will be 10 years from now? >> our industry is in the same kind of occurred in that the 1960's, when we moved from door-to-door interviewing to telephone interviewing. and we have some of the same complaints as we had been. wearing that same sort of transition that we are in now. a young ot exactly person anymore. i do not have a landline. so the idea that you can do a legitimate survey without a portion of icant cell phones is expansible. we are going to be at 50% very, very soon here in our samples. but then, ultimately, we have to figure out how to go online data collection and that has all kinds of challenges regarding randomness. you can have huge panels, but opt into the e to panel.

most of our data, i think, we some be collecting through version of online data have a lot but we of challenges to sort out between now and then. >> i like the comparison to the 1960's. this is really interesting, i think you guys so much. >> appreciat it. >> thank you. [applause] >> the "national journal" also political analyst charlie cook, who is editor and publisher of the "cook political report". [applause] >> thanks. well, that was the shortest introduction i have had in a while. thanks, marty. know, i love it! that is kind of awesome. anyway, i'm teasing.

thank you very much, marty and greg and all the great people at united technologies. i've had the chance to do a of events for them and they are great, great people to work for. i long for the day when i can a house with an elevator in my own helicopter, not in this lifetime -- but anyway, i can always wish. you are all observers -- i'm to do to figure out how this -- okay, anyway, we are experiment in of and i deprivation finished up at nbc in new york at 2:45 am this morning. i went back to my hotel and drafted my column for friday -- then friday's magazine and showered and shaved. 6 o'clock train 15 n, so i have had a

minute nap -- because i finished the column up while i was -- while i was on the train. so we will see if i have any coherence whatsoever, but anyway, this is a stream of consciousness. this is not a full polished i will be giving in a few weeks. for me talk about a couple things. one, we haven't for a couple what you are democrats is the equivalent of a perfect storm. for things coming together, the least important of all of them was the numerical had 21 e -- democrats only had republicans 15 -- but that was the least of the senate democrats problems. was much bigger -- the map, the geography. folks in this audience know that democrats had seven seats up in romney and republicans only

of an obama eeds states, but only a few of those democrats in romney states were states that romney carried by 14 points or more. so now we knew that i was going to be ugly. third is the turnout and we know that, increasingly, the turnout in presidential elections is broad. but in midterm elections, the open, t tends to be wider, more republican and of this is that, okay, maybe the older fifth in this we were growing older were 65 and a pretty democratic voting group. during the rew up great depression, franklin roosevelt and the new deal and all that, and they are gone now. for the most part. now are nd older is

more likely -- olders are likely to remember the better and under r carter reagan -- they are more likely to remember those 12 years than the years under franklin roosevelt. as they, because they vote often than everybody else, they drop off the least in terms of midterm elections. so there is this gap between what happens in the presidential elections and a midterm election. obviously, it does not mean that republicans will always do all midterm elections -- because that is not the case -- if enough bad things happen, of course republicans have a bad election. take 2006 between hurricane katrina and the war in iraq based on popular, of course have a bad -- being so unpopular, of course they can have a battier. the fourth and obvious one is the political environment.

number being ama's lousy -- but the four factors coming together. to a certain extent, we knew that republicans are going to have some pretty significant gains in the selection, but then, you know, how far is this going to go? to be honest, i thought this to be, you know, at bottom and four to five. right now, were sitting, it looks like there's a pretty good chance that the will get to eat eight and even - takes them cause it a while -- alaska is a slow count state. honestly, what happens in louisiana as well. you look at these states

and you say, okay, montana, south dakota, west virginia -- three democratic open seats that were kind of easy. everybody knew where those were going. then you had three more democratic seeds that were romney +14 se states -- alaska, arkansas, louisiana. is already tipped over -- and then, we know the four purple states that we were all watching -- my thought was, okay, for this to be a wave, republicans need to pretty much went six out of six or five out of six of

those romney 14 states. they need to win three out of four or four out of the purple states, which they have done in colorado and north carolina. the one that split the way was new hampshire. so that fits the test of a no question about it. the republicans, i cannot they e that, you know, could lose one in a wave year, but they cannot lose to. it turned out that they held onto all three. mitch mcconnell in kentucky ended up as a blowout. to be y knew it was going a blowout. some obviously, there is doubt, but it kind of blew itself out with a big lead later on. then you have the other two this was an -- and interesting -- robertson kansas, his numbers were awful. as long as that race was

was in deep s, he trouble. republicans when tried to -- ch and switch gears and tried to show him that he is going to vote with the democrats, that is when roberts came back in. in the end, roberts was able to win. last night, abc -- is always think they , i should always put the camera outside the studio -- they, earlier on, before any of the kansas but was counted, he was making argument that, look, clearly republicans are having really, really good night. it is so inconsistent for that good s to have of night and to drop in and comment in the state that ought to be theirs, kansas.

