country all over the world can respect prudence demeanor and

the mood of the majority and efficiently uses it for his domestic purposes. >> the level of self oscillation involves the level of antagonism inside ukraine which seems to be lost now for a generation or more in terms of having any close relationship with moscow. the sense among other neighboring countries that russia is dangerous that it is prepared to take huge risks to violate international norms in pursuit of the short-term political goals. how is that a smart strategy? seven at the prospect of degradation of the stability putin craves. >> translator: [inaudible] why should we give it up.

you should be afraid of us. [inaudible] maybe you can use your gears because there is no contradiction. there is the goal to win back the respect that everything is correct. >> so let's turn to the domestic political environment. four months ago exactly the noted russian politician himself was killed a short distance and there's no clarity at this point i think about why about who and about the long-term effects. can you give us your sense. but why this happened. >> translator:

[inaudible] and with the conversations with different people who were close to the investigation. the investigator was absolutely confused. it is proven by the technical means. the video and records with no if proved the elements of the people -- the desert is shown to the media and president putin.

they were perpetrators. they were proven by the technical means and filming that some manage to leave the country . this is a complicated joke because it is a political element. the people protect them. both in the eyes of the public.

there is a search for the organizer and cannot protect the merger under criminal perception because he did not exist -- [inaudible] [inaudible] and they worry about how the relations have built in the

area. they were not in the conversation on this topic. [inaudible] -- and in the world today. they are going to be lenient and dave believes there were many political that we should never completely discover. i am absolutely confused that it

proves so very well end it's kind of a lenient push in respect of the joint work. he gave an order in the permission we call 80 people -- [inaudible] who were killed after he quit they know his route in the details. maybe it was the cia.

the technical means so far with no ukrainian moment. >> could you talk a little bit about how this has affected you personally and the liberal establishment you are a part of? several people have had to leave the country. people now go back and forth. you are very visible. is that the protection you are wearing or is it just faith? >> translator: [inaudible] that may tell you one episode. i got a phone call from one of the so-called law enforcement agencies.

they said yes we have. stay wherever you want to go. they flew to london. [inaudible] later i got a call that says you can come back now. now you can leave it alone. i have the card -- [inaudible] this happens in early january. we refuse to -- because he

preferred beautiful girls instead. no matter how much we can joke he was alone. he was working with security. he will live a little longer. >> a couple years ago there was a spontaneous demonstration of soccer hooligans on the square in reaction to his moscow fight in the decision to not press charges against the assailant then it killed -- there is another fight between soccer hooligans and the immigrant guest workers. russian politics has changed dramatically since that event which i think was in 2010 if i'm not mistaken. nationalists and otherwise

marginal voices have now become part of the mainstream, part of the domestic mainstream. it's not a phenomenon you expect to intensify in the run-up to the elections in 2016 or 28 teams or does putin and his political team need to create a more moderate stand of what normal politics is in brescia? -- in russia? >> translator: [inaudible] -- the nationalist and the imperialists. they remain marginal in terms of political end quote prosecutes them. they are what i call it in russia which includes not only russians in chechnya and in

ukrainians of courses gaining strength. in terms of the electoral putin's party will benefit from it. he is going to get 7% 10%. he is quite loyal to putin which is only his electorate as well. the hula dance soccer players and members of the police -- [inaudible] ..

environment in crying or are we just any pause in a pause and will there be predictable triggers or unpredictable but pulls this into a dangerous stage of the conflict? >> i believe there is a long-term conflict in the next year. [inaudible] [inaudible]

this war is going to be for a long time. [inaudible] and i believe they already used this because of the free entrance on the border of ukraine. that is a great market.

>> and to keep this conflict forever. i'm very pessimistic [inaudible] [inaudible] what kind of a decision are they supposed to make? and the different things were shut down and i bb that would have been my mistake.

the situation is not controlled and the number of missions in the military. there's a large number of factors when it was taken away with many people that were willing to continue this unpredictable environment, no matter what they wanted political or military. >> the analogy of comparing the flight going to the idea that president putin wouldn't be aware that russia supplied the equipment and it's a pretty clear-cut case that somebody made a terrible mistake using

that equipment to protect to the attack an airliner thinking they're having a military airliner so we need to be careful in terms of where we are assigning the blame. i think the idea that he would start a war for such a terrible decision, which ultimately is a reflection on his failed policies i think it doesn't make a lot of logical sense. but the question is long-term. is the goal to have it for decades or is it to wait until it collapses and then you will have either pieces of ukraine that become more cooperative or ukraine basically stops existing as a unitary state. where is the goal that this ends? >> i completely disagree.

