get your order in today on our website. tonight on c-span2, political analyst charlie cook discusses 2016 elections. donald trump talks to reporters in new york. and later a senate armed service committee hearing on the future of warfare. charlie cook, publishers of the cook report, made predictions about who would win each party's no nomination and discussed the democrat's chances of taking over the senate.

>> thank you for coming out. united technology has sponsored these issues and i was holding out for a helicopter but you sold the company so i have to hold out for an elevator for the house or something. but anyway, and the great people at national journal for putting this together. great crowd. i want to put in a plug quickly. the brand new almanac of american politics just came out. it is an amazing 2084 pages. it is sort of everything you needed to know. i bought my first copy in 1972 when i was a senior in high school in louisiana. i bought everyone -- were you from louisiana? we went to the same high school.

that is right! anyway, so -- wow, see this is a real story. i didn't make it up. just anyway, it is now at bookstores near you and amazon and all kinds of great places. there is an 18-page introduction essay i wrote at the beginning. just remember i wrote it over the summer. cut me some slack there. what i am going to try to do is talk a little bit -- if you feel confused about the 2016 campaign so far join the club. elections are like fingerprints. everyone is unique and they have different dynamics and circumstances. this is obviously about as weird as they come. kind of interesting dynamics on the democratic side and a lot on

the republican side. i am going it try to put sense into what is going on and why and look at the democratic nomination side briefly and spend more time on the republican side and talk about the general election to the extent we can without knowing who the nominees are and then talk about the u.s. senate finally. in terms of why this is a weird election and what is making this a highly combustable and gumbo

of different factors -- that is the southern part of the state. not where we are; the easternmost suburb of dallas. i would argue the factors are ideas, economic anxiety, p populism, the culture wars and pervasive anger at politicians. let's talk about the ideas for a second. i don't think there is any question that the democratic party is a heck of a lot more liberal than it was when bill clinton left office 15 years ago. at the same time, the republican party is a heck of a lot more conservative than it was when george bush left office seven years ago. this is manifesting itself on

congress and party primaries and the like where what we are seeing is that the people who were conservative, moderate democrats are pretty much gone. in terms of the electorate are gone. so the parties are more cohesive. there is a lot of sorting taking place. that means the conservative democrats that were the balance keeping democrats from going off into a ditch, this is your left, they are gone. and the liberal moderate republicans, the ballot sort of kept congressional republicans from going into the a ditch on the right hand side. they are gone as well pretty much. it reflects what happened in the primaries as well. just simply democratic primaries are more liberal than they used

to be and republican primaries more conservative. so the primaries moved to the extreme and the centers of gravity moved to the extreme. the people, members that don't reflect that, have been purged out sort of, in primaries. and then we have a median environment that reinforces all of that whether it is fox and talk radio and the internet on the right or the prime time shows on msnbc and a little talk radio and a lot of internet on the left it is just intensifying this idea to a point that wasn't there 5-10 years ago. there is another dimension. it used to be more when people, when you disagreed with someone, you just have different views. and increasingly, and this is true on the left and right, anybody you disagree with must be evil. they cannot just be wrong. there is something more than that that has taken place.

it has taken on a real edge. and the whole idea of balancing competing values has gone out the way. enough of the essoteric stuff. i would say jeb bush and hillary clinton are caught in time warps. i turned 62 today. today is stew rothenberg's birthday so if you run into him. my birthday is later in the month. jeb bush is 62. just a touch older and hillary clinton just turned 68. if you think about hillary clinton, when her husband was president she was perceived to be at the far left of her husband's administration and she is scrambling like mad to keep up with the party that moved

considerably to the left. and look at jeb bush. he was one of the most conservative governors in america and now the primary difference between jeb bush and clinton is bush demonstrated ideas to moving over with the party. he hasn't moved over to keep up with it as comfortably and having lots of problems. so this ideaology is a big factor. second thing is economic anxiety. you know it is very interesting is while we came out of a recession in 2009, we were seeing polls even earlier this year that were showing a majority of americans but we still were in a recession.

and if you think about the last two years of looking at economic growth it has been a yo-yo. it has been about 3.24 percent. over the last two years, for the quarter, starting 2013, 4th quarter, gdp was at 3.8 -- that is good. then it dropped down to negative .9 for the 1st quarter of 2014. then it jumped up to 4.6 and stayed at 4.3 and dropped to 2.1. so that is below where you want. then it dropped down to sixth tenths of a growth rate and then up to 3.9 and only 1.5 percent

for the 3rd quarter. this is, you know what we have is an economy that is getting buffeted. it is so fragile it is getting buffeted by things like droughts in the west or west coast dock strike or what is going on in china or the euro zone or greece. it is continuing this anxiety that really never ended after the recession is over. when you get down to it, if you look at median, real household income, half the families and half the households have done better/half worse, household income hasn't gone up since 1999 when you consider inflation. we have had two terms of democrat presidents since 1999 and two terms of republican presidents since then. we have had democratic majori majorities in the house and

republican majorities. no matter who was in charge, real median household incomes haven't gone up. that is so that people have this feeling that well the economy may have recovered but my economy hasn't recovered. and that is sort of adding a new degree of angst. all of this led to populism. whether that is the occupy wall street on the left and elizabeth warren and bernie sanders, two of the hottest people and personality in the democratic party. or the tea party movement with trump on the right side this rise is causing tension within each party. the tension in the democratic party between the building construction unions who wanted the keystone xl pipeline and the environmentalist who didn't want the keystone xl pipeline. or look on the republican side. the export/import bank is

creating tension on each side. then you get to the culture wars. where you have one piece of america that is desperately trying to protect what they see as the historic values and culture of this country. and the other side believes the culture that values should move and change with times and should keep up with the change in society. it is manifesting in things like the most recent planned parenthood fetal tissue research issue, same-sex marriage, and it is like one country wants to watch father's knows best and the other wants to watch modern family. it is creating another tension out there. and then finally, think about what conservatives and republicans, but mostly conservatives tend to value. they tend to value freedom and

liberty. liberals and democrats put a higher value on justice and equality. it is like two different value systems. it is like the men are from mars and women are from venus or whatever the book is. different value systems driving wedges through the political process. that leads us finally to the anger at washington and career politicians. there is a recent poll that asks people do you think most people in politics can or cannot be trusted. can be trusted, 23%. cannot be trusted, 72%. wow. do you think the current political system in the united states is basically functional or dysfunctional? functional, 33%. dysfunctional, 64%. these are very, very deeply held views but there is a party

difference. they asked people what is more important to you: someone with experience in how the political system works or someone from outside of the existing political establishment. overall, 56% of americans said they preferred experience. 56%. and 40% preferred an outsider. if you just talk to democratic voters, 69% experience and only 27% outsider. but just republican voters it was 60% outsider and 36% prefer experience. when you think of republicans, and this comes into the presidential a little bit, is that republicans tend not to be early adopters. historically they have been people that like to be comfortable with things.

