twitter, facebook, and by phone. every campaign event would cover is on our website, c-span.org. ms. swain: welcome to c-span's "newsmakers" on this thanksgiving weekend when the real countdown to the iowa caucus begins. you will meet the chairs of the democratic and republican parties joining us from iowa. on the screen is jeff kaufmann, the iowa party chair. let me introduce you to the reporters who will be introducing him. sahil kapur and karen tumulty. mr. kapur: iweb voters have determined the candidate twice. why do believe that iowa should go first and selecting nominees, if they do not reflect the larger republican electorate? mr. kaufmann: fair question. four years ago, mitt romney was in a virtual tie with rick santorum, losing in one of the

closest elections in iowa. even given that, i do not think americans expect us to choose the nominee. if so, we would not need the other 49 contests. i think iowa exists so that every person has the credentials to run for president can do so, in an environment where you can literally walk the state, where the media environments are reasonable. i think iowa starts the process. ms. tumulty: you mentioned that mitt romney lost the caucus by a very narrow margin. on caucus night, he won the caucasus by a very narrow margin. it was not until a lot of recounting, i think something like one week later that you

determined that rick santorum won. what are you doing this time around to make sure that does not happen again? mr. kaufmann: we are very adamant, and very much have a conviction that i will not happen again. probably the most tangible thing we have done is enter into a partnership with the democratic party, and with microsoft. microsoft is going to provide a way for us to report our results. there will be internal checks and that reporting. it will be a very transparent process. in fact, the media and the public will see the results

coming in in real time. we will take the 1682 precincts, and be able to see those results come in. things will be much more accurate. obviously, we had a blue-ribbon panel that took a very hard look at all of our processes in the caucus. we implemented some of those reforms. i feel very, very confident that we will have a caucus as free of human beings as we can make it. ms. swain: let me ask, how is

social media, which is much bigger even than it was four years ago, changing the caucuses this year? mr. kaufmann: the ability for these candidates to reach everyone on multiple levels is freely breathtaking to see. when you talk to the candidates that are crisscrossing iowa right now, you can no longer talk to a commercial here are their, when you go to an event. the various modes of being able to interact with i once is breaking -- with iowans is breaking new boundaries. it makes it a little more difficult to track what you are doing, if it is moving you in the direction where you want to go. you have to take, i believe, the polling as a temporary snapshot in time. i think the more social media that we have, the more likely we are to be able to track those groups that in the past have not participated in the caucuses. obviously, you people are one of those groups. mr. kapur: i'm sure you have seen the new plan out this morning. the big news is ted cruz is surging into a tie with donald trump. i am wondering if you can tell us a little bit about where his strengths and weaknesses are in the state of iowa, and what do you think the iowa establishment would get behind him? mr. kaufmann: i will answer the latter question very specifically. i truly believe that, at this point, the polls are very transient and very fluid. i will be honest, i will not put

any money down on a bet as to who wins until we get well into december, probably, to be honest with you, january. things are so fluid. my opinion is the vast majority of iowans have not made up their mind yet. that makes everything all the more exciting. in terms of ted cruz, i would answer that as far as all of the candidates -- iowans have been doing this for a long time, they are very methodical in their decision-making process. there has not been a republican -- and i have talked to thousands of thousands -- they are literally keeping a tally. they have the pros and cons, they are meeting with the candidates. i really think that you'd candidate, in and of themselves, are going to be looked at in a very discerning way.

i believe that iowans understand there will be no perfect candidate. what we pick our nominee -- i have yet to be at an event, and i have been to hundreds, where i get anything but an absolute affirmation that that is what we want to do. i think any hesitation any republican will have about our nominee, and we will have some because none of the nominees are perfect, will pale in comparison from the republican perspective of having another eight years of obama, which is how we would characterize eight years of hillary clinton. ms. tumulty: the cliche is that

