this is one hour. >> as our panelists get my cup, i will give a short interest. we are headed into the last panel of the dead. it is an exciting one. we thank her previous analysts. it was a really heavy topic and there is more that we hope to do on the topic of the fcca. our final topic is on the minds of every single person in this room. in less than one week, voters go to the polls to elect 1/3 of the senate, the entire house of representatives, 37 governors, and state legislators in all but four states. with the current mood of discontent across the country, many observers are predicting that the elections will result

in major changes to the composition of congress and statehouses from coast to coast. what results can we expect on election day? more importantly, what might happen after the election? well the president and congress come to agreement? will it be nonstop gridlock or confrontation for the next two years? our two panelists are uniquely suited to answer in these and other questions about the political landscape. they are both longtime political strategists who served as chairman of their prospective parties. r respective party. our moderator today is also a very experienced observer in washington. morton kondracke has been a journalist for nearly 50 years, th 45 of them in washington. he is currently executive editor and columnist for a walk on the paper and has previously written

for a variety of publications, including "the wall street journal" and the new republic. he's also a familiar presence on television, serving as the regular political commentator on the fox news channel and previously spending 16 years as one of the original amos on the mclaughlin group. please join me in welcoming mort and he will introduce the panel. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] well, i'm delighted to be here. and if you ever watched mclaughlin or fox news show that not only glad to be here, but i'd be glad to be anywhere where i can finish a sentence without being contradicted. today i get to play john maclachlan atually, but in the spirit of fox news of course i will make it fair and balanced. i will not spend a lot of time introducing our two panelists. but they are in fact two of the most able, articulate and able lyrical prose and the united states of america, especially in

washington. they've both been chairman of their respective party committees. they were simultaneously chairman of 2003, 22,005. and you could barely turn out a sunday morning talkshow tv without seeing them together. and you will get a full impressi of a washington is like from the two of them because they actually get along together. to go in alphabetical order, ed gillespie in 1994 was press secretary to soon-to-be house majority dick armey and helped write the contract with america. he worked on george w. bush's presidential camign in 2000. he was chairman of the republican national committee from 2,322,005, helping president bush get rid of the republicans keep control of the house and senate. he was counselor in the bush white house in 2007, to 2009. and he wrote a book called wendy

wright, campaign poltics and conservative policy and is now co-organizer with karl rove of american crossroads, which is allegedly spending 75 billion secret money to elect republicans or should i say democrats. he's also the chairman of the republican state leadership committee, which is trying to elect as many state legislatures and down ballot seniors and state so as to secure up strong future for the republican party. terry mcauliffe. if ed came up to the political route to the top of the message god, terry came through the finance row. back in 1980 and 81, he was the finance deputy for the democratic national committee. he was the finance chairman for

gephardt in 1998. he was national finance chairman for president clinton's reelection committee in 1996 he was chairman of dnc from 2000 went to 2005 and rws a total of $570 billion getting the democratic party out of debt for the first time. he was chairman of hillary clinton's 2008 presidential campaign. you ran for governor in 2009 and right now he's in virginia. right now he does not have an american cross counterpart, but he's told me he's doing his darndest to help elect democrats and he too ithe author of a book, but a party: my life among decrats, candidates, presidents, donors, act that is, alligators and other wild animals. anyway. >> was yours "the new york times" bestseller? >> the "washington post." >> there you go. [laughter]

>> for hardback nonfiction political. [laughter] see i told you, no styling here. i'm going to ask each of the panelists, starting with ed, what is going to happen next tuesday and why? please confine your answer to three minutes. we've got a lot of ground to cover. >> republicans will have a very big day. i'm afraid to get my hopes up and say just let them go. the fact is when you look at the dynamic, the congressional ballot averaging around plus seven right now. th's huge for republicans. the president is upside down on the job approval ratings. when you look around the country race by race, it's clear that we're going to win control of the house of representatives, north of 45, seats in the house. it included close in the senate, not likely to gain a majority in the senate. i'd say around seven or exceeds likely in the senate. perhaps just as importantly when it comes to the implications for

