different. ..

>> thank you very, very much for your excellent speech and bringing us up to date on what really is. i am concerned this document to me is just a peace at any price and the piece of blank paper and the price we pay for our future, and as you said our values, it seems what we need to do is go back to peace through strength. 1979, the hostages were released and the liberal side was going

along. iranians will move when they think they got the best deal. they were not sure. when did they go? right at the inaugural when the former president took off and ronald reagan, they were not sure what he would do as the cowboy, and that is when we got peace through strength and that is what we need today. peace through strength. in addition to that, i have another concern is this going to give them full diplomatic authorities? or are we going to have limitations? are we going to give them back their embassy here, too? which is in a crucial location especially for the british embassy which is a block down and it has been vacant since 1979 except when used by the state department and rented out.

that is a concern for me. it is jus across the bridge from our mosque and the italian, brazilian, and other embassies on embassy road. that would be a perfect center for a little mischief. that is one thing that is a grave concern to me. >> mr. fox: well, i guess that the aim is to see a greater and greater normalization in relations with iran. that in itself is not a bad thing but it has to be earned. and my point is giving all of these things at the beginning of the process, before they have been earned and before they are showing they are willing to implement the agreement itself seems a touch naive. [inaudible question]

>> mr. fox: the west, the polls, say they are thinking trumps critical analysis. russia launched a cyber attack on histonia and we did something. they invaded georgia and they are still there and our response was minimum. the last time i was here in washington, one of the u.s. senators said to me i am worried putin is misreading the signals from the west. and i said you know what? putin is perfectly reading the signals from the west. he acts, we don't respond and he acts and we don't respond. what is difficult to read about that? >> hi, david from the heritage

foundation. thank you for your remarks, dr. fox. moving forward, it seems like the democrats and the u.s. are going to filibuster and the deal will be implemented. what is the steps moving forward for people that don't believe this deal is going to leave to iran not obtaining nuclear weapons. what are the steps that should be taken moving forward? thank you. >> mr. fox: it looks like the agreement will gow ahead and we will be stuck with the risks that are in it. what i think we will have to do, the best we can do is to insure that the rights of access by the iaea are fully upheld and that the stallling techniques that have been described and we have seen in the past by iran are not allowed to buy them extra time.

even the year's brokeout i don't think is accurate. i think it is more like seven or eight months than a years break out. and there are so many risks in all of these processes. i find it hard to be optimistic about it. i think we are sadly limited into what levers we have to pull if our anxiety grows over the years ahead. when this was brought up in house of commons, the foreign secretary, my friend, phillip hammond said he thought it was a historical agreement and said with all due respect history will determine whether it is a historic agreement. and a generic lesson for all politicians in that one. >> thank you.

the vast majority of syria was not caused by isis by assad appointed by iran and killed more people. shouldn't any kind of action that you propose be brought against isis and assad as well? >> mr. fox: well, i am not going to go into the complexities of iran except to say this: that it has been the movement of isis that has caused in recent times this mass movement of refuge and you are right the war was causing instability and this is instability upon instability if you like. it is not just the number of

refuges there. i was in turkey and they have seen two million people crossing their borders which is a huge problem for any country. we know what isis is capable. we have seen what they have been doing and their animal behavior towards the fellow human beings in the maim of so name sof name -- name of so-called religion and we have to raise our games. a few airstrikes on isis in iraq is not enough because it is not giving the people the safety they require. with the marsh arabs and in iraq we were able to achieve no-fly zones and zones of safety so people could live without fear in their own country. we are going to have to do something similar again.

i know we don't want to do it and i know the public opinion may not be in favor of doing it. but if we only want to have the policies that are already accepted by the public why don't we give up and let the pollsters run the country. politics is about leading not just reflecting public opinion. >> the last two questions. where can we go from here? what can we do about? it would have to be by the u.s. sen a senate and i heard that 34 senators are agreeing with the deal.

>> mr. fox: on the uranium deal i think it is going through. it is going to happen. this deal is going to be a reality. and we are going to have to exactly work out what room for maneuver we have within the terms of this agreement. we have to really hope that people like me are wrong and very wrong. if we are right, even half right, we don't have a lot of levers to pull should iran change its behavior and a direction that doesn't suit or security interests. >> you had a question? >> thank you. i am going back after this. my question is that in u.s. generally believed they were sent to the country in honor of

pressure and occurance. and to top them you to do this and negotiate. [inaudible question] >> mr. fox: i understand the desire to get to the grievant. as i said in the beginning, any agreement that generally stops iran from being able to get access to nuclear weapon capability would have to be welcomed because it would reduce the threats to the region and beyond. my question is going back to an answer to your early question. who got most of what they wanted out of the agreement? is it closer to the iranians

starting position in negotiat n negotiation? or our starting negotiations? i think the winner is clear. >> thank you for a terrific presentation today. and a very, very engaging q&a session here. i have a huge number of questions regarding the iran nuclear deal. this is a dangerous deal that will under cuff the security of the united states, great britain and america's allie sex -- allies. >> congress takes up a

resolution of disproval of the iran nuclear agreement when members return to capitol hill next week. senators are still announcing their position. ben cardon of maryland said he is against the deal saying after 10-15 years it would leave iran with the option to produce enough enriched fuel for a nuclear weapon in a short time. tonight on booktv, books by 2016 presidential candidates. we begin with ohio governor john kasich on this book "stand for something" then bobby jindel with leadership and crisis and rand paul with government bullies: how everyday americans are being harassed, implies prisoned by the fed's. and we have rick perry's book as

well. booktv on c-span2 starting at 8:00 eastern. a signature of booktv is our all day coverage the weekend. we are live from the 15th annual national book festival from our nation's capital. and at the end of september we celebrate brooklyn's book festival. and then the southern book fest vil in nation and then live from austin for the texas book festival and at the end of the month we will cover to festivals on the same weekend. the wisconsin book festival in madison and also the boston book festival. and then we go to portland oregon for wood stock and then live at the book awards in new

york city and then live from miami at the end of the shows. the c-span cities tour. this weekend we are joined by charter communication to learn more about the history and literary life of grand junction, colorado. the mining of a mineral had a significant important here. >> especially here in grand junction we are surrounded by morrison rock and find dinosaur bones and fossils and we also find a miseral called carnotite that contains three elements. radium, which is radio and was used to help solve and fight cancer. it contained a chemical used to