they want -- you know, they have been small seat conservatives. we started seeing the changing sum in 2012 and 2014 a great deal. so there is a difference within the two parties between the two. i am mad as hell and not taking this anymore. it really is that strong and toxic. these are the five factors i think created this instability we are seeing in the political process. let's talk about the democratic side first. you know there is some precedent to what we are seeing in the terms of the democratic party initially behind the frontrunner and the frontrunner has the lock on the nomination but then a challenger comes out and makes it a little interesting for some

period of time. think of walter man mondale with the challenge from heart. or al gore and the challenge from bradley. each got interesting briefly and then got a little less interesting. in 2000 things were different with the left getting further to the left and to the left of where hillary clinton had been. and then this anger at politicians, career politicians, anger at washington or the established order of things created more edge to it. the real story with hillary clinton is when you think about when she left office as secretary of state she had terrific numbers overall. republicans and conservatives

all hated her but hated her as long as they have known anything about her. but if you look at her numbers along democrats, liberals, moderates, independents, hillary clinton's numbers in january of 2013 were good. the truth is they were probably unsustainably high because there was a period of time where she was not seen as a politician or a presidential candidate. she was above politics. so her numbers among non-conservative and non-republicans road up to an unsustainable level. when she left office, they started picking up her running for president, you saw this slide down in secretary clinton's positive or favorable numbers coming down but it was good. it didn't pick up the steam until 2014 when she became seen in more of a political context.

she didn't help herself with a couple remarks. my two favorites were in january of 2014. down in new orleans speaking to the national automobile dealers associate and she finds the need to sort of volunteer that she hasn't been behind the wheel of a car since 1996. you know, you watch that and go, what in the hell would you say that for? was this your way of sucking up to a room full of car dealers? why would you say that? she talked about my husband and i were dead broke when they left the white house. we know about the legal fees from the white water and the impeachment.

yes, of course. but anybody that can get a seven-figure book deal and six-figure speeches is not what most of us think of as dead broke. it was different. but again, it is still -- hers were still pretty good until this e-mail thing started catching. early on i blew off the e-mail thing. you use work e-mail for work stuff. but you are not paranoid about people being out to get you. i would not have done it and she would not if she could do it again. but then you hear there may have

been classified information in some shape or form flowing over. whether it was classified before or after the fact or marked classified or not and things started getting more complicated. the republicans were as healthy and having the lead to not having a lead or within the margin of error within people like donald trump. when you look at the polls, i

talked at a peter heart who has a new poll coming out last night/this morning, and peter makes the argument that clinton is perceived as smart and competent by most people but they don't have this warmth. a lot of them don't like her or feel any kind of comfort with her. they don't necessarily trust her. it is not a competence thing. it is a personal thing. that comes into play in a general election. but in a nomination environment, you know, it is kind of hard to see how she could possibly lose the nomination to bernie sanders barring some catastrophic event. could sanders win the iowa caucus or new hampshire primary? that could happen. it is observation changes

behavior. you could argue they have been observed a lot and it changed their behavior some or in the primary caucuses out there. but when it gets to primaries, non-new england primaries, the demographics don't map up. if the fbi finds things and decide to pursue it and the decision is up to the public integrity justice department, a group of career politicians, but if they do a recommendation up, that is going to put the attorney general and the obama administration in a really tough

position. you have a huge mess on your hands. if you think of this as getting overplayed, think for once, did sandy berger who was clinton's first advisor expect to be prosecuted for mishandling classified information? what about john doych who stepped down already? or david petreus while director of national intelligence tr not appropriately handling

classified information? this is something where there is a chance they decide to pursue this, directly or indirectly, that could cause her real, real problems. to the point about the public integrity section, tell me about the bush white house. i don't think they wanted to do that. they are faced with a situation of how do you turn it down? it was a garbage case that was discredited after senator stevens lost the election and was dead. or do you think the obama white house wanted david prosecuted? a close advisor to the president. heck no. do youngstown -- do i think this is going to happen?

no, i don't. there is a chance it knows to the dark side. if it did, and i think we are talking about 1-6 chance, if it did, i think you will find democrats again looking on the wall for the in case of fire break the class option. before getting in the nuts and bolts of handicapp handycap p a think of every republican nominee with the exception of goldwater, everyone of them has been a sitting president, former

or current vice president, runner up of the previous nomi nation, related to the probe hazardo -- previous president or a commander in the war. republicans are not early adopters. we started seeing different behavior in 2012. when you saw michelle bachmann win the iowa republican straw poll or herman cain shoot up in the polls, where republicans considered nominating inconceivable people that was totally against their stereotype of doing this. in the end, they nominated mitt

romney who was the runner-up but that was only after pursuing every possible option and they were all discredited. what we saw in the republican nomination fight was a little forshadowing of the situation we have seen since then. one other broad point, if you think back to 2008, what is something you heard a lot of republicans say in the 2008 general election? well, it is a lousy idea to nominate young freshman senators. okay. and there is a sort of feeling among a lot of people in both parties that well you really want someone that maybe somebody who has been a governor of a state, that executive experience is a better skill set than someone who came out of congress. so you have this over here.

but there is another thing that is also important. if you did a national poll and asked people what is the most important facing the country today or what do you want the next president of the united states, what do you want them to focus on, if you ask democrats that question what they will tell you is the economy, jobs, and a certain con dproup of issues. republicans say terrorism, america's place in the world, completely different issues which are not governer oriented. so the republicans have a dichotomy of what they want that is separate from ideas. how should we look at this race?

i am sort of a simple-minded person. i like to hyper-organize because i am adhd i tend to hyper-organize. things. i look at it like ncaa brackets. you have the brackets over here that is the conventional establishment republican party that nominated eisenhower, both bushes, reagan, dole, mccain, romney -- that republican party. and then there is this other republican party that is more of an outsider wing. ronald reagan would have been an outsider by '76 but by '80 the establishment embraced him by then. then you have this other outsider other wing that is unorthodox. it is a malgam of four groups.

you have the tea party, the faith-based conservatives, then you have libertarian, and then you have people that are just really, really, really, really, really -- five really's -- conservative. i would argue what is happening and the weird things happening on the conventional side are different from the weird things happening on the more exotic side. on the more conventional side, i think what we see is if someone told us two years ago, jeb bush is absolutely positively going to run for president, what would most of us assumed? he would lock up the conventional half of the republican party, and it is about half, he would lock that half of the party up almost immediately and have a very good chance of winning the overall republican nomination.