2012, probably about eight governorships. a lot of them among the great lake states, battleground states for the electoral college. and then he mentioned their leadership committee which hopes to elect house and senate candidates in the state legislatures. and i think we'll probably make it not doub-digit backing of state leat as well, which is important down the line because of the di cycle. those legislators cycle selected this year which are the i will have an effect on control of congress, n just this year, but for a decade that could affect 15 to 25 house seats for the next five cycles. so that's what's going to come. the wise because the american people believe this president and the democratic congress has overreached a lot of voters who will come out and vote republican this year, voted for barack obama in 2008, but they thought they were voting to change washington. they didn't think they were

voting to change america and their say in this administration and this congress try to change america to move us away from the free enterprise system to more government control of our economy and the resistance to it. they're resentful of the reckless spending, the government controlled health care taken of the student loan industry, trying to impose costs on energy and the tax regime and they reject and republicans to sh to check on that. >> first of all, thought to be here at the chamber of commerce. i'm just wondering which countries will pay my fee. china, saudi arabia. it is great to be back in the chamber here. i think of the senate is probably somewhere around six or seven feet. i think most people would agree it would be very hard for republicans to gain control. we're going to win west virginia and connecticut has been virtually almost impossible for the republicans to gain control of the united states senate.

patty murray's up, barbara boxer is up, very tight in nevada. very tight in pennsylvania. at a site that. colorado, everyday candidat back and forth. we could end up somewhere around republicans may be 47, maybe 48. >> unit a sickly agree -- >> forty-eight and 49. >> we couldwin kentucky. that could be a pickup for us in kentucky. friend paul versus jack can wake our candidate. i think in the house, the number is not 39. it's 43. there are four races in the republicans you can see they're not contesting for pickups we have. i would say 43 is a lot of seats. i think were looking somewhere anywhere from 35 to 45 seats. i think a month ago people were talking 50, 60, 70. that's gone. i think what she's seen

happen -- the key party has been helpful to the democrats obviously it is saved as siegenthaler, which was a very testy for us. harry reid is very competitive because sharon and the one that seats up there. the tea party has been helpful to us and a lot of people went out to vote and show their frustrations in the primaries and understand when a candidate wants to privatize social security, get rid of medicare as we know it. there's some very extreme views which is outside the mainstream of america. i think the democrats -- president obama has been out campaigning. tens of thousands of people have shown up inyou can see the enthm coming back as we get closer. you know, nothing the best closing argundependents really care. they think everybody in politics is corrupt, doesn't really matter. is that we can't allow them to come out and still is foreign money. so maybe it helped us a little bit. i would just cautio audience, ww

what the turnout numbers will be. this is a very unique collection. when i'd be shocked if we can't control e house by one or two seats? no. would i beurpred if we lost by five or 10? no. but i think over the next week's listings will crystallize and come together. the last thing will say, early coproducing the stories in the press today. early vote is up to the democrats. we're doing better in the states and people thought comparable to a six and they were in the house and senate. if you look at our numbers in colorado and other states, were ing better than the republicans on early though. so we'll see what happens. >> were you in the a chewing wood on the cusp of losing control of the congress? went from a democratic standpoint -- nancy pelosi is proud. she says repass health care. we pass a stimulus package. the white house as we inherited this terrible economic situation and were not back yet, but things are turning around. credit card reforms, student loan reforms.

why is the country angry? >> clearlyn the midterm and the first-term come you're always going to lose seats. i would occur at the point though we haven't put our best foot forward. if you bieve the reports of going out the doorthe bush administration. our economy was teetering on the world economy was teetering president obama got in. he did finance reforms. whatever you want to say about health care, he ran saying he would pass health care. i know why this is a shot. we've got to cover 38 million americans. by the democrats after they pass it as their top defeated to consummate time talking talking about it. i'll be honest, somewhat baffles me. if you can't defend it then you shouldn't have done it. president bush has a lot of great things that he's been able to accomplish. what did i say?

yeah, president obama. i'm trying to help eddie. [applause] there's some things i didn't agree with, t.a.r.p., i hate bailouts. and business. i've created thousands of jobs in my life. i hate to see bailouts. if you look at the numbers today of the t.a.r.p. in the stainless, maybe in a $14.5 trillion economy, for lose $50 billion to save millions and of jobs. but you've got to explain that to the public. we have not done the job. >> not a messaging problem. >> a sort of go hand in hand i would argue little bit. the substance has been great, but they haven't been able to talk about it. let's not forget everything over this is horrible. we 50 million people out of work. we took a 125,000 jobs to keep up with population growth. we e still in the midst of a horrible economy and make a long way to go. until you fix it, people be frustrated, angry and mad. >> ed, do you think obama is truly antibusiness or even more socialt? i mean, he didn't go for the public option on health care.

there's no card check back a pass. their attacks to the stimulus package and on and on. they passed a small business aid will and no local rule in the financial regulatory, so why does he have this reputation of being antibusiness? >> effective if you look at his agenda in the newsroom commies nstantly driving jobs and creators in our eonomy. he's constantly tryi to have the disions for millions of americans for the free-market system but the decisions of people at washington government and to stay here i where it's going to be. make a decision for your relative to your health insurance, so you're going to buy with your own money and here's the kind you're going to buy. and the fact is one of the reasons for terry's point, they have a messaging problem. the messages have proven to be false.