strengthen steel. and it also contains uranium and uranium as we know is one of the best sources for atomic power and atomic weapons. >> colorado congressman wane aspenall was responsible for the areas agriculture development through the water legislation. >> he fought the battle to reserve water for western colorado by making sure we got our fair share. how did he do that? well, beginning in his state career, and then going on to his federal career, he climbed up the ladder of senority and exerci exercised more power than you

could have usually have. certainly in congress where he made sure western and eastern colorado were treated fairly in division of water. the passage of the colorado river storage project in 1956 was his first big project. >> see all of our programs from grand junction this weekend. next, nbc's chalk todd moderates a discussion with democrat and republican strategist and pollsters on the 2016 election. topics include the make-up of the u.s. electorate, donald trump's influence on the cycle and the world of social media. this is an hour and a half. >> thank you for that lovely

introduction and for everything you have done for the george washington university. welcome to the school of medium public affairs in the most important city in the world. we will hear remarkable conversation about a truely remarkable event. we with kicking off with a sold out house that i am delighted to see. how many students are in the room? which i am more delighted to see. and with c-span which i am more delighted to see. so i am very delighted. we are presenting this program in true collaborative spirit with the school of political

management, college democrats, and college republicans as well. democrats in the room? republicans is in the room? the school of public affairs as mentioned is a dynamic place. journalism mass communication and political communication and a masters in strategic communication. the research students due is timely, it is sharp, and it is incredibly relevant not just to the health of the republic today and the nature of the politics but to the health of the republic in the fiche answer how we will engage and be informed and communicate and be governored. as mentioned, tonight's event is the official kick off of the smp silver anniversary. i want to take a moment to talk about it because we are proud and excited about it.

we have several alumni joining us tonight. alumni, raise your hands. several national council members we're on the advisory board. raise your hand. and we have a number of faculty. faculty? thank you very much for being here -- all of you. we will be celebrating this entire year a series of special event and things aimed at highlighting the accomplishments of our alumni, enriching the student experience and looking to the future as we grow the next generation of leaders in journalism, politics and in political communication. we are having a number of events and next week we are hosting one i think will be fascinating that revolves around the subject of marriage equality and those who set the agenda around the issue changed the conversation in what

was a remarkable period of time. we will have registration for that so if you are interested in joining us keep your eyes pealed and that information will pop up on the website. i want to tell you about another exciting program we are laurening. the fmpa career access network. it is going to do a number of things for student. one, provide support for experience learning and subsidies and funding for underpaid or unpaid internships because internships are so important in getting that professional tow hold and experience you bring to the classroom. secondly, we will use it to encourage professional connection through networking events and establishing a formal mentoring program between our engaged alummi and students setting a goal of $250,000 to

launch this and it is part of our $10 million making history campaign. this is what we are building if the future and we are excited about where it is going. anyone interested in helping with this, find me and i want to have that conversation. the chair of our national council is here, this is our premier advisory board, adam conner from national council and john lansing hasn't made it yet but he will be and he was sworn in as the new head of the broadca broadca broadcasting board of governors that oversees all of the telecast around the world. it is very important job. we are highlighting the extended community of the school of media

and public affairs and the remarkable thinks they have done, incredible contributions they have made, and the wonderful thought and substance they bring to us, our students, faculty and university through their lives. i will introduce the panel now. i will call them out and if you know them you can applaud. i will start with paul wilson, chairman and ceo of wilson grand communication which is a television and digital communication company. he is participating at various levels in six presidential campaigns. any particular party? >> i think republican. >> i think so, too. >> but paul has been on our national council for how long? >> 13 years. >> 13 glorious years.

c cornel bleacher is next. you have seen him on cnn and other television networks. he is one of the premier strategist in progressive politics when i take as democrat. >> depends on the day. >> under chairman howard dean was the first to lead in that role under national party. and next frank farin who is co-chair of the commission on presidential debates. [applause] >> he conducts the general election, vice presidential debates in election years. in the 1980s he was chairman of the republican party for six years and that is when i first met frank. i was covered ronald reagan and

he was explaining him. and amy walter is next. national editor of the political report. [applause] >> where she provides analysis of issues, trends and events that shape the political environment and her column is at cook.com. one other person who is on the air right now and joins us later, i hope if they don't go too long on the air, is our former smpa distinguished fellow and she brings incredible insight into what she does and hopefully she will bring some here if they let her off the air. our moderator who was a student at the university of george washington, an amazing student and now teacher of american

politics. moderator of "meet the press" and political director at nbc news and the newest member of the smpa council. please give a warm welcome to chuck todd. while chuck takes his seat i want to do one quick thing and recognize lorane brawls and smara smit and alice for putting this event together. we will turn it over to you chuck and this great panel. [applause] >> how many freshman are in the building? fantastic. 25 years ago was obviously the founding of this school -- 25 years ago was when i stepped foot on this campus. 25 years ago, by the way this

was a parking lot and next door was the coolest thing i discovered something called power records. we had to buy our music back in the day. all of my student debt belongs to whoever the poor person that bankrupted tower records back in the day. i came here because i was hoping for experiences. i was hope to have washington experiences and i think that tw does it better than every other school in this city. it is the only school in the heart of this city. you absolutely feel it fused with the political community in a way you don't get at that school that is not on a metro somewhere on a river down by the street nor the school near our offices in the way interlands of washington, d.c. there is nothing like this university. i have more praise -- ours

offices. there is nothing like gw. [applause] >> all of my first jobs came just from being right here at tw. let's get started with this crazy race. so, paul, i will start with you. it is your party. what the hell is going on? i am sure you get this call saying what is going on? druconald trump, what is going ? >> we used to have goal post but the are none anymore. who thought you could insult people, switch positions, be a flip-floper and do anything you wanted to and you would rise in the polls? we see donald trump breaking all the rules. so the question for the new freshman is why?