so there is the bush thing. and scott walker would do well with this. what was going on here? first with bush, i think you could say first that the bush brand has been kind of dinged up some. this is not the brand that dad left in 1992 or that w inherited in 2000. i wrote a column a year or so ago where i likened it to jeb bush is the teenager whose older

brother wrecked the car just before homecoming or something. it is not your fault but you have deal with the consequences. there is that. but closely associated with that is the bush brand, that was once terrific in the republican party, but it is also, w not withstanding, it is associated with conventional, historic traditional republican establishment and that has taken on a bad sheen. we talked about the part where the republican party moved over to jeb, dad's right, jeb's right and moved way over. i also think there is one other factor here. i hardly know him. i hardly met him with a couple

times. but jeb bush has always struck me as a smart guy and an honest guy, he is not a chameleon in any shape or form, and he is being asked to take changes in what he feels is important on substance issues and take on a rhetoric i think the guy is uncomfortable doing. conversely, hillary clinton was more than happy to go ahead and move over on keystone xl pipeline, and trade and things like that. but bush is showing a lot of -- you know, a considerable resistant. so it is not only creating a political problem but it is coming across like his heart is not in this. the guy that was sort of an 800 pound gorilla when he was governor of florida who exuted

strength and confidence and great certainty and now we are not seeing that anymore. i had a ceo of a big company that dealt with him a lot when he was governor say that guy, when he walked into a room, you knew someone walked into room. he projected this air. and he said i don't see this happening now. and i think we are seeing that in the debates. in interviews, and on the campaign trail so underperforming is an understatement. but he is in a position where he is going to have to turn it around and needed to the other night even but in the next couple two-four weeks because i don't think he is getting any new donors on board, any now donors, and there are a lot of big bundlers and fundraisers that were fully prepared to go his way but have been sitting back a little bit.

i think bush is facing a very real threat. and you see scott walker whose skill set didn't match the brand. and chris christie, i think with christie, a lot of the momentum was when there was uncertainty about whether jeb bush would one. and people pushing christie in the new york/new jersey area that once it became clear jeb bush was going to run it is like the wind came out of christie's sales. then you had the bridge mess and a little bit of the jersey state

finances but the fourth thing is what is chris christie's stich? the truth teller. the big tough guy that is going to tell the truth. he got out trumped. donald trump stole his act. chris christie and donald trump are different people but that role was stolen. you watch christie in the debate and i think he is pretty good but he has never been able to recover or match up to the expectations. he is looking at the best raw, talent. if we were talking about sports,

you would say that marco rubio is the best all-around athlete in this race. that he has got a very, very good skillset. if you look at his announcement speech, in terms of skill and reach, it was the speech that was not unlike obama, but the thing about it is i had dinner with a democratic strategist the next night who was like, you know, a democrat could have given 80% of rubio's speech because it wasn't partisan. it was a message that could resinate across a lot of lines and particularly to independents and moderate voters.

that is really good. folks are terrified of marco rubio in the beginning because of the obvious latino voters but going after younger voters also where republicans have a hard time. if rb -- obama won the 18 year olds by a 23% margin. romney's best group was 65 and older. if a republican could cut into democratic margins among younger voters that would be huge. but the problem is he is running a general election campaign not unlike bush but while running for republican presidential nomination. he needs to throw red meat to the party base and he hasn't been throwing that which is why

i think rubio is moving up in the polls but not as a pace you might think. it is because he seems to be running for the general election and the nomination. i suspect that needs to change. and then you get to john casich. i knew him back in the house. i liked him a lot. i have not talked to or seen him since he became governor but i would say just as mark rubio has the best skill set i would argue that casich is probably the most qualified person running in either party. 18 years as a member of the house back when it was a functioning institution. the house armed service committee member the entire time he is there checking that national security box. governor of ohio. that is a big deal. then you think it is ohio. no republican ever won the

presidency without winning ohio. and if you look at ideaological where he is, i think of this as a bell curve, where the bell curve is the 40-45 yardline on the right side because the country is a little more conservative than liberal, and kasich is on the 40 yardline. in the same zone as bush and rubio. so it is not optimal to win the election but it is good place to be. but he has one shortcoming and that is, and again i alluded to and said i have adhd which is no surprise to the people that work with me, that adderall or

ritilin would change his life. you have never seen a person that is as successful as him that is as unorganized or undisciplined. contrast his speeches with ted cruz. ted cruz did it at liberty university, he had memorized the speech, it was perfect. what about kasich? there wasn't a teleprompter. i don't think there was a speech written. he got up and went on this stream of conscious thing for close to 50 minutes. you go john, john, this is an important event here. that sort of thing. i am aware of a fundraising

phone call me made within the last month to someone. this big republican donor-type, very wealthy person, it was clear that kasich was having one, or possibly two, other conversations while on the phone with the donor type. and the guy finally said if you want to talk to me on the phone call me when you are not having other conversations. it is like you cannot do that. the point is i think if bush doesn't get stuff together quickly, and i think it may not quite be too late, but you have see rubio take this conventional thing. i mean christie showing signs of life and things but i think it is going to be more rubio. let's go ever to the exotic side. i have to really, really speed up. donald trump is clearly tapping

into the this visceral anger. it is like giving the finger to career politicians and the establishment. or let's say you have people estranged from the establishment. they are looking for the opposite of a politician. that is what they want. but for different people that is different things. for some, and it tends to skew a little bit more blue coller, a little bit more male, a little younger, but not exclusively in any of those, their idea of donald trump is donald trump. he is the opposite of the politician in their mind. he is angry, says what is on his mind, doesn't care what anybody thinks. it is a pretty good act. so one group gravitated to him. then there is a second group,

and these are people that are just as estranged but not as angry. they are gravitating to ben carson. they say him as a kind gentle man. they see him as someone who is a role model focus groups say. this is what politicians ought to be like; who tell the truth and are decent people. so in their mind, and it tends to skew more white collar, deeply religious, a lot is about religion, but in their minds, ben carson is the opposite. and it is carly fiorina in the other group. doesn't fit the mode of a career-politician over here. a lot is social economics,

temperamental, it is what are you looking for. keep in mind, by the way, that you know, we used to this can of the republican party as the p t party of country clubbers. keep in mind that roughly half of the republican party is college-educated. roughly half is not, though. a lot of these are or their parents were conservative democrats who moved into the republican party and completely changed the mix of the republican party. so they moved over. now, the thing is i think, my colleague amy walter wrote a column over the summer where she said summer is for dating and winter is for mating. i thought that -- you know, i

have heard republican voters say, particularly last summer, that this was like walking into a baskin robins with 31 flavors of candidates and they have the wooden spoon and they are tasting all of them having a great time. the establishment is petrified but the voters are having a great time because they never had a selection quite like this. we have seen trump's averages starting to come down and carson has supplanted him in some. let me do a quick rant. you can see people in the press, and non-press, who will gravitate -- whatever is the new poll, and even though they have no earthly idea who the pollster is, and nobody has heard of the

pollster, and it is like polls are a commodity. they have become all of the same. it turned out they were making stuff. i saw people on a morning show going crazy over a couple state polls i never heard of the pollster before. ever! and like, you know, any of you, you could -- what your mother's maiden name? >> tata? >> tata research just came out with a poll that shows -- i mean, the thing is you could get it on television. i should not say this. this is on c-span and somebody will. they give it as much credence as if it were an nbc times poll or

something. i think that as it gets closer to february 1st iowa caucus to february 8th, from the dating around phase, or having a little this or that, and i think we are seeing it with trump. the novelity is wearing off. people are noticing he knows little about very few of these things. they are starting to see it fade. i think carson is going to have some legs and we will last a little longer. the funny thing, the trump and carson vote is not interchangeable. take for the carson-type voters, they see trump as this vain and profane man who brags about being on the cover of "play boy"

magazine, fully clothed, and that is against the deeply faith-based people backing carson. we are talking about different voters here. but when you listen to carson, and i am sure, first of all, as a neuro surgeon, the guy probably has twice the iq points of any of us in this room. but when you listen to him, it is clear he knows very, very, little about any of these things. you heard him being asked about the debt limit and it was clear he didn't know it what it was. the question is once you get into caucuses and primaries and messing around/dating around down to getting to who is going to be the republican nominee? who can beat and win the general election?