we now have the president after having spent a trillion dollars on the senate package, high times to hear going to shovel ready project. and unless a naysay tepieces now, there's no such thing as a shovel ready project. tonight he tells a trillion dollars later and $3.4 billion increase in the national debt. they said they were going to bannock o-oscar down. how many times did we hear that? if you like the insurance have, you can keep it. no, you can't. the fact is you're not going to ve the insurance guy. and the fact is for many private sector beneficiaries, they are going be moving into public health plans. there are disturbing to see it. they not only been the heart federal cost down. we know it will increase the deficit, but your premiums are going up because of all of the mandates, the cost of the mandates being spread to those worthy of privateurance. so they've got a real problem, not just in terms of the message. if god and in terms of policy and that's what their pain,

including the fact of the antibusiness point. investors and small business owners are goi to get hammered on january 1, 2011. they will be part of the largest tax increase in american history. that's going to cup on top of all mandates. it will come on top of allthe regulations. there's a regulatory on-site right now that's only going to get worse i suspect over the next two years. so yeah, he's antibusiness. when you're the president say profit, he often spits it out. it's like clearly it is an evil, evil things, people making a profit. and so, his entire administration -- >> i've never heard them use the word prophet. >> release may, he doesn't sing it. there's nobody better was ever been in the private sector creating jobs. >> let me ask you this. what would obama have had to do differently in order to get some republican support for the

stimulus package, for health care reform, financial regulatory reform and so on. was there every chance that he could have attracted republican vote and if so, how? >> i would say at that moment he came and went at a time when he met with republican leaders in congress to talk about stimulus. and they said we have some ideas would like to put on the table. in his response to them was i won. go pound sand. we'll take care of this. and now his responses you can sit in the back of the car. and the quiet back there. don't make me stop the cars. so it's pretty clear he has a pronounced disdain -- you know, what is working for president bush in the white house and the speeches would come across my desk, if the speechwriters had put in the announcer tried to put in the mouths of the mouth of the president of the united states a personal attack on the senate democratic leader or the democratic speaker of the house, as opposed to challenging the

policies to, you know, have a personal attack against a member of congress, the president would've stricken from the speech would've been pretty not toe way -- ir got to us couldn't imagine present bush handing in the speeches they make sure you mention bob shrum. he got the president of the united states talking about karl rove, beverly? is talking about a political operative on the other side of the aisle? is unbecoming of the oval office? that is where they are. it's clear they're not interested in hearing republican ideas are working across the aisle. maybe that will change when there's what i think a republican majority in the house. but frankly i doubt it. i think they're more likely to go to the congress? we don't need no stinking congress. we're going to regulate and do things to the epa and department of labor and plenty of hhs.

will enact policies that way. >> what is your read -- i mean, you're an old frie of bill clinton. clinton when he got defeated in 1994, famously famously triangulated and put himself between the republicans in the commerce and the democratic liberal. what is obama going to do? ould he triangulate? >> first of all, we've got to get through the upcoming elections. >> assume that at this rate. >> let's be clear. president obama is one of the nicest guys yoll ever meet him and that's why his personal pervade the ratings are so high. he came to washington, tried to read. from day one the republicans didn't want to work with him. from day one they said we're not going to do it. let's be clear on the environment. today. it's not what the republicans are gaining. it's not the brand of the republican party today is gaining populity. the democratic party is still higher than the republican

party. tom davis, former member of congress from northern virginia referred to republican platform in their message that came up with a plan. finally they were answered to wed go put out and how they lead america and everybody attacked it. so let's keep this in the framework. you have today people very frustrated. we are in power today. listen, president obama ran on an agenda change. he said i'm going to do with health care. we're spending 70% of our gdp are the closest country today is canada. the deficit is running in health care. something had to be done about health care. your business on wall street ar yet to do about the republican subculture with health care, retail financial rform. full repeal of the student loan reform. the student reform plan will reduce our deficit is $60 billion. students now can get a fixed

afforded. >> so if you were advising him, you say straightahead you don't have to compromise with the republicans now? >> i think president obama will give us credit for that. he's going to do what he thinks is right. we have elections. if you don't like it, happens on election day. i will be honest, and the environment erein come with a horrible economy facing today, republicans could've done a lot better. one of the biggest problems they had as they recruited candidates producing a lot of candidates in the last two weeks of the fallen through the cracks, one guy in oh to pay 15 million in taxes. you've got a guy in the four to 25th. good candidates out there were not the best quality candidates. so if you look at the upcoming elections, it is a frustrated, any electorate. when they try to tell people is this is a choice selection. publicans are against every single thing. here's a president obama and his choice. don't wake up the day after the