how can you get away with that? and we welcome you here, by the way. and the answer as to why you can break the rules is he is doing something different. we call it agenda setting. he is telling the public how to make the decision about the presidency. he is not saying, oh, experience or anything like that. he is saying, make it on a deal-maker. make it on somebody who can negotiate better for this country. and he is changing how we viewed the presidency. and historically when you change how a voting group looks at the candidates it can change the election outcome. so it doesn't look like it is scientific but it works the same way. he is changing the agenda of how we pick a president. will he make it? we don't know. but he is in the game pretty strong. >> frank, let me -- you were one

of the gentlemen republicans of the '80s. is this your republican party what do you say when people ask you that question? >> what i always say as co-chairman of the presidential debates i must be non-partisan. but some of the freshman who are here i got an opportunity to talk to last sunday night and when you say what is hell is going on i think no one has done a better job describing what is going on, in both political parties, than peggy newman who said what was washington, or the establishment given us over the last 20 years and ticked off sex scandals, financial scandals, unwon war, economic collapse, t

tepid recovery, not even pretending to control the borders, a bunch of things that frustrated so many americans -- republicans, democrats, and indepentants -- and it is in your face democrats and professional politics. and that is why trump, dr. carson and carly. and sanders moving on the democratic side. the american people are unhappy and dissatisfied with the whole system. i think it is the democratic and republican party. the american people lost trust and confidence in corporations and banks and in some churches. i mean it is an unhappy time in our country and this is watt we are seeing a reflection of. how long this continues is the real question. >> carl, you were an early

pollster with a candidate named obama and i talked to plenty of team, and you and i had this n conversation. one of the reasons obama got elected is the public was frustrated with the election system. is this ten years of frustration is there and now it is born out even more so? >> i think a couple things. i think one is sort of being frustrated with washington isn't anything new although you could make the argument that the level of frustration is high. i am going in a slightly different direction and go with quality. i think as a person who has been fascinated by the romanticism that so many have about the american voter. if you look around at the american culture now, you know,

what leading our culture right now, our culture is being eaten by reality television ethos. and those people who are driving that reality ethos and those ratings of reality television are the same people making the kardashian's rich beyond belief -- those are not separate americans. they are you. they are the american voters, too. so i actually love from a political student standpoint what donald trump is doing because he is truly doing something amazing. he is taking all of those tactics and getting to politicians you turn into a tactician. and he took the tactics that worked well in reality television and guess what? they are working really well in

politics. it is one of the interesting things i saw from the polls in iowa. only 41% of the caucus goers want a candidate who is specific on policies. i mean so let's not be mistaken about what is going on in america both culturally and how it is now going on in our policy. i hear person after person saying donald trump wasn't going to last and after this and this he would drop and he keeps going up, up, up in the polls. as students of politics and especially students of communication think about how this is going to impact elections not just this year but years to come. if this is the trajectory and i can argue it is a horrible trajectory but i think a decade ago some of our parents would argue things happening in politics are horrible trajectories.

but donald trump is brilliant with social media. he is driving most of today's conversation by what he tweets out. think about your tools and the skills you are going to need to win in these campaigns and to win and communicate in broadcast as well. i think he is changing the way politics is played. i don't think it is for the good but i'm not putting a value judgment on it. >> he never sends his own tweet. he phones them in. he has people to do this. they are huge. amy, pour the cold water on this. september 2nd, 2015. september 2nd, 1991. paul shangas -- that is really funny the four of you. september of 1991, the hot candidate was a guy name paul

and bill clinton had not announced. 1995, alexander lamar was the fliefsh. 1999 i think it was steve forbes and all of the money he was bringing to the race. 20, a guy named howard dean. are we overanalyzing donald trump and sanders? >> let me start with trump and then he will move to sanders. for trump there is something what he is doing and i agree with what everybody is saying it is different than what we have seen before. he is able to set the agenda by playing by a set of different rules. it is fascinating to watch the other candidates. it is like watching the kid on the playground when one kid comes in and does something differently and winning whatever the game is. kick ball or whatever. and all of the kid that have been playing for a long time say

that is not fair. you are not playing by the rules. we had rules and you are not playing by them. >> that was july. >> i think jeb bush said that in july. >> it looks like that! guys, stop! he has been a master of that. there is something i have never seen before and the reason people went on tv saying harry reid -- he had a feeling he could not get further. i don't remember a time when a candidate with hundred percent name id has a 75% disapproval rating among his own party and 66% of people in his own party said i will not vote for you. you think that guy is done. everybody knows him and they don't like him. two months later in iowa those

numbers flips. 67-23 approval/disapproval. that is not supposed to happen. there is something unique about him. the question in my mind is how long does this last? is this something where it has been fun. it has been interesting to watch. it has been a great reality show for the summer but at the end of the day voters are going to learn more about donald trump. he has been a master at being anything anybody want him to be. his base of support is broad. not just angry tea party people. support of moderates, women -- this is among republicans. he has done well. once the race is engaged, candidates have to hold on. there has not been one dollar

really spent in the race. a little here in new hampshire and iowa but there is $2 husband hn million or more waiting to get engaged -- $200 million. and the opposition ad and the research -- will they work? or do we find out he is impervious. quickly about sanders, he is making movement and doing it because he is tapping into anger out there. but the republican and democrat base are night and day. the republican base is incredibly divided and upset with what they see within their own party, divided on issues, divided on policies and no cohesion. on the democratic side the base

is united on major issues, foreign policy is a little bit of a place where they will divide. but not on much else. and they uniformly like hillary clinton. she does better among liberal democrats than anyone. >> every republican wishes they had hillary clinton's backing. >> but remember there is 17 candidates. so there is a reason it is spread out. it is different when you have two candidates which is what the democrats have. not that the former governor of maryland and jim web and

>> chafey! you get the win >> that is why i could not remember his name he used to be a republican. >> there is not an opening for an anti-hillary. let's move to the media thing. >> this isnin 2007 this black ga muslim name came out of nowhere and took off like fire. i would be very anxious about this. i think they are because the democratic primary voters are in fact restless.