who do you want to be the commander and chief to deal with all of these problems? i suspect you will see this start to fade down a little bit. i think it is going to go to someone, this more exotic wing of the nomination. it is going to go to someone who is a vehicle for that anger, that outsider, but knows more and is sort of more -- is not quite as flawed in one way or another. and obviously trump and carson are very different people than some of the others. could it be a carly fiorina? she is a great example, to me, of how someone who never held elective office, and shouldn't necessarily know about the foreign policy issues and things, man she is flat been to school. she has studied this stuff.

she knows these issues inside and out. she is honed in. she is on message. and the thing about it is what carson and trump don't know and understand about public policy clearly fiorina figured it out. she is really good. i think her challenge is this. b besides the fact there is no campaign underneath her which is the deal-breaker in primaries and caucus but the question is what is her narrative? is it going to be a flawed and

failed ceo who was pushed out and has become sort of untouchable in some ways? i mean like where is she -- usually you think about baseball or football. a manager or coach, or whatever, gets fired from what team and what happens? they pop up some place else. ceo's are often like that. they go on corporate boards. you can make a fabulous living going on the boards of big companies, as a former woman ceo of a big company, you would think about boards. other than taiwan conductor i never heard of her being on a board. then we get to ted cruz. i talked about how kasich was

probably the most qualified and rubio probably had the best skill set in terms of skill set but one thing that rubio, that fiorina and cruz share, focus, discipline, i mean they are -- they are absolutely on task and nothing you could say or do will sort of peal them off of what they are trying to say which is a valuable commodity in politics. when i look at cruz, i see someone, and i am a registered independent, middle of the road guy, i don't agree with ted cruz on a lot, but when several of us had dinner with him last year, the backroom of a steak house, and sitting across from him, cruz said things the day before i would have thought were crazy, and the next day i did in fact

think were crazy. but when he said it, it didn't sound crazy. it made a heck of a lot of sense. he is a very, very skilled communicator. you cannot listen to him and say this guy was a championship debater in college. and finally, focused and has a strategy. you notice he has never criticized trump or carson because he wants to inherit. he believes their support is going to start melting off. we are seeing trump start to melt off already. he wants to be there to be the remainder man. to sort of pick up the support, and you don't do it by telling people their first choice was a stupid first choice. that is not how you do it. and so, i am watching cruz as the guy that i think, and i don't have data to support this,

is most likely to be the person that inherits this outside more exotic side of the republican party. that is how i see it. quickly, first of all, this election is about change. and what kind of change do you want? risky or more safe form of change? that is something peter heart was saying the other day. what kind of change do you want? to me you say is this time for change election or about changing american demographics? if time for a change, that is leading towards republicans winning. but more about demographics that can be a really challenge for the republican party. this is going to be, one thing, we are waiting to get the rest of the new wall street nbc journal poll, in september they asked would you whether see a democrat or republican elected. and it was 37-37 or 38-38. just dead even. that is where this thing starts

off. and then candidates, events, circumstances kind of sort of start leaning it one way or the other. sort of watch that. quickly, the senate and then we need to open it up. senate, everybody in this room knows most of the people watching c-span know, senate 54 republican, 46 democrat so democrats need a five-seat gain to hold the house. we have gone into a boom bust cycle in the senate. john edwards talked about two americas. i agree. i have presidential election america, and midterm election america. the turnout is big, broad, and diverse, it looks like the country in the general election. but mid-term, turnout is 60%

high, older, wider, conservative and more republican. it is just a different environment. so what we are having is 2008, democrats have a great year in the house and senate. 2010, republicans have a great year pick up the house and senate seat. 2012 presidential year again, democrats reelected and pick up the house and senate. 2014, boom bust cycle. six-year terms in the senate. if you are a republican and elected on a mid-term election year congrats you won with a 70 mile per hour wind at your back. but six years later you are up during a presidential year. other other way around, democrat elected during the presidential year, six years later, you are up in a mid-term election. in 2014, last year, democrats had a whole bunch of seats up and they were in really, really

red republican states and they just got completely hosed. that is a political science term. 2016, the shoe is on the other foot. republicans have 24 -- these were the seats up in the 2010 republican wave election. republicans have 24 seats and democrats only have 10. but republicans have seven seats up in states that obamaca took 2007. one of those republican state seats in an obama state is in iowa and grassley will not lose. but you have six republican seats that are in real, real danger here. and conversely you only have one on the democratic side and that is in nevada. if you ask each side, what is one more? and republicans would love to

talk about colorado. but that doesn't look that promising against michael bennett. democrats would like to say richard burr and north carolina. but i don't think anything is going to happen there. it is 6-1. you look at kirk in illinois, good guy, but if he got reelected it would be an enormous upset. ron johnson in wisconsin would be an unset, i think. and you look at other republicans that would not be upset but republicans in states that obama took have challenges. portman in ohio, we have pennsylvania, the new hampshire senator and rubio's open seat in florida finally. six republican seats that are a-prime vulnerable versus harry reid's open seat in nevada.

...

like florida, ohio, new hampshire, nevada, so that it is not necessarily true that as it goes presidentially it will also go in the senate, but keep in mind, whatever the turn of dynamics, whatever the issue agenda, whatever is going on. we are looking at a heck of a race for the senate underneath what is obviously one of the weirdest and most fun presidential races we have ever seen. i know we have some microphones here. i'm told there is a way to tweet questions in. questions, comments, accusations, and i think state your name and the

organization your representing are with did i answer -- zero, you have some? these are two good ones. first, how can establishment republicans win in a populist friendly year? and,and, i guess that is a great, great, great question, although to me trump is more populist. carson is less. so populism is going on. and to me i don't really call with carson is doing populism. it is something different and big and meaningful, but i think that it is something that is other than populism. that is a really good question command where

clearly one of two things happened. republicans change their stripes and did something theymay have only done once since 2002 or is more like 2012 with a flair with all of this and want to do this and end up doing that. that is onethat is one course. the other courses they go with someone outside of the box or that is running from the outside. he's a better candidate skills and trump are carson. he knows this stuff in the issues and in a debate he would be very, very, very formidable. that is why i think that you could have a somewhat populist or outsider run and possibly when the republican nomination, but that it is