there are three tickets out of iowa. you don't have to win iowa, but if you don't finish in the top three, that is a sign you will not go anywhere out of iowa. this time around, the field is so big, and full of highly credentialed people -- senators, governors, ceos -- do you think the old rule applies, especially in an era when people have sources of outside money to tap on as well? mr. kaufmann: i think the premise of your question is correct. i believe the old adage does not fit this year. we have exactly what you said, a very wide field of credible candidates. i do not know what the magic number is in terms of the ticket out of iowa. in my opinion, there are more than three tickets out of iowa. that fulfills what iowa is supposed to do which is give

everybody a chance to be heard in environment where you do not have to be a multimillionaire, you do not have to be self funding yourself. i think we fulfill that role, i think we fulfill that role all the way back in 1976 when jimmy carter was able to claim a name for himself, and all the way through today. i believe that is the role of iowa. i think there are more than three tickets out of here. ms. tumulty: how many are there? mr. kaufmann: if i knew that, i would probably be writing a textbook on political science, instead of talking to you. i'm not trying to skirt the

question. i think it depends. if you are down in the lower tier right now, and in the end, you make a significant jump up, i think that can be construed as a win in iowa. i think expectations play such a huge component in the tickets in iowa. i think it remains to be seen. obviously second or third will be a ticket out of iowa. also, movement could be considered a ticket out of iowa. mr. kapur: i want to ask you about the role of tv ads. a group supporting jeb bush has spent millions of dollars and run spots in iowa. it does not seem to be working. why do you think that is? mr. kaufmann: i think iowa is still a retail politics state. there are certainly going to be a lot of commercials that will be run. there will be a lot of social

media that will be part of the campaign. iowa is still small enough and the iowa universe and voter is still demanding enough -- and i mean that in a positive way -- you have to look these candidates in the eye. i think being at all kinds of venues, where republicans are gathering, i still believe that long-term will be the ticket. there will be exceptions.

ultimately, anything else you do besides meeting voters can enhance. i think that is what iowans see as their role. it takes a lifetime for an individual iowan to make the decision that they do. it also takes a lot of dollars. a lot of these events are also fundraisers for other candidates. we take this very seriously in iowa. i think that is the reason why some things that may generally work in the general election may not work here. ms. tumulty: speaking of looking caucus-goers into the eye, what is your sense of what is on people's mind these days? it was originally assumed that this would be an economy election, but the attacks in paris seem to have changed the conversation, at least on the candidates' end. what are people thinking about?

mr. kaufmann: i have seen a decided shift since the terrorist attacks to form policy and terrorism. i have seen that changed not only in the questions being asked, which occurs at a lot of these venues, but also in terms of the stump speeches of the candidates. that does not meet the immigration questions or economy questions will not be important, but i think that how to deal with issues like syria, iran, i believe those will stay with us through february 1. the issues seem to be almost as fluid as people's opinions. let's face it. if you like one candidates view on the economy and another candidates view on foreign

policy, all of a sudden the iowa caucus-goers will go through the methodical analysis of who they will vote for. in some ways, it has made their job as voters more difficult. i think there is a real syria of what terrorism could do, not only to our country, but the state. i think there is a lot of trepidation about how a future democrat president might handle that. i think that could have a carryover effect into the general election. mr. kapur: i want to ask you about the cancellation of the brown and black forum. you had phrased this as an important step for outreach to african-american and hispanic voters. do you worry about the signal it sense that this got canceled? mr. kaufmann: i do not worry about the signal that it sense because that was going to be one

venue for outreach. the genesis of that is a friendship that wayne ford and i developed when we were in the legislator. we came together. there were some scheduling issues. there were issues in terms of candidates being able to be here for that particular of that. not one time did i hear one of our candidates say they did not want to discuss these issues. in fact, it is not only the right thing to do, but i think it is good politics.