you know this. how often is it the person established for the front runner happens to be the nominee? democrats don't like coronation. >> al gore was inpneumnathe nom. hillary clinton is the first one in a generation to not survive. >> i will not take al gore because he was vice president, though. i think that is different. i think it is good for democrats and republicans to have more than one candidate and have a contested hard fought primary. will you go out to each state and fight for every vote? and i think it helps. obama was a much better presidential candidate after the fight. i think it helps energize that

base and it will help with the republican base. i love hard fought primaries on both sides. >> should we sign you up as joe biden's pollster? >> biden and warren would make it. >> let's transition to media in this respect. first, the basic question, which is is the trump funom -- situation the media or und understanding the medium more so? i make the argument we gave him as bad of an entry as any candidate has gotten. we all trashed him undimmediate and it only helped him. it is not as if the media hasn't vetted him. that is one of the things people

hit us with. all of that has been done and it made him more powerful. i guess the question is is it donald trump's better und understanding of the media we have seen or does the media play a role in the rise of trump? >> i think it is both. he is experienced in reality shows. he knows how to use one sentence on a particular subject that gets to something the american people are concerned about. he know how to do it. i watched them do something and he was laughing and it was funny. if it cuts through and i think it is combination of both and

how long it last -- i don't know. >> paul, i think he is treating media like a salt shaker and he just empties you out and shakes you all over the place. he does it. and it works. and we have never seen it before so there is that novelty thing but it has been powerful. >> we spent most of the time talk about trump. >> and we have yet to really get into trump's past policies or who he is or what he a has done. the vetting -- >> it consist of one thing which isn't a republican issue is trade. that is the one thing he has been consistent on for 35 years of public utterance. he was complaining in the '80s and now it is russia he is co ' complaining about.

>> he breaks so many rules. there was an ad where we had john kerry on a sail boat and he would go back and forth and i brought it but we cannot play it. it showed how many times he flipped flopped. it is a common attack and worked. >> it is not working among republican primary voters we say but it is working, and i think it will work, not the flip-flopping aspect but what he has done in terms of the issues he is bringing up and the controversy he loves to sit in. female and hispanic voters it is a big downside. >> the tv hasn't started. you know the war chest that some of the major candidates in both parties have -- we have not started laying that out. they have not gone with it yet. i think they will focus --

whoever is on top. >> let's talk about the realization and the understanding of a new medium. populus candidates -- it is interesting how they take off. ronald reagan was under the radar doing radio commentaries. ross perot showed the power of cable tell television and the idea you can campaign on television. you could argue that president obama was the first one to understand the power of social media 1.0. and other candidates learned from it at the time. you look in 1992 and bill clinton started doing arseno after he saw it worked for ross perot.

my other question is is there something to learn from tromp's success? i think there is. but paul? >> i think they are trying. they are attacking him now with great regularity. if they don't play on his turf they are being ignored so the only way is to glom on to him but i don't think it will cut him down. >> you talked about how effective he is on social media. i look at him as he is on the record all of the time. he is john mccain on steroids. the beauty of trump, and i say the to clinton people, people call to complain, he is on the record all of the time. shouldn't other politicians learn from this? >> i do but it goes back to, i think, my initial point which is like it is the kardashian's tactic now, which does say there

is no publicity that is bad publicity. kim kardashian does outrageous things. >> makes a sex tape? >> wow. >> that is the best logical way -- >> you see the ted cruz's -- >> it is all about buffing the numbers. >> you see the ted cruz's and scott walker's that align them several and go further out there on the issues. you have all of the republicans talking about let's build a big wall. a great deal of them are. they are falling in line. there is something to be said and this generation is going to have to work harder than us. there is something going on. that pop culture america that is in love with reality television -- those tactics are working in politics. ...

will have to master it. i think if you will be successful you will master what trump is doing. i just think you are going to. >> i don't think -- the secret to donald is annoying. he is always flamboyant. what you see now is what i would say with donald in business and so forth. he has the personality. i don't know i haven't talked to him since he started running for president of i will run for president, if i don't make it i will have a new reality show. i am not sure he gets up in the morning saying i want to be pre president of the united states. the other candidates, both parties, they really want to be president. maybe donald is looking at the i'm just not sure. he's looking at these numbers. maybe we can be present.

that's the difference. he has the personality. goes up to the microphone. the campaign struggle. the most important thing, your candidate and candidate strengths and weaknesses. you want to do a lot of ads. there are some you never want to see on camera. there are terrible. other people talk for them. not everyone can do this. people who don't do it well, it becomes obvious. i ultimately do think that the issue is authenticity. there is nothing flashy about him. i had it doesn't look like it's called, that graph this around him, but he is surrounded by twentysomethings. you would think he would appeal to an older audience. but using micro.

>> no. no no no. some of them are there to us in the collective middle finger. >> flamboyant. let's try to play out the scenario. i'm not asking you. i'm not asking his cannot be the nominee. one microphone here. that's overdoing. line up and we will do rapidfire. two questions here. so who are the possible nominees now as of this day?

most likely it will be the most republican nominees. >> i think he does. i think i can prove it. i wrote the statistics from four years ago. i inserted trump'si inserted trumps number. you can see that his 25 percent in new hampshire, iowa, florida, it puts him in the game right away. and that is maybe an unfair way to look at it. he is in the game and will have delegates and momentum, but you have other great candidates out they're. you know, jeb bush with a ton of money, carly is kind of exciting. it is not over by any means. is going to be in the game. >> plausible nominees at this point in time.

>> with carly being the outlier of the group, but you have to watch. he has a ton of dough but has not been able to make it work. >> anyone want to add to that list? >> again, my position. >> what you are going to see , i think he will be there. i think what will effective more than anything else is he starts falling off on the bottom. the money is not there. staff not being paid and so forth. you will start losing people at the bottom. some things to watch. but with regard to that come i, i agree. >> let me ask you one other question. cleveland, we have a nominee by the time of the cleveland convention. >> i hope not.

>> by the time we get to convention, it is hypothetically possible. >> what do you think? >> i think that we could have -- >> something where the nominee doesn't have enough delegates. >> you can clearly get that way. the middle part of the republican process as proportionality, not when her take all. if i. if i get 30 percent of the vote i get 30 percent of the delegates. a lot of the statistical pundits don't think it will happen, but i think there's a slim chance. >> 1976 convention. we had that. and i should say, just passed away the last couple

of weeks. then governor reagan would have been the vice president. but i don't think -- i think we will no. i don't think -- >> let me ask you a different question. the size of the political earthquake it hillary clinton loses iowa and/or new hampshire to bernie sanders? they are trying to say we could see. and we will be okay. i don't know if they understand the size potentially. >> am going to ask that anti- back into something that was brought up your earlier. if she was -- if she loses iowa or new hampshire it puts a lot behind sanders. iowa and new hampshire a big deals. obama's when in 2008, the

primary season, they really lost it. but this is bernie's problem , and they get this. after you get past the 1st couple, and this is when obama put the nomination away, south carolina and for a while there we were competing with hillary for the minority vote big time. was not really iowa that people say she one, he won iowa. that is complete bs. said he was okay. he worked very hard. we broke down the gate. it was a floodgate.

wasn't competing anymore. what happens? the democratic primary. you can't win north carolina, alabama, louisiana , virginia. to the heart of the south, the bible belt. where we ran across, the truth of the matter is the nomination would basically be over. >> and that is exactly what led him to do that. >> but going back, what is the level of panic. it becomes -- suddenly. if she loses in new hampshire and iowa, think your going to see, it will be a small case.