one that has gotten -- that does not have some of the shortcomings let's face it, the republican establishment is under siege. >> i think he is trying to build -- put kind of an edge back in. i mean,, i have a very high opinion of jeb bush. i give him a b12 shot. i personally like five our energies and just found them away. maybe a little bit more caffeine. and say, you know, and, you know how you kind of -- you

ever seen before a football game or some of the football players paying heads before the game? it is like a pair of rams, just sort of psyching themselves up for a game. and this guy needs to get psyched up. and i mean, if i were -- i would say whatever i needed to say. you want to go to thanksgiving having to look across the table? i would say whatever i needed to say to make him angry, get passionate and get him to show that this is not something. i don't thinki don't think it is his right or that he is inherited it or anything else. but i do think that is a perception out there. and he is a different person that his brother and maybe it is better, maybe it is not. he is a different person, but to, but to be

honest i don't think this is a campaign problem. he has rotten luck about what he is up, when he is up. the whole world might be different, but it is both timing and that he has yet to show that he desperately, desperately wants this and will,we will, you know, as he said the other day not terribly convincingly which you on nails 1st thing in the morning. more questions. yes, sir. there is a mike right there. >> thank you. given the impact of donald trump's campaign turning this into a schoolyard type politics, how do you see that impacting campaigns going forward? less genteel? >> while. well, i don't know. i kind of thing gentility start going out of style a while back. but -- because i think is

trump going to be a role model for some candidacies and the candidates of the future? yes, i think so. there is only one donald trump and that he really is a, something of a performance artist, and where,, you know, for a guy who has never been involved in politics before, he seems to have a very, very real understanding of how the media works for how to manipulate the media them out to take advantage of it, which is interesting for someone who has never run for anything before, but i am tempted to say that trump is part of a trend that we are seeing toward more outsized, more passionate, angry,passionate, angry, it is part of a trend that we had already seen, but i

think that he is a pretty unique character, and so it is not something we will see exactly like manifest itself like that, but we will see a lot of little trumps coming up along the way. hehe is awfully unique. i mean,, he really, really, really is. and the other thing about trump, to me, i don't know that this is a guya guy that could deal well with being in 2nd place for a long time. i don't think his ego can take it.it. keep in mind, he is only into this for 2 million so far. you can look up in the house and senate and find heck of a lot of people up there or that did not make it they're who put in far more than 2 million of there own money he said at one point that he would spend a hundred million if necessary. you know, 1st of all, let's just assume that he is liquid enough and can come over 100 million, do you know what that represents?

obama and romney each spend $1 billion in that election. so hundred million, you know, it is more than pocket change, but i don't think he would see the republican party donor stepping behind him to pick up the tab. i don't think that many people would jump out of pick up the tab for donald trump. but i do think that we are seeing politics go for a time to a very, very different place which is why it is important that while i personally don't think carson and trump will go the distance, that anger that they give voice to, that israel, and i don't underestimate that at all. who will be the jockey that rides that anger through to the finish line?

my hunchhunches it is not trump or carson. right over here. >> do you see any viable scenario in which the republicans lose the house? >> any viable scenario that republicans lose the house. first of all, the most -- it's hard. it is really, really, really, really hard and would take an enormous amount of effort was the house. basically, democrats would have to hold onto 100 percent of their seats and when every single republican seat that is in any danger at all, 100 percent of those, which really, rarely happens and then start knocking off people that are not even vulnerable at all and just given where people live population patterns, where the congressional district boundaries are, this is really hard. if you are going to tell me

republicans have lost the house what happens? i would assume one of two things. trump's name is on the general election ballot. either as a republican nominee or an independent, independent, and i don't think he will run as an independent. i don't know if carson would do that are not. but the thing about it, republicans have kind of, i mean, speaker ryan o speaker weiner a lot because, well, a year or so ago he says something about taking all of the sharp instruments out of the room. and by doing the debt ceiling and the budget deal they did remove the instruments that would be most likely for them to impale themselves. so that it is awfully, awfully, awfully hard.

look, you never want to say never. but it is awfully, awfully, awfully hard. if our republicans i would say, republicans should be worried about the damage they are doing to the franchise internally within the house of representatives when i think of fortysomething members that that that paul ryan not conservative enough, it is like, wow, this is really, really interesting. and i do think that a month or so ago eric cantor who let his district get out from under him but is a really smart guy, but he wrote a peace in the "wall street journal" where he warned conservatives of following leaders who are mr. -- misleading the and have given them -- there is this pervasive view among conservatives that we were

told, and itold command i think the establishment played in the us a little bit. we were told, if we elect of republican majorities of the house and to the senate that we could repeal obama care, turn back the epa regulations, undo everything obama has done and democrats have done and put forth our agenda and get a bunch of things done. in the next day actually the speaker warned of false prophets, you know, the same sort of thing. the thing is, it ignores basic civics that you may have a majority ina majority in the house and you may have a majority in the senate, but until you have vetoproof -- if you don't have the presidency, if you don't have vetoproof filibuster proof majorities you don't have that kind of control. and so these conservative voters feel like they were

misled. we were promised we could get all this done command to them republican leaders obviously could get all these things done and have chosen not to. well, they did not choose not to, they couldn't. look at the rules come out place works. and that is, i think, primary source of all of this vitriol that you are seeing within the republican party as they think they got like to. the thing is, i think that they were exaggerating. hyperbole is part of politics. put us in office and we can do x, y, z, but they took it literally and feel betrayed by their leaders in the leaders exaggerated somewhat. but you could not do that unless you have filibuster vetoproof majority. you cannot do all of these things you guys desperately want to do. so, another question in the

room? >> okay. >> is there a path to victory for the gop and colorado senate? the smart aleck side of me says,says, yes, get him to resign from one seat to run for that one. i think here is the challenge. number one, it is a presidential year as opposed to a midterm year. the electorate in colorado, colorado is one of the closest aides to being 50-yard line state out there, but it is a big difference between presidential year and midterm year mark udall is from a story family, but i don't think he was a natural

politician. and while michael bennet is relatively new to politics,, wow, i think his understanding of politics and of campaigns and how to win is very, very, very highly developed, and, and i don't think he is as beatable as udall was. finally, there is only one cory gardner. you show me another cory gardner that can cut into independents and moderates, cut against the problems that the party is facing in umpteen different groups, and that person could win the general election. so far republicans have not found someone there yet. i am pretty skeptical there command to be perfectly honest i'm fairly skeptical of north carolina. the sanders outreach to might -- white male voters

something with key demographics, do you see from the gop. well, to me yes bernie sanders support is overwhelmingly white and that -- but i think that the white males the bernie sanders voters, swing general election voters. talking about volvos and birkenstocks and soy lattes and things like that because i think that is not fair. but the thing about it is sanders voters and supporters are very, very, very passionate liberals and they are not anybody that whatever contemplate voting republican. what is interesting is, i

don't -- if there is a path to the white house from bernie sanders it is a subtle one and probably requires republicans doing some pretty exotic things themselves and then getting a whole bunch of breaks. it will be a long process. >> it is the revamped primary schedule most favorite your opinion? >> wrote a peace earlier this year, and david wasserman, our house editor has no working on some things. it is interesting. there are -- i am not sure -- well, i don't think he

has released this yet, but there are an enormous number of delegates for the republican convention are not from conservative places. and basically every congressional district, each one has three delegates. now there are also some from states that have voted republican. for example, in the most republican districts, david we will shoot me for doing this. and the most republican district in the country according to wasserman romney got -- there were 85,672 romney votes for each of the three delegates from the congressional district.