they will be discussed in this primary. there will be other venues for doing that. this was one way of doing it. this was one venue. the candidates have not stopped, nor will they stop talking about these issues. they are talking about these issues right now. it was a chance to highlight the issues. we will find other ways to do that. ms. swain: one last question? ms. tumulty: special conservatives have been the key, or at least in recent cycles, to spring as a surprise at the end -- weather was mike huckabee, rick santorum. what is your sense of evangelical voters this time? are they likely to be more dispersed than they were in the past? mr. kaufmann: i think two comments. i don't believe they will be voting as a pack. we have several very strong evangelical groups in the state. those two groups -- three or four groups do not necessarily agree on everything. christian evangelicals are in

important part of our party, but certainly not the majority of our party. we also have niches for our business conservatives, for our libertarian party, for what is called the so-called establishment, although i think that word is often misused. i do not believe they will vote in a block. i believe that a successful candidate will have to reach out beyond that, and to independent voters as well. ms. swain: 20 seconds as we close here -- are you concerned that donald trump, if he is not your nominee, will melt an independent bid for the white house? mr. kaufmann: i am not. i believe donald trump and all of our candidates have in overriding concern of another eight years of barack obama, which is exactly what hillary clinton will be when she is coordinated. -- coronated. whether iowa goes on and are victor becomes the nominee, i have a great deal of confidence that people, and in this case, not just republicans but independence, will want a change.

ms. swain: i was republican party chair joining us from iowa, thank you for being our guest on "newsmakers" this week. mr. kaufmann: thanks for having me. ms. swain: on this thanksgiving weekend, we continue our conversation with the chairs of the parties in iowa. on your screen now is dr. angela mcguire. let me introduce again the reporters asking the questions. karen tumulty is with "the washington post," and sahil kapur is with "bloomberg politics." mr. kapur: the latest census figures shows that just 6% of iowans are nonwhite. why should i would continue to select the nominees of it does not reflect the demographic makeup of your party? ms. mcguire: first of all, thank you for having me today. i think what is happening here in iowa is we are becoming much more diverse all the time. we have actually increased, since 2000, 80% in our latino population. what we also do is take our diversity very seriously. we have the brown-black form to

talk about diversity issues. i think we are very cognizant of that. i think we are a little more diverse than people think. ms. tumulty: that was one of the secret weapons that barack obama had in 2008. people have this impression of iowa caucus-goers as being older and whiter. barack obama did manage to turn out a lot of young people and a more diverse population. if the caucus go with looked like they normally did, barack obama was said to come in third, not first. what is your sense of caucus-goers ability to organize and excite people?

ms. mcguire: all the campaigns are really doing a great job organizing throughout the state. you are exactly right. the caucus is different. you have to show up in a particular place at a particular time. it is february 1, so the weather might be bad. i think they are all trying to appeal to many different constituencies, like you talked about. some of the younger people, the diversity. what we appreciate as a party is when they appeal to those different people, that is party building for us. as they come to the caucus, that makes us better as a party, and helps us win in november. we are really happy that they are organizing as they are. i have seen enthusiasm like i have never seen in the state.

mr. kapur: what are your thoughts on the similarities and differences in terms of senator obama and 2008 and now senator sanders who is trying to pull off a similar uphill climb? to what extent do you see similarities and do you not see them? ms. mcguire: certainly, center said as has a lot of passionate followers here. he certainly has great events. as i travel around the state, i see a lot of his constituents

going to the caucus, and try to get others go to the caucus. it is hard to tell if it will be the same as president obama was. it was a very atypical caucus, if you will. it was really a unique caucus. every caucus has its unique flavor. i think this one will have its flavor. certainly, other candidates are having a lot of enthusiasm throughout the state. ms. tumulty: with hillary clinton, you can only imagine that she does not have terrific memory of iowa from 2008. she spent a time of money there. they went in very confident, and she came in third. what is your sense of the kind of operation that she is running now as compared with 2008? how is it different? has she figured out what her mistakes were then? ms. mcguire: i do not know if it is mistakes. she is running a very good campaign. one of the things she is doing is talking to people -- every day iowans, if you will -- and small gatherings. she used to do big gatherings. now she is doing much smaller gatherings. she is also putting it into her policies. i have seen several things were

her policies have come from talking to iowans. she has taught a college affordability, paid leave, some of the issues they are having. that is what iowans like. the caucus-goers really want to look the candidate in the eye and be able to talk about their issues. i think she has done that very well and translated it into

policies, and i think that will be very favorable for her. mr. kapur: the iowa polls have moved back and forth a bit. do you believe secretary clinton is currently the front runner in iowa? ms. mcguire: polls are today and not february 1. in the next two months, as you talk about the up-and-down we have had already, we will have more ups and downs. that is the nature of the caucus. i do not think you will know who is the winner until february 1 wendy caucus results come in. i think you will have changes, still, that will change the front runner. it is still anybody's game, i would say. ms. tumulty: what are the places where secretary clinton and senator sanders have sharpened their differences, especially since the attacks in paris? secretary clinton gave a hawkish, even more hawkish than the president, speech on security last week.