>> i think you will have people pushing. >> you get to do both. >> tell me, how does this play itself out? >> the only person that i would add, i would put rubio in that category. the candidate that has been under the radar, one of the few candidates that is very well-liked and well-liked among a broad coalition of republican voters. his getting out there and presenting himself, and unlike many other candidates , very good retail and strong on camera and natural candidate. i would add to that. as much as we would love the convention, those things never happen. we can always dream.

we will see. what was the other thing? iowa and new hampshire. we like that. that sounds like a lot of fun, but i agree. if you look at the fcc primaries, again, all southern states, where i would get concerned is when you start to see numbers among african-americans and latinos and hillary start to drop. that is when there are problems. losing white, liberalwhite, liberal men is not as much of a problem for her. >> right. >> they are all in new hampshire and iowa. >> i will just say, the only candidate i throw in here, ted crews. i would bei would be buying stock in ted crews winning iowa right now over and above. >> i would be buying stock if i were republican.

[laughter] >> the democrats favorite republican. >> let's go to some questions. tell us where your from originally. >> am from cape cod, massachusetts.cod, massachusetts. i just want to thank you for being here with us. >> excellent. >> you guys are all stuck with monday, wednesday, friday. outline. and i just want to ask, do we think the war chest is going to be as effective as it has been to a candidate like donald trump, his personality seems to be so big that it could deflect all of the power and money

negatively to whoever is dishing it out and then also how is that going to change the playing field for someone trying to rise to the top? >> i will just go quickly. in a two-person race money matters a lot. you have this. on one hand is going after trump on tv. at the same time they will use all of their money to try to destroy case again rubio. get the nomination. but i am of this theory that money matters less today than it did four years ago. >> the one new., the super pack. each of these candidates have a stash of money they cannot control and someone else's spending on their behalf. that is the new wildcard. it is not the candidate but the candidates friend. >> double down. it is an amazing thing.

most of his money is not in it. once upon a time in this country you want to control the message. >> we were disciplined about that. we didn't want anyone controlling our message and telling her story. you not going to have people connected to the campaign. defining a large swath of this. i'm going to go in. just american. you have millionaire sitting out they're. and then they define the terms of the debate in a way that ordinary people don't. i benefit from lots of money. i'll be doggone if i think you all benefit from all

this process. >> i differ a little bit. it depends where the money is being spent and him what. involved in ronald reagan's races, what we call the blocking and tackling was going out in identifying people, making sure they were registered to vote and get them to the polls. what has happened is president obama and his campaign use this to do it, use this to do it, the social media. if that money is out there, there is only so much you can do on television anymore. most people your age don't even watch television anymore. you watch it on your computer or some other vehicle. if that money is being used for blocking and tackling, to identify your supporters, it can be very effective.

>> is a problematic. is it problematic that so much of the functions once upon time the party would do? >> it destroyed the two broadest -based organizations in this country, the republican and democratic party when you have the left, right, and center. the limitations to being able to spend our money on things, it destroyed and change the makeup of the parties. >> let me guide this. they wanted without spending the most money. mccain ending. >> the super pack definitely has much more money.

you look at the time being reserve right now. sixty-five or 70 percent. the one thing i will say is they are controlling a message outside of the campaign, but they cannot control the candidates. fundamentally you can have all the money in the world. if your candidate is not good that it does not matter how much money have. a really good example of this. your watching the candidate this weekend having a little trouble staying on message. there is not a darn thing that the super pack can do. >> i promise we won't take five minutes per question. you did hit on the topic. >> i'm from pittsburgh, pennsylvania. the making of a president, 1968. how 1968 seems to look a lot like today.

race riots in the streets, and ongoing war on terror which does not seem to be ending. a country with a lot of prosperity but no mobility for lower and middle income americans and establishment politics which is the laughing stock of the country. what is the outcome of 2016? i am with you on this. we can sit here. donald trump is george wallace. [laughter] but that is not meant to be a laugh. he is tapping into nativism. we have had that before. go to you 1st because of your gray hair. >> people have come up to me and asked the question. i have looked at bernie sanders very much. like jim mccarthy. remember, he lost new

hampshire. the whole -- the effect of running that race in the debate and so forth got lyndon johnson to step down and said he would not run for reelection. i think the question is smart, and that is what i'm talking about. the last 20 years, what have the people in washington given the american people? not very much. >> one point. i asked that question of peter who is renowned pollster. >> and he says, it was about anger. much more about anxiety, and there is a difference. there is definitely a lot of anger. but the overall impression he is getting, and i have seen this in focus groups, says that there is frustration but what we want right now is someone to allay the fear rather than build it up.

>> hey, mark. [laughter] >> the election in 1968 discussed. [laughter] [applause] >> well she catches her breath, addressed the social unrest. >> i was not alive and 68, just for reference. the social unrest is really interesting. it is something that the progressives are going to have to take seriously. social media savvy, young, smart people using the social media vehicle.

these it is a vehicle for the new civil rights movement. and for organizing. you know, all eyes matter, but you're going to say black lives matter because were not going to have our issues mixed in. can specifically talk about gender specific issues. talk about gay and lesbian issues.issues. dammit, your going to talk about african-american issues, and there is a militants to this. when barack obama steps off stage, it's going to flow. barack obama has been on the stage and it will be interesting. it will be very interesting. by the way, barack obama 12 majority elections. you have to go a long way to

find a democrat that is one back-to-back majority elections. that is an important part of the coalition for progressives. i think democrats are going to struggle mightily. this militant revolt going on among minority voters. bernie sanders answers that better than hillary. >> this is aa good way if you want to give us your collective thought. the question is, how much is this like 68? it's an interesting comparison. the anxiety and all of that. >> it is an interesting comparison. we are at a populist moment in american politics. i don't think that it is as convulsive as 68. you had tremendous numbers of american young men dying in a foreign war. we do not have that.