was thinking yeah, yeah, but these are just unique circumstances. out that axelrod was exactly right. last meeting -- a of thought -- okay, then georgia where, you know, we knew there was a possibility that someone could runoff, but i think most people assume there would be a runoff. win without due to a runoff, that was a big win. to three zero. so it is clearly a wave. but the question is, is it a tsunami? i heard a lot of people throw around the tsunami word, but is it a wave?- yes. the newt hink of

gingrich landslide, the ronald reagan landslide -- you know, the hallmark of these kind of races is that upsets occur. i mean, like real upsets. was going to be if the republicans win someplace where they are not supposed to win. virginia, with ed gillespie senator mark warner -- obviously, that is still being but that almost happened. mike mcfarland against al franken in minnesota -- to the that would've been okay, certifiable grade tsunami -- great tsunami, but some of this was expected. i think that when you look at the other races -- and

particularly in the house -- things were going along that we do not expect. i mean, we knew that have licans would like to the turnout advantage, but what we saw was a significant we just had -- there were just a heck of a lot who, for atic voters whatever reason, chose not to vote. upset with ey were president obama, whether democratic candidates and lack of the reason the turnout, whatever it was -- our house was looking at he council at night and said that we had some democratic ow because some -- huge problems in upstate new york only over the california losses or ocratic near losses in five or six states with the democratic really, really,

really low. on there g was going that was sort of within the democratic side and, obviously, there's more than that going than that going

on, but it was just a very -- in some places there were some very weak tickets. and, for example, how many of you live in maryland? a decent percentage. anybody here think that john delaney was going have a really tough race? i mean, i kind of her that there was a race going on and that he was having to spend more money than he expected. that thing was really, really, really close and he was behind for a good part of the evening. i think in maryland -- and that gets to the american governor's race, which, i think, a real surprise -- now, we knew that it was closing some. we knew that anthony brown was weak and thank god for the internet where we can change our ratings late. about four or five days ago, we moved it to tossup. but to be honest, that i think valerie hogan would actually win? no -- there was a general lack of enthusiasm. so i think that was maybe a third of it. thirds of it was that the lieutenant governor -- democratic nominee -- he was given exactly one thing to do as the democratic governor and that was the maryland healthcare website. badly got screwed up so that, you know, i think it is sort of those two things together. but, boy, that was really two things. virginia, maryland, up to something word was

happening and we are going to be sifting through, you know, mountains of election results and exit polls for the

mountains of election results and exit polls for the next couple of weeks. republicans, if it stays a seven -- which i don't think it will -- they will be at 52 seats. if they go to nine, it will go to 54. they are going to need every bit of that for holding on in 2016 -- where you will remember that there are, what, 24 -- where's my cheat sheet? this is where the sleep deprivation is kicking in. there are 21 republican seats up and only 15 -- i'm trying to read upside down here. under the statistic before a sleep deprived. 24 republican seats up and only -- and six of those republican seats are up in obama states. take ey need -- when you the middle number, let the republicans are at 53. have, potentially, marco rubio, ted cruz running country running for president. are forcing some votes to mitch mcconnell chagrin. to have some going some republicans who are in some pretty challenging situations for 2016. there's probably a limit to what they can sign up for. you know, kirk in illinois. is in a state where carried by 17 a

points. how considerate legislation will -- conservative legislation will he be willing to sign on to? new hampshire where obama won by six. won n in ohio where obama by three points-- there's kind of a limit to how far out there those folks are going to go. then you think, okay, the and the speaker has him with ut out for so many exotic and potentially members of his conference, you know, on the things that go to the fore that have the support of the majority. so stuff coming out of the necessity, t by

will be -- maybe, very conservative. over to the es senate where they may have three or more missing members. so that is another obstacle for republicans in terms of getting things through. then, how, you know, do we think that harry reid and going to, you know, play dead and let things rolled through. think so -- 't gosh, i don't think so. i'm an answer to assume that because republicans have got a majority -- and a majority by couple of seats -- that suddenly congress will start to become a productive entity. today, we have the president in a news conference there will in the meetings later week -- it will be interesting

to see what the president does do not expect -- the 1994 ght after democratic disaster and president clinton sort of basically said there is any way. i'm going a different direction. completely t of reconfigure the direction, his whole strategy, started moving towards the center. i am not going to hold my part h for this one and of it is that i do not think any president feels culpability, any responsibility whatsoever, for what has happened. think you think so, so for him to say, oh, i need to do things differently. i am not sure that is in the president's dna. you have that -- that sort of going on. will there be a shakeup? i think there will be sort of a moderate, moderately small shakeup in the white house, but again, i think the

is sident has people who he maybe too e with -- comfortable with and i don't is going to be pitching people at the door. you know, i think that the couple years will be really, really, really interesting. really interesting to see how much patience reid ah, has with harry and the democrats -- how much patience mitch mcconnell has and the ry reid democrats -- you know, we are hearing some people say no, no, schuller is on board. which, okay, okay -- i'm a little surprised, but okay. i do think that on the one