ection and got some of the christine o'donnell in the united states senate. i'm taing about the issues that we shouldn't be part of mainstream america. they face unemployment compensation is unconstitutial. their issues i don't think mainstream america are in and people are beginning to come out and say why is the enthusiasm gap getting closer? >> what is obama to go to turn this thing around. i mean, i don't know how many foreclosures are going to be in fragmented. the housing prices are continuing to go down. by one estimate, we were going to have to create 200,000 jobs a month for five years to get back to 5% unemployment. so that's not happening. nothing like that is happening. so how does obama turn this thing around? i mean, his popularity is sinking. you think that it's only because because -- because republicans are going to look so bad?

iveco turns it around? >> let's be clear. this exact opresident clinton was then-president reagan were both in worksheet. president reagan was in much worse shape than were president obama is today. and both president clinton, president reagan a landslide >> because they ve economic recoveries. we have got to invest in small business. we've got to nvest in manufacturing. republicans are against the manufacturing bill. we have to put more into green energy. i'm chairman of a huge green car company. this was a million dollars to build hybrids and electric vehicles. we are getting beaten by china, saudi arabia and south korea. we have come this one's going to elegies. or for that. we have to create jobs for children. republicans are against that. they found on the planet where they want to take america. it was not only criticized by their own party, and was

referred to as dog food. we've got a plan that is going to continue doing what he's doing and it takes time to turn this economy around. when president bush stopped talking, we were losing a hundred thousand jobs per month. we face now are creating jobs. not as much as we need, but at least we'v turned the curb and were moving in the right direction. >> obama says, and i heard terry say that the republicans have no answers for native americans problems, they're just going to do the same thing that president bush did and the republicans d before that. cut taxes for the rich and deregulate and all that stuff. and the fact is, it is a matter of fact per capita income, immediate income of america did not rise during the entire decade of 2,002,009. that's the bush era. i've seen one estimate where if you discount the consumption that we based on people taking second mortgages on their houses, refinancing their

houses, that consumption but it actually had a growth rate of over 1% a year during the bush years. so are they going to do the same thing? and why should we expect any different results in the next -- with republican congressmen we had. >> a couple things. i understand from 2001 to 2000 from your startingith then-president bush commended inheriting recession at the beginning of his term that was then, after some brief period of growth, the attacks of september 11 had a devastating effect on our economy and we had to reconfigure entire government to respond to that. and of course, we also had as a result of the tax relief the president passed, 52 months of uninterrupted job creation. that's longest run of job creation in american history. and the fact is in sevn, with the tax cuts becausef the economic growth and the few

unemployed, we have more revenue coming to the federal treasury ever in the history of the country as well. at the end of ithe housing crisis, which by the way big factor in the housing crisis which led to the economic crisis, financial sector crisis with the failure to reform fannie mae and freddie mac to the bush administration promoted that barney frank, president obama, then senator obama and others come across that rejected, would not enact it would not pass those reforms resultedn a severe economic downturn obviously especially in the financial markets. so if you look at thse policies and republicans have new ideas proposed to new policies, particarly into the response is doneness office. the tax relief are talking about and that is going to go on january 1, 2011. we'll see the economic growth resulted from it is a tax increase would go into effect. without actually spur economic

growth? i dot think so. >> let me stop you there. but what happened to the link that likes to think of it extended wer temporarily extended or go out of business? you seem to think they're going to be eliminated for everybody. >> what i knows that's what happens without any actio what the congress did, they had turned without. you wonder again in terms of being antibusiness, if you're is at usiness owner come here it ito moocher taxer will be a journey one, 2011 and you're supposed to hire somebody in the best? you've got to be kidding me. it was one of the most irresponsible things for congress to do. were going to leave town.we'll maybe williford at in the weather suosed to kick in. so i don't know what they're going to do. are they going to try to protect the child tax credit and some other things, but let the small business owners and investors in

terms of dividends and capital gains? i don't know if you are his peers that's part of the problem. >> terry, what would you guess congress is going to do? >> they've clearly got to come ba and get the budget resolve. with the budgetary issues to do for that sort of makes my point. he did not have one thing the republicans would do. it goes back to the age-old talk about taxes. bush makes a good job is tired eight years he created jobs. he created 27.2 under his new year's. i think president bush for two years of surplus and a $5.6 trillion surplus when he left office. i mean, we have a plan with president clinton. >> obama there are bush? >> i've got bush on y mind. the difference between bush and clinton is 22.7, but a significant difference between the two. they're going to have to do something because we have to get the budget done with.

if we lose the hoe, you know, don't know. nancy pelosi calling everybody up saying you have to come back to vote. i don't know. >> l. be interesting. >> the secretary's right, my instinct was to spring up curveba and your comments about president bush's term. in terms to the pledge of america, there's a lot of progrowth policies that they have put in to help small business owners to repeal and replace health care reform so we cannot small business risk pools, so that we cannot liability reforms that will take out a lot of frivolous spending in the health care system. he will keep some of the things in the health health care bill t they supported in the first place, but will repeal things driving up the cost of the things that are affecting job creation. and yeah, they would keep the tax relief in place.