but ii do think we are in a populist moment in american politics, which means it is volatile and unpredictable. that is why we have donald trump and to a lesser extent bernie sanders. you want to get rid of the hedge fund guys tax loophole and that is the classic kind of combination of every populist movement that we have ever seen in american politics combining those two things, nativism and economic populism against the banks wall street. whatever it is that have always had those two things. i think one of the questions for me is just like out of 68, permanent changes in american politics. what will be this populist moment legacy when we have had other populist candidates? they did not win, but they made permanent contributions to american politics. helped create the modern

american policy. ross perot put the deficit on the map. bill clinton balance the budget. what is his legacy going to be? can the republican party into a nativist party what? will jeb bush get up on his hind legs and really vanquish trump is him and change the nature of the party? i think that is unlikely, but those are the things i'm thinking about. >> a promise we will do a lightning round. ten minutes for two questions. >> i'm from chicago. my question is is there a specific policy issue that will affect the election? >> policy? policy. >> let's go to our to practicing political consultants on that one. i would say that it rarely is there.

we see niche issues that play a role. the right to life issue is a motivator. we see tax policy being talked about, but it is more personality. >> i agree. >> what will be the most debated issue in the fall campaign. what do you think? >> middle-class income. >> and that is a real issue which is really important. >> the party has to handle that. >> i here you. >> next question. >> hi. my name is anna. i justi just had a question going back to what you guys started from. donald trump said something which then got cut off. the most interesting thing he said was it is a broken system. and he said that in response

to being asked about how he with -- how he dealt with bankruptcy. not abuse. they useabuse. i use the lots of my own advantage. so far he is the only republican and aside from bernie sanders the only candidate to have mentioned the idea of a broken system. y'all mentioned the idea of reality television campaigning. is theis the unwillingness of or the ability of the candidates to mimic the tactics and ability to understand social media campaigning, or is it an unwillingness to abuse the system, and in doing so acknowledge it is broken? >> you know, it is funny because if you look at this field, on paper they look like they are people running against the system.

marco rubio, ted crews, randy paul, randy paul, tea party candidates who ran against the establishment. ted crews will take it to washington. governors that are not part of washington. everyone says i can do this, but you can. the system is broken. do not have people who are standing up there saying, status quo,saying, status quo, establishment. i cannot wait to do that and work within the system. they all ran saying that the system is broken. >> i meant the particular financing system. >> or do you mean wall street. >> and she is right. to here right. to here donald trump talk about the corrupting nature of donations. >> and literally. >> and i got to it.

>> the rally. a huge part of the speech. no one could have created them. they could not have come up with it. i'm beholden to no one. money is corrupting. jeb bush raises hundreds of millions of dollars and beholden to the hedge fund guys. they all ask me for money. he is -- that is one of the other attributes of the classic populist. he is pure because he is a billionaire. he does not take any money. offered money. he's not going to make the campaign finance system is issue like bernie sanders, but he says america used to be great. itit is now in the toilet and i'm going to fix it.

>> running against a broken washington. >> running against washington in the system. we tie that to hillary. and her experience. reflected upside down. >> we work in massachusetts. do you think you will have a chance of winning?

>> or something to be said. his eight years. barack obama. what he's been through. he gained a lot from that. if he can make a case that he is more authentically the inheritor of the obama coalition than hillary, there is some there there. she -- but don't count them out.

it showed, it builds on that 60 percent of people described herein one word. and that, it showed that she is losing support among millennial's 18 to 39, losing support among women voters. if that breaksif that breaks what your talking about with black lives matter and have always questioned whether or not blacks, hispanics, and agency where the were the key to the 2012 victory of the president, whether they would turn out those core constituents, i don't see it yet. then it's goingthen it's

going to get in. very well loved. a great deal of affection for him with the death of the son. handled it the way he had done. seven vice presidential debates. the american people want to like the president. >> surprised when he is not higher in the polls. >> is places in the green rooms in washington. [laughter] >> i feel like the 1st month will be great and everyone will say he is so unscripted impolitic. scripted and impolitic. >> that's right. >> invited elizabeth warren to be on the ticket with him

>> more about elizabeth warren than it was about joe biden. >> hi. i'm marissa. talking a lot about the domestic issue. my question pertains more to foreign politics. given the fact that foreign-policy issues, very pertinent in the near future. be able to best handle the foreign-policy issues. >> it should be hillary clinton, former secretary of state. the interesting thing about foreign policy, foreign-policy was the number one issue for republicans. that's very unusual that it is at the top of the list the republicans don't have a good alternative. they say the obama foreign-policy has been a

disaster. they don't have a well thought out, clear alternative. it's easy to say the world is on fire, obama can fix it , but there, but the going to have to cough the solution. >> bring up a fair. the most dramatically, dramatic difference between the nominees will be how they pursue foreign-policy. nominate someone hawkish and will basically say to themselves, whatever bush to them going to do the opposite. >> this will be the most dramatic difference between the two candidates. >> there will be dramatic differences whether it's on immigration. >> all the domestic politics. >> the one thing they have not gotten to, has not done

as many interviews is the other candidates. have you noticed that? but we don't have a clear sense of where she is now on these issues. we know where she is in secretary of state what are you going to do? is what is happening. here is what is going on in syria. traditionally she has been more hawkish than a lot of democrats, certainly in her past. the iraq war, much more hawkish. there may be a way in which she is obviously going to be very different from her republican opponent. >> i think there is a republican foreign-policy.

it's reagan's piece. piece in the world for having a strong nation who is respected around the world. increase in spending, armed forces are nowhere near where they were or should be beyond that, dealingthat, dealing with the individual issues again i agree that they have not been fleshed out, but that will be the common core. >> next question. >> good evening. my name is kendrick chang. my question basically in -- >> does not agree with you, by the way. [laughter] >> i was born in the same hospital in the end the

general election is decided by electoral college. for the past two elections it has been decided by a handful of states. otherwise -- >> battleground states. >> leaving any new states with the added. >> not very many. florida, ohio, go through the list. list. they are the pivotal ones. when will be see california? >> a little bit because the obama campaign came in and. >> frankly some of this was from dean. >> on election night we will not be sitting around waiting for the results to come in. and so putting more things in the play and putting money into play, virginia, north carolina.

we put a lot of money in north carolina. will indiana get more play? will georgia get more play? a couple of polls in georgia and run the numbers. some democratic state but it costs so much money. i think that money is a problem with putting more states in play. you will see the battleground. if i am a republican you have to broaden the battleground. you lost florida to time straight and florida is growing more diverse. i don't know maps to get your guide to the white house without winning florida. you have to broaden the map little. >> we would hope.hope. we would hope. wouldn't you put wisconsin in the mix? sometimes it just does not work. you can hope to.