-- his rry reid is super packed raised a lot of a huge part of the financial advertising operation for democrats. you cannot say that he didn't good in that also think ut i that, though, senator reid in protecting, shielding members from casting tough votes, he may have done them a disservice. that mark pryor, that mary landrieu, that kay hagan could have used the opportunity to split the ticket with the president. that would've helped them out. my column for tuesday, yes, yesterday, wow -- a friend of mine reminded me of the late rom

democratic congressman mike from rick's home state -- something to the effect of, if into a 't want to run burning building, to become a fireman. and the thing is is that is of being a job congressman is taking tough votes. on the one hand, these democratic incumbents were not take the opportunity to some distance -- they were running at support levels nothing came up -- on the other hand, the policy was not happening. i mean, we have big problems facing this country and, let's it was not e us and voting. so there's some -- but it looks like democrats are going to stay with their. anyway, we are going to be sifting through this for a while. what the o figure out

heck happened because anybody who is one simple explanation for what happened -- i'm sorry, these things are sort of bigger and more complicated. it is going to take some time to do that. to take some d questions and i am also at this ipad ook i what i should do -- what should do is raffle this ipad they do not -- off, but they do not tell me that i could. i am not a technology person ipod, but , i have an let's see -- oh, this is nice. i would not want charlie cook's travel in sleep schedule. anyway, let's go down -- i am for a question here. i did see some interesting though, and some quotes -- well -- there are

microphones here and here while i am looking. line body was quoting a of his that i didn't get a chance to hear that was great. steve on gop nominating normal candidates. when you do not nominate nuts, you don't give squirrels anything to eat. wow, this he really say that? no wonder the tea party hates his guts. that was my favorite. go-ahead. >> the republicans did so well last night -- >> move 6 inches -- >> they did so well last night the governor races last night, they picked up illinois and maryland. the post that a couple days

ago that their surveys indicated that republicans were going to big of a number of state legislative seats. what is your view? do you think that this is more of a trend state level for republicans to be more historically an they have then? >> good question. each of these situations were different. we talked about maryland, than in massachusetts we have her screwing up her second and final statewide bid -- and in pennsylvania with goes to corbett, a show how -- you know, we can washington or anywhere -- we can watch senate races, house races, and dynamics in these races are largely, you know, there is some linkage across state lines. i think we get pretty good --

not perfect, obviously -- but pretty good at what is generally likely to happen. are so vernors races difficult because there are indigenous issues, local issues, and even if you know what they all are, you don't know how they weigh. a lot of times, a new governor some in and they will do tough, unpopular things. to the numbers going toilet and they get reelected. that happens a lot. but with corbett, they sort of went down and stay down. from d friends pennsylvania say, wow, it was the penn state thing. the penn state loyalist but him under a bus and the critics thought that he did not do enough, early enough. those of us -- how the

heck to figure out how much to weigh these things? i had an email from the republican legislative leaders subgroup -- it was a really, really good night -- but this is where that timing that i talked about comes in. because there are far more state legislative seats up and in the midterm p election cycle -- which is a title for republicans -- at a ally puts democrats disadvantage because they're good news, presidential years, not as much up. then when you think back to happened this past time horrific ublicans had nights in 2006, in 2008, republicans were in deep coming out of 2008. but if you are a party and never want to have a good

election, the best election end in a zero to because that leads into redistricting and republicans huge boost in 2010, able to do -- they were able to do to democrats with democrats had been doing to them for generations. to it usly, there is more than redistricting, but i a pattern re seeing where democrats has some real, problems in midterm elections as long as the most enthusiastic democratic voting groups are just sort of disinclined to vote in midterm elections. so it is a feast and famine type situation. i think democrats have a problem understating gubernatorial level, which has, obviously, huge congressional implications. it is going to take a few days before know exactly, but it is

safe to say that they had a id. that level, too. having a good catchers were g partisan jobs, in democratic dog catchers would've had a really bad night. never been who are washington school trip, you know, got sucked under. great question, thank you. >> the republican pollster talked about how hard it is to win the white house three times in a row. the atmosphere in 2016 given, on the one hand on the popularity, and other hand the advantages the have an s seem to presidential years? >> i think it was an excellent point. number one, you are absolutely right. we had, what, five times since the end of world war ii the party has had the

whitehouse for two consecutive and only one time to party with a third consecutive term. and guess what, present reagan's -- president reagan's numbers were very, very good. now, for 2016, you know, there are a couple things that we do not know. history tells us that republicans ought to win in question is the big whether they will have repaired their brand. some have they repaired of their problems with young voters, s, voters, self-described moderate voters, and to be honest, with issue, maybe -- maybe a little bit, but i would argue that some of those groups basically stayed home. it will be very interesting to watch, for example, to see