>> republicans. >> if yocan come it would be hard to do. we try to get a permanent -- when we had control of the house and the senate in the white house and wasn't able to be done because you have the rules in the senate and the five-year tenure budgeting window. that said, yeah, we shouldn't be punishing job creators at the time were trying to create jobs. >> and the ultimate optimist, t i do worry when we had to compete globally with all these countriesmoving ahead on green and clean technologies and everything else, no matter what we say it's going to be very close in the house and senate. if we agree the senate probably is going to sathat democrat to . i don't know if you see largest legislatn in action the next two years for us to be competitive. i don't know how much is actually unfortunate for a nation that time we should be gearing up. i worry will be putting our bes foot forward globally. >> ed, let ask you about the

secret funny that you're hing to raise. is 75 million incorrect figure for american crossroads? >> first of all, to be together with the chamber again the last time i was together with the chamber was in a democratic national committee at. so it's good to be here in person. the fact is the figures, i'm fully supportive of americans. i think we've made up for some time on the conservative side of the political spectrum to counter what they have on the left and have had recycles. you know, we did not adapt to bipartisan campaign reform act on the right the way the left it. or the because the left promoted in there ready to go want to pass an array to post it. so i felt we needed somebody like american crossroads. i'm not actually on the board. i'm not a consultant. i have no formal affiliationthe. i give informal advice and i

encourage people to serve on the board. i do know the answer to the question. they're doing very, very well. they've done much, much better frankly. the pace quick to quite a bit after president obma and the democratic national committee attacks them because they got a list of e-mails and a lot of hits on the website, saying we haven't heard it until president obama mentioned it or the dnc mentned in the picked up about $20 million from the time they started to attack. so i'm all for it. i think it's a great thing. i chair the republican state leadership committee. we disclose their donors to the irs and we hope in ste house and senate races. but to the broader question about the secret money, you know, this is not new. in fact, this has been going on -- this is the third cycle now since mccain-feingold went into effect. as rnc chairman, he will remember, i oppose mccain-feingold and said this is

a mistake and challenged it in supreme court. it's going to diminish the roles and the parties and enhance the roles of the outside groups and is going to diminish transparency with the party doesn't comply with. >> before citizens united, didn't everybodywho kick didn't have to discle? >> we knew about george stein maus and move on.org, didn't we? >> how about the fact in 2000 come to you may remember a very nasty ad against george w. bush as governor. >> naacp. but we know it came from the naacp. >> we know the money came from american crossroads pearman of the money came from the u.s. chamber of commerce. it's all undisclosed. [inaudible] it's been going on for a number of cycles. what happened, to answer your question, on the conservative side there has been a mentality, well, we don't like those things. and we're not going to do that. and they've

gap. eitheray, just in terms of the spending in the psycho it was reported todayin the publication did analysis of all the spending and the left and the democrats have so far spent $180 million more than the right and the election cycle. so this is -- you know, this is all about president obama laid down the predicate that they lost to the house again. in big numbers in the senate and l these governorships and state legislative chamber ships because we got out. one, they're not going to get outspent. i've said all along will be posted. in this election cycle than we have been in pat publicans verss the leftnd democrats. but will still be outspent, our candidates. but they'll be close enough in the wind is so much utterback said $180 million for the leftps

won't overcome the wind in their face. but the fact is those are the rules. but the law of the land. >> republicans have been saying forever that were against campaign finance reform. it interferes with free spurge announced that. every sent out to be disclosed. so there was a bill that ch schumer and kristen holland >> the democrats editorial mmittee. okay -- >> it exempted the unions. >> some of that money is okay and some of its not. and the money that helps elect democrats and those that helps republicans is not. >> i ean, if it were an evening playing field and the units have to disclose much as corporations have to disclose, would you be in favor of a disclose facts? >> i would be in favor of going