>> the battleground has changed over time. there was a time when they were not part of it. demographics will shift. >> i had arizona to the list. both of them, they may still go both ways. >> there is not a dollar spent until the very end by the republicans, romney campaign. i think that changes. >> my name is emily originally from texas and kansas surprisingly. >> tell us how you really feel. >> but the party. the resources to get on the ballot, extremely difficult.

it might sound simple, but it's not. we have to keep them in the party. someone will have to be there. >> are any of these pledges, you have to pledge that you will support the eventual nominee? >> south carolina, i think it is. run by the same party. >> or lose your loss. >> what is the legal resource? started moving in they're were sore loser lawsuits. >> the general election. >> someone filed it. addendum a question.

we are talking about howard schultz. >> the parties have blocked it in place with the laws. john anderson, ross perot. there are candidates who have tried to make that third-party work, and it is not. it splits the vote. and so i think there is a great reluctance. >> you are talking about a billion dollars. >> are talking about a billion dollars. >> the next question. >> my name is matthew lee. >> frank touched upon this very lightly. assuming he does make it through and is one of the

candidates, where do you think the republican voters that did not support him, where will they flock to? if he does not and runs independent where does the average republican trump supporter go? >> a good question, and i'm not sure. the see ted crews being very cozy. coming to washington next week. hoping that if he does not succeed is was would go to him. i think they will split. i am not sure there is one place they will go. it's going to go down to the wire and be effective as we have seen. i'm not ready to declare that he is going to fizzle

out somewhere down the road. he may. two of the other 16 we will fizzle out. >> let's say he gets the nomination, the republicans who don't like him historically drift back to the nominee of the party. whether that would happen this time. >> we have seen it with bad nominees, tea party, whatever. most republicans, no matter how divisive. usually for the democrats. >> a big question is turn out. this election, the 3rd unanswered question i have already mentioned. blacks, hispanics turn out the same numbers and be excited about hillary as they were about obama. they talk about florida and ohio those were close races.

demographic concentrations using social media by the obama campaign to pull both of those over the line. that's the big question, turnout. >> to any of you think clinton versus bush,bush, the general election creates a higher turnout environment? yeah. look at that. isn't that a guarantee? >> it's also a guarantee of a republican. if you take a look -- >> clinton bush low turnout. >> it helps republicans. and if your looking at the battleground, 65 plus republican. you look at the republican precincts.

if you have a 16-point difference your lost. we went into 2014 saying we can have that election all over again. the difference between base republican democrat, 16 points. we have to energize. regular run-of-the-mill. awfully affluent, very upscale. turnout was lower than baltimore. if you can't energize a big turnout, and when younger voters don't make up a larger percentage of the electorate democrats don't do very well. >> the 2014 turnout as a predictor? >> no. sixteen-point turnout

difference. >> thank you. >> how are you doing? >> questions for folks at the end. i tell you, whoever is behind you, it better be a really good question because is the last one. >> i'm from massachusetts and i work with professor and social media. refreshing my twitter. i think to me the biggest in the room is that we are at an event called campaign 2016. september 22015. the campaigns are getting longer and longer since president kennedy, and i was just wondering how this has affected your respective field and what was the biggest effect on the political system in general. >> we love them. [laughter]

>> no vacation. >> it has been no vacation. >> the commission on presidential debate, i think on election day 2012, the voters are already voting. the question is doing move the debates earlier? to remove them before people start voting online? as you know, the conventions of move back. their goal was to shorten the campaign. but it's for your campaign. >> i would say if you want to no the biggest change in my 25 years,25 years, used to be the year was the

governing year. the really was a governing year in washington. we now have a governing month. that is it. >> i agree. >> if you politicize that is why your wondering. campaigns are not about compromise. there are about aspirational. everything has to be aspirational and perfect which is why we see what we see on capitol hill. >> good evening. i am from new jersey. on the 1st one. >> diversification. >> the freshman class. >> my question is more from the abundance of media. the looking at what we

talked about with the kardashian's then president obama's mastery of social media and have the discourses shifting from these defined ideas that people can believe in latch onto, these things are less specific. going to the future we are seeing twitter and social media proliferation, what is the role of the media in future elections? now some are very good on social media, butmedia, but is there an avenue for me to inform and shape the debate, or is it solely to candidates? >> good question. >> i go back. i'll trump has made the media. i here this all the time. i can't figure it out. i get confused on the day-to-day basis. but it seems that the candidates -- i view it as a

spread offense. this isthis is what trump is perfected. the whole idea of the spread offense, you put up five wide receivers so they can double-team anybody. you're going to have a mismatch and trump will be open. he talks all the time. you here about that. you're focused on this other one and your opponents are trying to tackle you over here when you just ran for the ends on the other issue. my question is when the other candidates will figure that out. >> he is a unique media creature. that is where he lives. i'm doing the story this week and asking a lot of people the legacy. somebody said today, he will change the way campaigns are run. i don't know who will be the next champion candidate.