and i think it is hosea's toronto's, 1,772 romney votes per republican delegate to the convention. so that there is not very republican places. less ideological republican. even though the people who live there don't even no any republicans.

the thing about it, the delegate selection process does on the republican side tends to put -- does give non- republican performing districts a boatload of delegates, and it is some pretty impressive numbers. >> in particular the nominee be so disliked that it would drive them to the other party rather than being attracted to the other party. >> that's a very good peemack. to me, independence is independence is the best number look at, but i also look at self-described moderates as well.

let me make sure i am looking at the exit poll, the right tab. independent. that's the vertical. i'm looking for the horizontal tab. romney won the independent vote by a five-point margin in 2012. romney won the independent vote by five percentage points, but among self-described moderates obama wanted by 15-point margin. and so i kind of look at both of those groups, independent and moderate.

and so is there -- obama one without winning more independent votes but did it because his party had an advantage in terms of party. a lot of conservatives did not vote for romney and that route press the republican number. at the same time as she had done what it would take to jack up to what extent might he have lost the independent vote. this whole exercise, you haveexercise, you have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

you have to be able to hold your base while reaching in and grabbing as many votes as you possibly can from the middle, whether it is the partisan middle, independent, or ideological middle moderate and keep in mind that a great number. >> in my other notes. the decisive factor. 29 percent as a vision for the future. and romney one that group by nine-point margin. romney one that group by 13 points.

romney one that grew by 23 points. the other group, 21 percent cares about people like me and obama one that group by a 63-point margin. so romney won three out of four, but got clobbered there. and so that is why for a conservative the key is how can i maximize the republican vote, maximize the conservative vote, but not come across as this coldhearted person who does not care about regular people. and, you know, that is why you say how does the republican do that? the answer is, very carefully. it is not something that just happens automatically. okay.

i am getting the hook. last question. emergency candidate for both parties, michael bloomberg. >> well, 1st ofwell, 1st of all, let me state my personal bias. i think he is a smart guy, very good mayor of new york. the republican side, that would be a complete nonstarter. you cannot do what he has done on guns and have any chance on the republican side. and even on the democratic side i think it would be safe to say that elizabeth warren and the occupy people , if they think hillary clinton is a wall street candidate, try somebody that actually did work there. they would get completely out of their minds. i just think that joe biden would be -- to me if there was case of fire break the

glass, if it's early i think you might very well see the party head back toward biden. if it is late in the process , like really like then where it is almost like too late and we get into the world of filing deadlines in this, but i wonder whether -- ii don't think -- i have a hard time seeing any circumstance, sanders actually wins the nomination. so the guy within the existing field. >> and i think.

>> someone who has been a two-term governor of the state, widely considered to be in the mainstream of the party in politics, where bernie sanders has been -- he has his own unique character, but let's face it, he has not been the most effective member, liberal democratic senator. really effective democratic senators, ted kennedy, tom harkin. but sanders has chosen to basically be a voice but to actually do stuff, get things done, driving agenda. that had not been sanders so

much. supporters are passionate. but the thing is, would a party, the democratic party moved to him in the pinch? i have a hard time seeing that happen. anyway, thank you for coming out, thank you united technologies. take you very much. [applause] ..

if i were to write a second biography, i decided to write that book. i am going to be standing next to the president to reach out to the most important 500 people in the world. who knows how i will feel at the moment question and i don't know. i have a a feeling what i might ask. if i feel that in the moment, i can pull off the goofiness, goofiness, i'll do it. this sunday on q&a, on his writing career. his crossover between religion and politics. >> i think the important for everyone to take seriously, but never to make what we christians would call idol politics. there are people who have done that and they are sort of

worshiping that idol rather than the god who caused them to care for the poor and justices. i think that is a fine line and something i talk about fairly often. >> sunday night at eight eastern and pacific on q&a. >> presidential candidate donald trump held a news conference to promote his new book. he took questions from reporters and shared his thoughts on the presidential race. this is 35 minutes. thank you louise, i appreciate it very much. it's a great honor. i want to thank simon and schuster, one of the most magnificent publishers for years and years. i've heard about simon & schuster as being a fabulous, i was going to say the roles royce

or the harvard or the yale but they really are a great one. i want to thank you very much. you have given us such tremendous support. we did this quickly and we think it we did it very effectively. it has been an incredible experience. we wrote a book and the title, tripled america's very tough crippled america's very tough. i think one of the reasons we need to do what we need to do and one of the reasons we are doing so well in the campaign is weary tell it like it is and we tell the truth. america is crippled. we 017 and now 18 and very soon it will be $19 trillion in debt. we have a military that doesn't have proper instruction from leadership and we don't know what were doing. we are losing all over the world with trade deals with every country. know matter what country you pick, they are beating us in trade. we can't go on like this any longer. it is impossible to go on like

this any longer. i always mention, as an example, a trader. we get sergeant bergdahl and they get five of the people they wanted. they wanted them badly and that's not the way it's going to work anymore. we will write about it in the book. we tell lots of different stories of lots of different things and i think it's going to be very instructional and important to me which was instructional. when i did the deal, i think one of the reasons it was so successful, was that it was largely instructional. even today when i speak, so many people hold up the book the art of the deal and the other books we've done. this is one that probably, not since the art of the deal, i have to tell this to louise, have i worked so hard on a book. it was in a confined. of time that we wanted to get it out really, really quickly so that it pertains to what's going on right now. the moment of time. we got it done. david did a fantastic job. where's david?

david did a fantastic job. all of my people did a fantastic job. they help me so much because we are doing a couple of other things right now so this was not easy getting the sin. but we see by the lines to park avenue, they been forming last night and i'm going to be signing books starting at 12 o'clock, doing a couple of interviews and then signing books at 12:00 o'clock. that will be a very exciting very exciting time for me. we have fans who have bought the book and they just bought it and some have been online for 12 and 14 hours. i don't know how they do it, but they do it. they find a way. i'm looking looking forward to getting to the signing. does anybody have any questions? >> yes go ahead, katie. >> well i think it's a different book. we just had polls come out in iowa where i am leading.