back to what we had, which is the parties who were responsible and they were transparent and they paid a much bigger role on the election. i think that was healthier for the process. someone he was unhealthy for ths news and others want to tell the voters, here's what you need to know. we don't need any of those commercials if we don't need any of that panel. we'll tell you what you need to know about the issues and you can vote based on what we tell you. so no matter what it is -- the campaign-finance reformers will not stop until they take the capacity for candidates, particularly conservative candidates to indicate different views directly to voters to make them how to communicate through the filter that is by and large helpful to liberal democrat candidates. >> anybody out there all over america and everybody in the audience who's got a raise in their states knows this, as they

are being inundated with bad. 95% of them negative, beating up on the other candidate to the point where the public is sick of it. and i just wonder, you know, using the burger king donald's analogy, if everybody was -- a burger king was attacking mcdonald's and mcdonald's was attacking burger king, people would make hamburgers. so aren't you undermining respect for politicians and politics with this unstoppable negativism in these ads? >> that's a different question and campaign-finance reforms. that assumes that there were campaign-finance reforms set up outside groups, they wouldn't be running negative ads. and i suspect they would. so the question about negative ads -- nobody likes negative ads. but don't confuse attitudes or y are, i. believe geared towards policy in differences in terms of where

one candidate stands versus another as opposed to personal attacks and that kind of thing, they affect behavior. and they are going to be part of the process. and portray negative behavior is accepted if he voted for a tax increase that would impose a tax increase. or kerry would say they want to privatize social security. we want to defend social security. but the negative a. ..

into a political party it's disruptive and it creates friction. i would feel myself i am a party switcher, i was a democrat in the 1983 when i went to work for a democratic member of congress in florida. terry and i are in similar background, irish catholic northeast, was born in new rsey, 1961, the year john f. kennedy was sworn in as president. the almost stand democrat on my birth certificate but a lot people in 1984 looked up and said we the second ronald reagan makes more sense to me than walter mondale people i don't think i'm a democrat i think i'm republican and i came into the party with ireland and other conservatives, a lot of northeastern catholic voters and midwestern ethnic catholic voters can to the republican party and there was this talk

about the -- a lot was driven about not only economics of the cultural aspects. abortion was an issue and i remember the story but the party being taken over by all these people and the country club republicans versus the social conservatives and the was the big story and we won and we thir ross perot had run and some would argue may have resulted in former president bush 41 closing and president clinton winning but clearly had a big impact. a lot of the voters can into the republican party and the process -- -- of the short of a is the more people coming to a party e better and i'm glad they are coming into the party. they are concerned about what people have been voting republic and going to republican mtings for years are concerned about this debt is out of control, taxes are too high, there's too much regulation, intervention in the economy, come in.

>> attorneys to be ronald reagan had this line the evin command that is thou shalt not steal of another republican yet you have jim demint from south carolina in the senate who is running engaging in primaries against the sitting senators, sitting fellow republican senators and wants to purge the party like olympia snowe and maybe even bob corker for all i know who are too moderate. so that and i kn that there are a lot of people in the leadership who do not see jim demint too well so are you going to have a war within the republican conference? >> if senator demint -- he has said he would rather have a republican conference of 30 republicans who share his view the and 51 with 21 who don't. >> that is not enlarging the party. >> i understand. [laughter] >> keep going. you're doing great. >> that is his point of view.

i like jim demint and i know and respect him. i don't share the point of view. sometimes what it takes to get elected to the senate as a republican in texas is diferent than what it taketo get elected as a statewide in maine or oregon, and you know, we have to be competitive around the country. at the same time i don't think the party should abandon its principles of being for overtaxes and stronger national security and traditional values ani think we can do both somewhere in between there is a happy medium. >> so if the republicans to take over the house of representatives particularly if it's big, should nancy pelosi continue to be speaker of the -- the democratic leader or should somebody else take over who is more popular in the country? >> i was at the number of the democratic caucus up there but if the house or to go republican i think they're going to have as you mentioned a very tough civil war inside the party. they will get pushed to an

extreme. it's a way to create havoc. as the sea today it's not just the republican party. it's the democrats are still more popular. it's just e tea party and they are great because it's brought a lot of enthusiasm. i love to see people out there engaged in active discourse but it's taken some moderate republicans and the primary shoved them to the right and it's taken those on the right and clearly shoved them into outer space out your and some of these candidates have that's great ouof the mainstream of american and that is and what voters want. the independents don't like it. >> do we have a microphone somewhere please come anybody raise your hand. >> i see somebody right back there. stevan and tell us who you are. >> and with the national prejudices the nation. my question is regarding the agenda going forward particularly of the republican side if they do take control of