>> in the public opinion after the plane was shot down and before that -- [inaudible] it was a 180-degree u-turn and we will never know who shut it down [inaudible]

and they put a full stop shut down. [inaudible] >> [inaudible]

is still not clear when it applies to the conversation the answer was ukraine did not. >> the question was on the previous shutdown. >> there is a debate about why do they hate us and if you watch through the prism of the official state television coming to get a pretty good idea. and i am just curious how you would assess the supreme court's decision to recognize marriage across the united states. is this formed the basis for the long-term cultural gap value gap between russia and the west?

>> the russian establishment couldn't carry [inaudible] [inaudible]

it costs more than the books into some other -- [inaudible] -- during the war and that is when people would be less afraid of the enemy. >> [inaudible] >> okay. so, we are going to open this up now to the people in attendance to pose questions. wait for the microphone before you start speaking and identify your name and affiliation, and three make it short and make it

a question. >> george washington university. [inaudible] the position is to provide a ground for the whole political spectrum come and recently we witnessed that some liberal positioners have turned against the idea station come and i was

wondering how and what measures you take to bring them back. >> [inaudible] actually come everybody is unhappy about this. they are criticized by president putin -- [inaudible] twenty-four hours per day.

[inaudible] [inaudible] is used to criticize the government and the others to speak without let's so they have the alternative to the outlet on

the official position for the chief editor of the people's ideas to accept and make it quite clear -- [inaudible]

is not a good merchandise. i believe it is. [inaudible] >> all the way in the back. >> to what degree -- to what degree do you think russians are becoming aware that they are dying in ukraine to cease the territory, and are they aware in the sense that they are going to take any action regarding? [inaudible]

and the information. >> the situation is more transparent. [inaudible] i am a journalist and i need that information.

[inaudible] if it is suggested because of the military brokers and i

should say it is changing. the public opinion is to start to think about the price of the issue. >> are you trying to minimize the significance of the military presence. are you trying to say this has become an element of proof because i think if we were looking for that you're not going to get something that stands up in court but rather you will see the pattern of behavior in terms of equipment, command structures and the rest.

that's the footprint. it's not about having hundreds of thousands of troops in eastern ukraine. >> it follows on the social networks. it is very efficient -- [inaudible] i am a journalist and there

should be some support for the equipment to -- [inaudible] it's still including the pictures because we care about the reputation and we can think about the large presence or insignificant presence.

this provides different information. [inaudible] >> said here on the left-hand side. >> thanks so much. i'm from the air force academy and i was wondering what you think the role of the baltic states or in this. we've seen a lot of news lately in the large-scale military exercises. how is the threat perceived and

if so how serious is that and will there be any involvement there x. >> maybe i misunderstood the question. >> is a large-scale. it could be deemed in 2007. >> it was in the first place

[inaudible] and it's about trying to threaten each other -- [inaudible] >> raised and brought up in the air. that is a different situation.

>> [inaudible] is the part for the business to continue if doubled its budget.

so it is a different organization. >> [inaudible] by the fact that he's describing the nato budget has not actually occurred except for a handful. [laughter]

[inaudible] could you please comment on the increasing number of questions for joining basis or especially from the northern caucuses and how is this perceived and what is russia doing and what can be done? >> [inaudible] has 1802 the chief of the federal service executing after the citizens became members.

[inaudible] there was the meeting devoted to this issue and the people that come back all under control -- [inaudible]

>> and it's a very careful and concerned -- [inaudible] but we did break up the relationship. much of the information still continues. >> is a very high level of exchange information.

and the u.s. senior officials following the instruction came to washington at the highest level [inaudible] >> time for three more questions if i can put them all together i will start right down here. >> you said back in 2000 the president called you his enemy.

but listening to you now you don't really strike me very much as the enemy. sometimes it is by ukraine especially as you speculate so my question is who are you and more important what you see your role in life today? thank you. >> but i am worried about this is the most important issue. i do not support the policy