products necessary for us to have the oil. i was saying this constantly and consistently to whoever would listen. i said, keep the oil, keep the oil, keep the oil. don't let somebody else did it. [applause] if they had listened to me then, we would've had the economic benefits of the oil which i wanted to use to help take care of the wounded soldiers, and families of those who died in the war. [applause] in addition to which thousands of lives would have been saved. this proposal by its very nature would have left soldiers in place of our assets.

we would've had soldiers there guarding this a valuable supply of oil. in the old days when we won a war, to the victor belong the spoils. [applause] instead, all we got from iraq and our adventures in the middle east was death, destruction, and tremendous financial loss. but it's time to put the mistakes of the past behind us and chart a new course. [applause] >> if i become president, the era of nationbuilding will be brought to a very swift and decisive end. [applause]

thank you. a new approach which must be shared by both parties in america, by our allies overseas, and by our friends in the middle east. must be to halt the spread of radical islam. [applause] all actions should be oriented around this goal, and any country which shares this goal will be our ally. very important. some don't share this goal. we cannot always choose our friends, but we can never fail to recognize our enemies. [applause] as president i will call for an international conference focused on this goal.

we will work side-by-side with our friends in the middle east including our greatest ally, israel. [applause] we will partner with king abdullah of jordan, and the president of egypt, president sisi, and all others who recognize this ideology of death that must be extinguished. [applause] we will also work very closely with nato on this new mission. i had previously said that nato was obsolete because it failed to deal adequately with terrorism. since my comments they have changed their policy, and now have a new division focused on terror threats. very good. very, very good. i also believe that we could find common ground with russia in the fight against isis.

wouldn't that be a good thing? wouldn't that be a good thing? [applause] they, too, have much at stake in the outcome in syria, and have had their own battles with islam and terrorism, just as bad as ours. they have a big, big problem in russia with isis. my administration will aggressively pursue joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy isis. international cooperation to cut off their funding, expanded intelligence sharing, and cyber warfare to disrupt and disable their propaganda and recruiting. they recruiting is taking place right now, and they are setting records. it's got to be stopped. [applause] we cannot allow the internet to

be used as a recruiting tool, and for other purposes by our enemy, we must shut down their access to this form of communication and we must do it immediately. immediately. [applause] unlike hillary clinton who was risk of so many lives with her careless handling of sensitive information, my administration will not telegraph exactly military plans and what they are. [applause] and by the way, what's happened with her 33,000 e-mails is an absolute disgrace to the united states of america. [applause]

i've often said that the great general douglas macarthur of the great general george patton would be in a state of shock if they were alive today to see the way president obama and hillary clinton tried to recklessly announce their every move before it happens. like they did in iraq, so that the enemy can prepare and adapt. their enemy says thank you. the fight will not be limited to isis. we will decimate al-qaeda, and we will seek to starve funding. [applause] for iran backed hamas and hezbollah.

so important. [applause] we can use existing u.n. security council resolutions to apply new and even stronger sanctions. military, cyber, and financial warfare will all be necessary to dismantle islamic terrorism. but we must use ideological warfare as well. very important. and they use it on us better than we have ever even thought of using it on them, but that will change. just as we want -- thank you. just as we won the cold war in part by exposing the evils of communism and the virtues of free markets, so, too, must we take on the ideology of radical islam. while my opponent accepted millions of dollars in foundation donations from

countries where being gay is an offense punishable by prison or death, my administration will speak out against the oppression of women, gays, and people of different beliefs. [applause] our administration will be a friend to all moderate muslim reformers in the middle east, and will amplify their voices. this includes the jihad against the horrible practice of honor killings where women are murdered by their relatives are dressing, mary are acting in a way that violates fundamentalist teachings. over 1000 pakistani girls are estimated to be the victims of honor killings by the relatives each year. recently a prominent pakistani social media star was strangled to death by her brother on the

charge of dishonoring the family. in his confession a brother took pride in the murder and said girls are born to stay home and follow traditions. shockingly, this is a practice that has reached our own shores. on such cases, and many, many cases have happened, but won't involve an iraqi immigrant who was sentenced to 34 years in jail for running over his own daughter, claiming she had been too westernized. to defeat islamic terrorism we must also speak out forcefully against a hateful ideology that provides the breeding ground for violence and terrorism to grow, it's a breeding ground. it's a terrible, terrible breeding ground. a new immigration policy is needed immediately and as well. [applause]

that common thread linking the major islamic terrorist attacks that have recently occurred on our soil, 9/11, the fort hood shooting, the boston bombing, the san bernardino attack, the orlando attack can't is that they have been called immigrants or the children of immigrants. clearly, new screening procedures are needed to. [applause] on review by the u.s. senate immigration subcommittee has identified 380 foreign-born individuals charged with terrorism or terrorism related offenses. between 9/11 and 2014, and many more since then, and this year is a record for identification. it's gotten worse, far worse.

we also know that isis recruits refugees after their entrance into the country, as we've seen with the somali refugee population in minnesota. beyond terrorist as we've also seen in france, foreign populations have brought their anti-semitic attitudes with them. in cologne germany on new year's eve, we have seen the reports of sexual violence and assault far greater than anybody knows. pew polling shows that in many other countries from which we grow large number of immigrants, extreme views about religion such as the death penalty and for those who are involved, the death penalty is very, very common. if you don't have the faith that they demand you have it a top administration will establish a clear principle that will govern all decisions pertaining to immigration.

and we will be tough. we will be even extreme. [applause] we should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people. in the cold war, we had an ideological screening test. that time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today. i call it extreme vetting. i call it extreme, extreme vetting. our country has enough problems. we don't need more. these are problems like we have never had before. [applause]

in addition to scrape out all members of the sympathizers of terrorist groups we must also screen out any hostile attitude towards our country or its principles, or who believed sharia law should supplant american law. [applause] those who did not believe in our constitution or the support bigotry and hatred will not be admitted for immigration into our country. [applause] only those who we expect to flourish in our country and to embrace a tolerant american society should be issued visas.