you saw the new pope from iowa? you saw the new poll in new hampshire where i'm leading it. i'm leading in georgia, texas, all over the place. are doing well. if you add in that, were beating everybody by a lot. were beating the establishment. the establishment has let us down. i don't know. i don't know how his book is doing. i think my book is very hard-hitting. this is a different kind of a book and he is a different kind of person. my book is very hard-hitting. it says it like it is. based on what simon & schuster just told me it's selling like hot cakes. we are very different people. we have very different qualities. we are extremely different. i'm different from all the other

candidates. look, nobody can negotiate trade deals like me. we are going to take the $400 billion a year that we are losing with china and that's going to be turned around. the $75 billion a year that we are short on with japan, the $50 billion a year that we lose to mexico, and that's right there will be a wall built. a wall will be built and it will go up. people come into the country legally. i much different. you look at marco rubio, very, very weak on immigration. you look at ben, he's weak on immigration and wants to get rid of medicare. you can't get rid of medicare. it would be a horrible thing to get rid of. it actually works. you get rid of the fraud, waste and abuse and it works. when a man is weak on immigration and wants to get rid of medicare, i don't know how he stays there. go ahead john. [inaudible] >> no i think that marco is overrated.

frankly, had bush been a better messenger, he has a better message. that was me delivering that message, it would've been a much different story. marco doesn't show up to the united states senate. he is representing the people of florida, which by the way that poll came out today and i am way up in florida over everybody. but marco is a a sitting senator and he doesn't show up for the people. i don't think he should be doing that. bush gave a very weak message. it was poorly delivered. the facts are ultimately that marco will be hurt very badly. if you look at mr. singer, you have to see where mr. singer is coming from. when you see where he is coming from i think people will say whoa, we didn't know that. look at marco's stance on illegal immigration. it's it's really trouble for him. i don't see how he can win. okay, yes, mark. [inaudible]

>> marco rubio's personal finances are discredited #zero know his personal finances, all you have to do is look at his credit card. he is a disaster with his credit card. i'll tell you what, i love florida. i'm in florida all the time. for years i have been hearing that his credit cards are a disaster. i would think when you take a look at it you will find that. his credit card debt and his problems with credit card and what he did when he was running the party apparatus with credit cards, i've heard about it for years. you will have to find out. >> he has a very bad record of finances. if you look at what happened with his houses, he certainly lives above his means. there's no question about that. i'll tell you what. i don't really care that much.

i want a room, i want to podium. let's get going because i don't really care that much. a lot of the people that are candidates and i respect many of them, not all of them but many of them, they felt it was very unfair because hillary clinton was given all softballs. i mean she wasn't asked one tough question. they didn't ask about the foundation or any of the problems. they didn't talk about the email problem, when that came up bernie sanders lost his whole campaign. what he did was so stupid. in order to get a one minute soundbite and some a a applause, that's where he gave up his campaign. people aren't going to his rallies. he's finished. unless something happens, she will easily be the candidate. i will say this. she only got softballs. that's all she got. if you look at the way we were treated, it wasn't the same way. with that being said, i don't really care. [inaudible] >> your name is? [inaudible]

>> well i think the republicans actually are doing a pretty good job overall. they coalesced at the last debate because it really started with me, the guy asked me a question and i think he is probably finished as a credible reporter. he was a disaster. it was such a horribly put question and so obviously. the republicans coalesced around each other. it was actually pretty beautiful when you think about it. all we want to do is be treated fairly. with me, i don't care that much. just give me a podium. what i would say is this. the networks have made a fortune because of me, not because of anybody else. they were saying that the last cycle they had 2,000,001,000,000 people in the networks didn't even want to broadcast because nobody watch.

nobody wanted to watch. now they have 25 million people, 24, 24 million people, 23 million people and 16 million people. give me a break. somebody said how did they get there and actually variety and hollywood reporter do report the stuff pretty well. much better than the political press. they said solely for one reason, it was trump. i'll take the credit. i think a wounded warriors and our veterans should be given some of the ed enormous profits being made on these debates, enormous profits. by the way anything beyond what they envision. cnn was going to get $2000 for 32nd ad. they ended up getting 250,000. they went from 2000 to $250,000 for a 32nd ad. they are making a portion and i think they should give some of the profits to the wounded warriors and the veterans. that's what i want. [inaudible] >> i'm giving them away. i'm giving the profits of my

book away to a lot of different organizations including the vet. >> who are you with? >> okay good. this is a new form of reporting. they used to come up with cameras. she came up with a cell form phone. speak fast. go ahead. [inaudible] >> i have been amazing with respect to the hiring of women. this building was built as the head person who was fantastic, by a woman and that was at a time when you didn't see that in the construction. i have many, many executives upstairs and in different buildings that i have that are women.

many at a proportion that is close to 50% or over 50% if i analyzed it. they get paid a lot of money and in many cases more than men doing the same job. women have always appreciated that about me. in terms of employment, i have really been stand out and i've been honored for doing so well with women. >> yes, go ahead. [inaudible] >> are you going to be voting? i don't think so so let's go. >> we don't have to worry about the french right now. go ahead. [inaudible] >> what jeb bush was saying at the last debate? i don't know but he didn't say it well. what is your question there, behind you? [inaudible] >> your with telemundo, go ahead. i like telemundo. i'm suing the other company for 500 million. go ahead.

because the country is doing so poorly. the country is doing so poorly. go ahead. [inaudible] that's good. they will have some demonstrations. oh good because it will get even higher ratings if they do that. i think it's fine. look, i think they should demonstrate. ratings will go even higher than they are going to be. it's going to be one of the highest rated shows ever and they are very excited about it. i have a great relationship, as you know from telemundo with the hispanics. you treated me very fairly. i won the pole recently in nevada and other polls. i think i got 37% in nevada and

leading everybody. i've got a great relationship with the hispanics. i have, working for me, thousands of hispanics. i've had tens of thousands of people over the years working for me. i am job machine. one of the things that does come out of every single pole and survey is that nobody, for the economy, nobody is even close. i am two, three, four, five times greater than anybody else. you almost say it's about the jobs, it's about the economy and how will anybody be trump in all fairness question i've had a great relationship with rutgers and jobs and with the hispanics. i protect i will win the hispanic vote. i think i will win the hispanic vote. i predict yes, i think i will get the nomination and i will win the white house. i think eating hillary clinton is going to be easy because her record is so bad. okay. go ahead. [inaudible]

>> that's the question i like. how am i preparing for my and out. i'm meeting with lorne michaels in a little while. after here we are going to sign, i have thousands people in line, but we are going to sign and later on this evening i'm meeting with lorne michaels and will start the whole thing. we'll pick this gets and we will have a fantastic show and we will all have a lot of fun. my jab impression? no i don't want to do that. i don't like to show a person sleeping at a podium. tom is asking, can jeb make a comeback? i think it will be very hard. not about money. i think i came up with the energy. we need tremendous energy because we need a person that has tremendous personal energy to get us back on track.