>> kanye west. [applause] >> is already there. he has already announced. >> the twitter horse he is running with jeb bush. you could make the argument that he is laying a media trap that scott walker ran into, and maybe it was fatal. what he talked about along the northern border if it wasn't for donald trump? i don't think so. >> you brought this up 1st trump will change the way campaigns are run. >> you have a lot of conventional establishment people shaking there heads and wanting it to go away. i think that this is for better or worse, politics will look more like reality television.

you better master it. >> is they're hope to change it? >> change it to what? >> a time when we could discuss great ideas and how things will be accomplished? >> there will always be some obscure website where you can do that. [applause] >> by the way, the good old days were not so good. the good old days were not so good. the question is whether you will use the tools for good or evil. i hate to be the black and white. >> go ahead. >> we do not defined in america how somebody should vote you're trying to constricted so this is how you should decided.

pluralistic. let anyone decided anyway they want. >> all right. that was a good question to end on. >> am not going to let you and quite yet. the plug on that last question, how many of you guys in this room are thinking about would consider going into politics or political journalism or something related to the public sector. >> now you get a job. >> what piece of advice based upon where we are going and how you think the reality show is changing, let each of you give somebody in the room. >> gw. [applause] >> i say that. it is this. it is, if washington is where you want to be, then

get here. people used to say whether it is a journalism, you better go to the louisville market. that is not the way works anymore. if you want to be reporting on washington come to washington. the other thing is, don't wait your turn. a lot of people tell you to wait your turn. this is for those of you that want to run for office. don't wait your turn. a lot of people were president of the united states. rockefeller, 1992. a lot of people wanted his next title to be governor of illinois because they wanted to wait his turn. dive right in. don't be afraid. be aa little impatient. it's okay.

while your here, get in the game. in turn, go to work for a company, johnny campaign. it's not hard. get in the game and you have them. >> we are. >> the real practical pieces. for a long time 80 plus percent of campaign spending has been just an advertising. and learn how to shoot a commercial. ifif you learn how to do that you can make a lot of money in politics. however, that is rapidly changing. the big money makers, the big money makers and politics are increasingly going to be the people who figure out how to take what

we have been traditionally doing on television and do it in the social media space the circle for money. circling, television advertising. but the circle is shrinking and moving to the social media base. he saw a lot of money and social media space. if you figure that out and get good at it you will be working for a long, long time. >> i would say -- >> so boring and all. regardless, your dream is to be in the print media, particularly in the latter. your writing. it's a lost art. and those of you that can put down on a piece of paper or even when your playing

and do it in a cogent and sophisticated way, i promise you. >> writing has been a loss. >> no more than 127 characters. >> the other thing, don't get too distracted by all of the shininess. it's fun covering the presidential campaign. a big circus and show in town. the best was covering congress and i learned more doing that than i could ever learn by sitting on a campaign bus traveling through the same thing and hearing the same speeches over and over again. what candidates really do, the on the ground exposure. you're not going to get the exposure that you do when you cover a presidential campaign, but you will understand politics and campaigns and these things

when people start talking about level data because we have been steeped in it and it will make you much better as a political reporter. >> i agree with everything that has been said especially about the writing and covering congress. the majority of people covering presidential campaigns cover congress. you don't want to wait too long, there is something to be said. >> literally and figuratively. >> and the other thing in terms of how the media is changing, and i have absolutely no idea what the knew model we will be, but there is always going to be a need for great content, really well reported, well-written content. that is never going to disappear. >> thank you all.

let me say 1st, this conversation here this evening, and i'm not sure which was better, what you get a set of what he has asked, but this is a demonstration of the power of the brains and the place in the institution. every single person. i can't tell you how proud i am of every single person on the stage being affiliated with our school and you and there here because they believe in you in the future and that is a powerful and wonderful thing, and i thank you all for that very much. i would likei would like to ask all of you in the audience to join me in thanking this panel. thank you for a fabulous evening. be safe. be well. good luck in campaign 2016. special thanks to chuck todd erased over here.

do me ado me a favor. tweet facebook post, as to graham, tell your parents to watch. they are all helping chuck lift is already terrific ratings even higher. thanks. [applause] good night and thank you all. [inaudible conversations]

>> sen.senator ben carnot of maryland, ranking member on the foreign relations committee said after ten to 15 years there was room at the option to produce a month and wrist fuel for nuclear weapon in the short time. live coverage tuesday. tonight but by 2016 presidential candidates. we begin with his book stand for something, the battle for american soil.

>> now the r's bishop of washington talks about the upcoming visit to the us. this is about an hour. >> our guests today is his eminence the archbishop of washington. this is his 1st visit with our group and the 2nd time in the nearly 50 year history of posting these events that are guest has been a religious leader.

the last such session was a breakfast 20 years ago with the dalai lama which a friend attended. welcome, your eminence. >> received graduate degrees from the catholic university of america, the gregorian university in rome and a doctorate in theology the university of st. thomas in rome. ordained as a bishop in 1986 by pope john the 2nd. served his church in a variety of key positions including one seattle and in the bishop of pittsburgh for 18 years before being appointed archbishop of washington in 2006, elevated to the college of cardinals in 2010 and in 2013 he participated in the conclave elected pope francis. thus ends the biographical portion of the program. as always, we are in an

electorate year. the filing of any kind on the breakfast is underway. there is no embargo in the session ends. to help you curb the relentless urge we will email several pictures of this session to all reporters here as soon as the breakfast inns. if you would like to ask a question, please do the traditional thing and send me 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 in the movie questions round the table. that will go to questions. thank you for doing this. we are honored to have you here. >> thank you very much. not only for the very gracious introduction, but for the welcome and the invitation to be here. i am truly complemented by the invitation.

just a few words about pope francis, some of our marks going to make command questions i get asked all the time with regularity from people who are part of the house, catholic or others as well. one of the questions that i think is a very significant one is what is the pope really like? what is he like? is he the way he appears? and i have to say, my experience with pope francis is the person that you see in public, the person you see in the pope mobile, the person you see going around the square, up more in the window on sundays is from my experience the exact same

person you see when you said across the coffee table from him. i highlight coffee table because when he receives you in his quarters, and his living room is not sitting behind a desk, sitting across the hall, he sitting on his chair across the coffee table where he usually has interesting things that he wants to comment on. i have found that this smiling, forthright, caring person that we see on television you see in the papers to me seen social media is the very person you encounter when you meet with him. >> is also the question about his popularity. one of the reasons i believe he is so immensely popular is because he offers in a

very, very appealing way the message of his office, offering all of us to consider seriously relationship with god and does not in such an inviting way. so many people are said to me that what they find so endearing is the way in which he takes the great challenge, thea great human challenge of having a living, working relationship with god, human divine relationship, he takes that and makes it something that we can feel comfortable with we feel invited. not all that long ago i was waiting at the carousel from a bag to come up at the airport.

and a woman came across, we were on the same flight. d- which have only way for banks,. you know, i think you might describe me as a fallen away i want you to no just made me feel like i was welcome. this is why tell the story. when i listen to him i realize that it is not all my fault. ..

>> but we have a place at the table. the next time you introduce yourself, why don't you say that you're an