said is that is keys calling attention to her vote for the iraq war. what is your sense for -- again, in this post terrorist attack environment -- of what iowa democrats are thinking on these issues? ms. mcguire: we were fortunate to have a debate right after the terror of that. what i saw in that debate is three candidates who all three were very thoughtful about foreign policy, our security, and keeping america safe. they had absolutely concrete ideas about what they wanted to do. they had good vision of how to keep america safe -- slightly different visions, but still, nonetheless very thoughtful. the thing i was proud of is i think a lot of candidates from another party have really used this in a different way than that. i was proud that our candidates had good, long rage, inclusive plans on how to keep americans safe. mr. kapur: iowa democrats are known to have some populist inclinations. i'm wondering what you think

about -- if you think that secretary clinton's relationship with wall street affects iowans? ms. mcguire: what i hear from people is about college affordability, income inequality, paid leave, education, health care. those are really the issues i hear about. i think that these issues that i hear in the press are not the issues i hear from caucus-goers. i think they will vote on things that affect their pocketbook and

things they think about every day at the kitchen table. i think that is more indicative of what will happen in the caucuses than other issues. ms. tumulty: you had mentioned party building. what is your sense of the strategy for november. iowa is a swing state. you are up against history here, hanging onto the white house for a third term in a row. what do you need to do here? ms. mcguire: we all taken very seriously. caucuses are about party building. come out on caucus night. that is where, many times, we get local candidates, activists, new volunteers. it really is about party building. yes, it is presidential, but it is also about building for our party so that in november we have all of those people to turn out and turn out other people. this is a swing state. i'm feeling very good about our chances of turning a blue in november 2016. mr. kapur: what steps has the democratic party taken to make sure that the coalition, including minorities and young voters that turned out, turn out again in 2016?

can you talk a little bit about social media, new technologies, and so forth. ms. mcguire: absolutely. we are doing great things. we have a couple of things. microsoft is partnering with us of the republicans to have a new reporting system. it is very efficient and very fast. we are very excited about that. we have also tried to expand the caucuses. we have heard the grumbling of people, so we are trying to expand the caucus and have a satellite caucus, we call that. this would be like the nursing home where, february 1 can be really cold here, and they would not have to get out in the snow with their walkers or wheelchairs, we could have a satellite caucus right there. we are also, in the next couple

of weeks, going to announce a tele-caucus. we are also trying to have child care. young parents -- i have seven kids, so this is near and dear to me -- if both parents want to go to the caucus, they need to have childcare. ms. tumulty: i love this idea of the iowa caucus, there is an app for that. i was at a briefing, a wonderful briefing, describing the procedures. defining the caucuses from the beginning, would they look anything like this complicated procedure that you have? ms. mcguire: certainly, it has come from history, and was not one of those things developed to do this way. it was developed because it was done in history. what i will tell you that is great about caucuses is it is a little bit like being the heart of democracy. you can together with your neighbors, and talk about what

is important to you, what vision you want for the country. i have seen a lot of people on caucus night decide about the candidate. it is fluid, democracy, there's nothing like it. we take a very seriously. it is the most democracy you can get. mr. kapur: a new poll out this morning shows us the cisco tie -- a statistical tie between ted cruz and donald trump. who would you rather run next november? ms. mcguire: i will leave that to the republicans.

what has upset me is the hateful rhetoric and divisive rhetoric. i think all of the republicans are having that rhetoric. that is not something that i think iowans like. i will stay with the democrats, i am pretty proud of them. ms. tumulty: is there anything you were wishing you heard your candidates talking about more than they are? ms. mcguire: i do not think so. they have been really good about reaching iowans, especially local issues. we have an education veto that the governor did. they have been very good about including that in their talking points. i think they are really list