you can't do that when you don't have that. i think marco is highly overrated. highly overrated. he doesn't have it. all you have to do is look at his stance on things. jeb, he lacks the quality that you need. were talking about everybody in the world is ripping us off. you need a very strong person with strong energy. thank you very much folks, i'll take the job. but, by the way, ben carson does not have that energy. we need somebody with tremendous energy to straighten out the military, isis and our horrible trade deals, to terminate obamacare and come up with something better for far less money. you need someone with tremendous personal energy. we have a president that doesn't have energy. you think obama has energy question he has no energy. he's been a horrible president. we need somebody with great

personal energy so we can make great deals and do well in every other respect. certainly jeb bush does not have that in my opinion. i'm the guardian, oh, they treat me very nicely in scotland. go ahead. good, thank you. well we just went over that, honestly. it's only going to make it hotter. another question? ahead. [inaudible] >> state again. you will see what we are going to do. the whole thing with anchor babies, i turned out to be right. a person has a baby, lives in mexico or asia or many different

places, has a baby, walks across the baby and has the baby walks across the border and has the baby here and now were responsible for that child. i don't think so. they were right, i was right. they were wrong. if you wanted to do that in mexico or few wanted to do that in any other country where you have a baby in that country in that country has that person for 85 years, including all of the cost of that person, they would laugh you right out of the country. you would be laughed out of the country so fast. that turned out, i was a hundred% right. were going to take care of it and it will be done in a very humane way but we are going to bring back our country and have a wall and mexico is going to pay for the wall and you know why they're going to pay? and i have great relationship with mexico. phenomenal relationships with the mexican people. they buy apartments from me, they work for me by the

thousands. phenomenal relationships, but let me tell you, we lose so much money with mexico in terms of trade imbalance. $45 billion last year. plus we give mexico billions and billions of dollars. they will pay for the wall. it will be very interesting. you know what, people will come into this country but they're going to come in legally. go ahead. can you talk louder? nobody can hear you. i know a lot of european countries are going to build walls to stop immigration.

walls work. all you have to do is ask israel. walls work if it is properly constructed. not the walls that these politicians who are running our country who are a disgrace, all talk no action. they build a wall this big made drive a a car through. walls work. all you have to do is build a wall that works. go ahead. [inaudible] >> we need pop and circumstance. good question actually. our country has no spirit. our country doesn't feel good about itself. the primary reason is we have no victories. where have we had a victory? where have we had ah aq victoryd trade question where have we had a victory as an example, this horrible deal that was signed with iran where were giving

$150 billion and we lose everything. we lose everything. it's a laughing stock. worse deal, worst contract i've ever seen. we have no victories. i do write about it. we need some pomp and circumstance but we need spirit. we need a cheerleader. i thought, seven years ago when obama got elected, the one thing i thought that he would be a great cheerleader for the country. he's not. he's he's been a great divider for the country. he has been one of the great dividers of all time. i'm not saying dress. it has nothing to do with stress. it has everything to do with the fact that he is very divisive. he has been a great divider and that should not have happened. >> yes. [inaudible] >> i will go anywhere they want. i don't care too much about the debates. i'm the one who gets all the

nasty questions anyway. nobody else gets the really nasty questions. in a way maybe they're defending me, but i don't think the doing it for that reason. i think it's irrelevant. i think i like the debates and i've done well in the debates. every single pole set i won all the debates. i don't know if i did or not, but i certainly didn't do badly. even cnbc pole set i won the debate. i like the debates, i think they're good for me, but we have to be treated a little bit fairly. as an example, hillary clinton, no tough questions. why didn't they ask about bill. why didn't they ask about all the different things. no tough questions. now that was staged by the democrats. frankly, they did a very smart

thing in the way they staged it. while we are going to stage something properly also. as far as i'm concerned, i really don't care that much. i just want to debate. i think debating is a good thing and it's healthy and it gets everything into the open. but you don't want people who read a question, in my opinion his careers probably ruined or threatened. you can ask about anything you want. hillary had only softballs. all night long. it was like this, here hillary, hit this one over the park. yeah, go ahead. [inaudible] are you from russia? >> alright i think our relationship with russia will be very good. vladimir putin was on 60 minutes with me three weeks ago. they have one of the highest ratings they've had in a long time. i'm going to give him total credit. we will have a very good relationship. i think with russia. maybe we won't. but i believe we will have a very good relationship with russia. i believe i will have a very

good relationship with vladimir putin. go ahead. [inaudible] sounds okay to me. go ahead. [inaudible] lie think there are a lot of economic issues. we didn't talk about trade. we didn't talk about devaluations, right. we didn't talk about corporate inversions which by the way, none of the other candidates, they don't even know what it means. but we didn't talk about corporate inversions where companies are leaving our country, massive openings because they can't get their money back and because they get lower taxes elsewhere. they are leaving and taking their jobs elsewhere. the corporate inversions syndrome is a very important thing to talk about. these are all things that weren't talking about at the

debate. instead they talked about fantasy football. it was a big question, fantasy football. i'm saying saying what about corporate inversion. two and a half billion dollars, at least, i think it's probably twice that much, it's in other countries wanting to come back but because our system is so corrupt and terrible, they can't get the money back to invest in this country. they don't talk about corporate inversion at the debate, they talk about fantasy football. go ahead sarah. you have to talk louder now. i was against the war in iraq very early on. i'll give it to you. yes i have it upstairs. i don't know, i'll give it to you upstairs. while you know, you have to understand, i was a developer. a lot of people didn't care about my view in 2003 or 2004. there is a writers article taken from a magazine about my stance in 2004, i i believe in july 2004, and it talked about

my stance on how i felt about iraq. i felt very strongly about what will happen. you will destabilize the middle east and iran will take over iraq. that's exactly what's happening. they will take over the oil reserves which are among the largest in the world and in addition other bad things will happen. the other bad things or are ices. i said that in 2004 and that was an article that was taken from a magazine previous to that. i felt that way for a long time. [inaudible] >> that's the best question you've ever asked me. finally sarah you're asking me this great question. sarah, from cnn, terrific person. do i think that it is time for some of the other republicans in the race that are registering zero in a couple of cases, they have zero with an arrow pointing left which i assume is it a

mistake because that's less than zero, do i think it's time to have some of the other republican candidates drop out? yes. there are too many people. i don't want to get personal, but you can look at the poll numbers. if a person person has been campaigning for four or five months and they are at zero or one or 2%, they should get out. like, look at me, i go to florida and look at the numbers that just came out of florida. 37%. georgia, those are real numbers. these numbers that these people have, and i often ask myself, i asked asked mark yesterday, what are they doing? i happen to think it is very bad for their brand. i think walker did a good thing. i think the way walker saw it wasn't happening, it wasn't going to happen, and he just got out quickly. he was favored, don't forget. i know it was before trump was going to happen. he was favored for a period of time.

they thought he was going to win. what happened is he got out. i think the way he got out was great. i think he did a really smart thing for himself. frankly other people should get out. i would like to personally have more time to talk about the problems of the united states. more importantly, how to solve the problems, because we can solve the problems. that's great question. people should get out. yes. [inaudible] eva. they just said said one of the biggest applause lines, is when i talk about my daughter of anke. she was just at fortune magazine for something like woman of the year. just say hello, hello, okay. she is going to be very involved and malan is going to be very involved. they will coming out very soon. she is going to iowa.