the house. we saw when they won in '94 they started enacting items with contractor america but then they ran out of steam and got the point tom delay said they are going to your market from the majority and lost heir way to read to you see any kind of ng-term strategy we see democrats over the years and decadesay national health care is the goal and so took them 60s on the years to get there but they got their. do you see republicans coming up with a formula saying we are going to force rollback in the obama administration they didn't and these things they did during the carter had fenestration and so on and so forth until they get back to where the republicans want to be. >> i do, and i don't argue with your assesent. thnature of politics we had the house for 12 years, and you know, by the time you get into the age, might come out and hear all of the low hanging fruit is

gone and it just becomes you do run out of gas is how you put it, run out f steam, that's the natural cycle of politics and then the pendulum starts to swing and the white house for eight years the same period. a lot of good things done. the balanced budget cited under president clinton didn't happen until the republicans got control of congress reading fact when democrats got control before the projections by the omb and cbo were as far as the eye could see. so i think the republicans will come in and they will reclaim the mantle of the fiscal discipline which we lost, and in 06 and 08 more voters in both of those election cycles and the democratic candidate for congress would be more likely to cut their taxes and cut spending. that's not the case today. that's because of what president obama and nncy pelosi and harry reid have done not only because what we've done that we have to demonstrate that when we get

control. the good news is if you look at new jersey or virginia where republican governors have governed as they said they would and have taken on public workers union's and public employee unions in new jersey and a balanced budget in virginia, doing the things they said they what i think republicans in congress and in the house in particular will do that. as for the longer term, i do think there is a true conflict of provisions to use the term that is shaping up here in a more clear way than we have seen in really some time. and our standard there on the republican side in 2012 will carry the message about the virtues of the space capitalism and why it is the greatest anti-poverty program, why that is the greatest advance, we to advance the human condition, and we will have the debate but until we of the standard bearer, the republicans in congress will be focused on responding to what the obama administration and

democratic congress has done in a tryingo get some of that le back. >> one thing the leedy and i would disagree on that is important, president clinton started with the had in 1993 with the deficit reduction act of 1993 was not one single republican voting for if you remember to the point of remember they went down and raved goodbye and she ended up losing the next election but if you talk to some of the former republican secretaries of the treasury, you talk to the economists, 90% startedin 1993 with the deficit reduction act which most republicans said the economy would go off a cliff, it did just the opposite so when we talk about president clinton and his surplus this started in 93 republicans cme in 93, beginning in '95 than we had some budget fights they wanted to shut down the part of education, they wanted to eliminate the department of energy which in the green infrar we are in today created was the dumbest thing we ever could have done and we shut the government down twice and was

the right thing to do. >> do you see there is a chance that the government shutdowns in the next two years given the fact the republicans want to cut spending and especially in health care implementation and the president doesn't want to do that? >> i was in the white house for president bush win the democratic congress was passing a budget tt was -- that he wouldn't sign and he wanted things done that they didn't want to enact, and the government shutdown was diverted as was the case after the first quarter out with president clinton, kind of an agreement out there that it is in no one's interest to shut down the federal government by at least agreeing to continue to resolutions and we ll work out on the site if we are increasing here some provisions composite provisions that can be carried on a continual resolution of both sides are amenable to it and which oversight says no we

are going to send you this even though you are going to view it or the president vetoed something that hadn't been agreed tohat is where the blame game begins but i think it's been kind and understanding this been in place since the gingrich clinton showdown and 95 that a continued resolution current levels until you can work out differences will be in place. >> let's hope that president obama what's john meter come wn the front steps of the air port. >> this will be the largest freshman class we've probably seen in 40 years. we've got 43 open seats, new members coming in, going to be some significant gains by the republicans, so no matter what this will be one of the largest class is we've seen in a long time. no matter what happens i don't think it is going to hpen. but the fear is going to be huge changes in the republican party.

there's those from the tiahrt background who are going to win who are going to demand no earmarks. they are going to demand we no longer have these and many mayors in the caucus who will stand for that is why don't think it will be a cohesive grou in order to accomplish that it will still control the united states economy. >> questions? >> in the back. yes. thomas niles with john deere. thanks for joining us, the distinguished members of the panel as well as the moderator. this would be a question for all three of you to get a week from today, wednesday, december 3rd, as we are getting a bit of reading the newspapers checking in withthe media what is the biggest surprise for the oh wow from the day before? >> the biggest surprise, well, i can't think it's going to be the

size of the republican sweep. i think it's going to be written by 40 seats. i don't think the republicans are going to take control of the senate, but i think they are going to gain a lot of seats in the house. 50 something. so i think that's going to is price. i think what really cocerns me is the gridlock that's going to happen the next two years especially when the debt commission reports. we have to get this det under control but that is another question. anyway, john, i mean and. >> i agree there will be a big magnitude from the republican win. one of the things that may not be surprised the is likely to be under reported is the diversity it's going to come into the republican party in this e election in terms of elected leaders, a hispanic center coming from florida i believe, mark a robie to -- arubio,

elected latino member of congress from washington state likely to be three african-americans elected to the u.s. house. we will have women governors and senatorsn the republican side and that will reflect the magnitude of the numbers itself, but it also is not likely to be widely reported by the media as i think that is a significant and positive development for the republican party going forward especially -- >> but do you see a big upset in the making? somebody that's going to win that's not expected to win or somebody that's going to lose that is expected to win? >> obviously senate majority leader is a very tight race. harry reid i think the big stories go obviously totally different as 43 seats if they even get close to that people will be shked republicans didn't have a big win. there's too much of a ridge on

the republican side the last month. they realized last week they have to bring that in a little bit. so i think the big surprise is the didn't win as many seats as they thought was possible. >> all right. another question. right here. we have five minutes left and i have to close with predictions. go ahead. [laughter] >> i have a question about gubernatorial and state legislature raises and when you see the impact on the redistricting. >> obviously it's the governor's races are so important because we are now into the years of the redistricting. any time you and in as you know we have big race is going on credit florida i think is of a couple of points, alex is the firsfemale governor of florida that would be a big win, we as a competitive race in texas i think we hold on to california so a lot of those states with

new members of congress are going to be coming from sitting here today but in an argumt is going to be good for us there are a lot of -- there is no question about it, it is a big deal as i say for the governors' races. i would say as a point of personal privilege and i think ed and i agree if you look at the nasty politics and so forth it's really gotten horrible out there. things are not getting done for the country felt to be giving them political have to move more of these non-partisan trawling of lines but i think the competition is god. i think the members of congress when 95% of the time they are not competitive anyre and that some of the problems we have in the system of government. >> in terms of the reasons in texas, texas is the biggest gain in the apportionment, i think

we're going to expand in the texas house as well and just in terms of the impact texas is a good example of the input controlled legislature and redistricting because when democrats controlled the texas legislature and there were 32 congressmen and congressional delegation to the breakdown was 17 democrats and 15 republicans. when republicans took control the redrew the lines of their republicans and 11 democrats comes what went from negative two to plus tenet just to give you a sense of the impact of redistricting on the congressional composition. when you look today the gains that are going to be made by the republicans that are likely to result in a control of the house a lot of them are long upper midwest and great lakes starting in new york maybe six or more house seats pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, wisconsin, indiana, a lot of seats and all those

states as well as florida i think, and that s a tossup governor's race right now and will have a big impact. there is a valid initiatives for the non-partisan redistricting in florida but just take those great lakes i think we are going to win the new york state senate so instead of having those freshmen who are elected in 2012 carville of their seats by the democratic legislature, democratic governor wi be able to protect those republican gains, ohio i think we are going to have a republican governor, state house, state senate, the scene in indiana and pennsylvania, the scene and was concentrating we are going to win the michigan state hous so those gains that we make it equal translate between 15 to 2 u.s. house seats either being protected or carved over the next cycles. ohio for exampleloses two seats, so having control of the

ohio statehouse many to win the seats to gain control of the four seats to gain control of the ohio state house. there will be important because you want to have from our perspective if you're going to draw in order to lose two seats to all somebody all of their seats i would rather see dennis kucinich and john boehner out of the seat. so those are very important elections and that is one of the kind of unwritten or underreported stories of the impact and have a big year like we are having in the year that ends in zero because it can result in the cycles -- >> we are out of time. >> the bad news for all of you in this room and i apologize, a week from today the 2012 presidential campaign begins. [laughter] >> i was went after st to briefly indicate 2009. a couple of questions sarah palin running? >> she's opened the door more than i have seen her recently and in the republican primary

three estimate does mitch daniels done? >> he has at best forward leaning. he's been a but considering it but i don't know. >> who do you think the republican nominee will be or do you have a hunch? >> i have no hunch and i think it is going to be a very big field and a lot of frustration and i think there will be good for us and it will be about seven or eight legitimate contenders. [laughter] >> does barack obama get challenged perhaps over afghanistan or something like that? >> no chance. >> no chance that hillary clinton will decide to run against them? okay, listen, thank you all very much and i just want you to observe civility in action. if you can do anything for the members of congress and governors and so on to stop them

from a building at one another and have you them talk like one another like these [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> "washington journal" is next. our live debate coverage continues at 7:00 p.m. eastern with the senate candidates and louisiana and at 8:00, with the candidates for >> we will talk with jennifer duffy of the cook political report about c. kenneth -- key senate races. then more about the races for governor with jessica taylor