safe to resume based on new circumstances or new procedures. the size of current immigration flows are too large to provide adequate screening. [applause] we have been about 100,000 permanent immigrants from the middle east every year. the size of current immigration flows are simply too large to

perform adequate screening. [applause] we admit about 100,000 permanent immigrants from the middle east every year. beyond that, we admit hundreds of thousands of temporary workers and visitors from the same regions. hundreds of thousands. if we don't control the numbers, we can perform adequate screening. there is no way it can take place. [applause] by contrast, my opponent wants to increase, which is unbelievable. new matter who you are or where you come from, once to increase by flow of syrian refugees 550% from what they are now. [boos] the united states subcommittee

on immigration estimates hillary clinton's plan would meet 526,000 refugees from all refugee sending nations. in her first term, assuming no cuts to other refugee programs. so it could get worse. additional to all other non-refugee immigration. unbelievable numbers. the subcommittee plan would impose a lifetime cost of $400 billion. when you include the cost of health care, welfare, housing and schooling and all other entitlement benefits excluded from the state department's policeman figures. think of this. $400 million.

in short, hillary clinton wants merkel.merica's angela and you know what a disaster this massive immigration has been to germany and the people of germany. crime has risen to levels people thought they would never see. it is a catastrophe. we have enough problems in our country. we don't need more. lastly, we will need to restore commonsense to our security procedures. another common feature of the past attacks that have occurred on our soil is that warning signs were totally ignored. fraud allijackers had over their visa applications. almost everyone of them. it said practically invisible

letters, "fraud." [laughter] and nobody saw it. the russians warned us about the boston bombers. attackers were even twice interviewed by the fbi. very sad. the female san bernardino statements, she was here on a fiance visa. which most people have never even heard of. from saudi arabia. and she wanted to support very openly jihad online. these are the people we are taking in. a neighbor saw suspicious behavior, bombs on the floor. and other things. [laughter] authorities,arn

because they said they did not want to be accused of racial profiling. dead and many more are gravely wounded. the shooter in orlando purportedly celebrated in his classroom after 9/11. he too was interviewed by the fbi. his father, a native of afghanistan, supported the oppressive taliban regime and expressed anti-american views very strongly. way, was just seen the behind hillary clinton with a big fat smile on his face all the way through her speech. he obviously liked what she had to say. it's called weakness. it's called stupidity.

then we had it. [applause] the shooter delivered a presentation to a remote mental health works in which he threw out one red flag after another. that we loveaimed death more than you love life. not good. these warning signs were ignored because political correctness has replaced common sense in our society. [applause] [chanting "trump"] mr. trump: thank you. that is why one of my first acts

as president will be to establish a commission on radical islam. which will include reformist voices in the muslim community, who will hopefully work with us. andant to build bridges erase divisions. the goal of the commission will be to identify and explain to the american public the core convictions and beliefs of radical islam, to identify the warning signs of radicalization, and to expose the networks in our society that support radicalization. this commission will be used to develop new protocols for local police officers, federal investigators, and immigration screeners. and while i'm at it, we should give a hand to our great police officers. [applause]

[chanting "trump"] mr. trump: thank you. we will also keep "common of a and place a renewed --keep open guantanamo bay and place a renewed emphasis-- [applause] we will also use drone strikes to seek high intelligence targets to dismantle their organizations. [applause] triedn combatants will be in military commissions. [applause] finally, we will pursue aggressive criminal or

immigration charges against anyone who lends material support to terrorism. there will be consequences for those people. there will be very serious consequences. similar to the effort to take down the mafia, this will be the understood mission of every federal investigator and prosecutor in the country. [applause] to accomplish a goal, you must state a mission. the support networks for radical islam will be removed one by one, viciously if necessary. viciously if necessary. [applause] immigration officers will also have their power is restored. [applause] they have been taken away. those that are guests in our

countries that are preaching hate will be asked to return home immediately. and if they don't do it, we will return them home. [applause] to make america safe again, we must work together again. our victory in the cold war relied on a bipartisan and international consensus. that is what we must have to defeat radical islamic terrorism. [applause] we couldn't defeat communism without acknowledging that communism exists, or explaining its horrible evils, we can't defeat radical islamic terrorism unless we do the exact same thing. we have to explain that it exists and explain the

difficulties. we have to have a leader that can do that, and we don't have that now. [applause] but this also means that we have to promote the exceptional virtues of her own way of life. country,n exceptional an exceptional way of life, but it's being trained on basic -- being read on by sick people. as newcomers come into our society, they will likewise have respect and do the same thing. pride in our institutions, our history, and our values should be taught by parents and allhers and impressed upon of those who come into our society and want to join it. [applause] assimilation is not an act of hostility, but an expression of

compassion. our system of government and american culture is the best in the world and will produce the best outcomes for all who adopted. -- who adopt it. [applause] [chanting "u.s.a."] mr. trump: thank you. this approach will not only make us safer, but bring us closer together as a country. renewing the spirit of americanism will help heal the divisions in our country, of which there are so many. we had a divider as president. we call him the great divider. it's the thing he does best. [applause] it will do so by emphasizing what we have in common, not what

pulls us apart. this is my pledge to the american people. as your president, i will be your single greatest champion. [applause] i will fight to ensure that every american is treated equally, protected equally, and honored equally. [applause] we will reject bigotry and hatred and depression in all of its many ugly forms -- and oppression in many of its ugly forms. as one american people. make --lay will we will we make america great again and safe again for everyone. thanks very much.

god bless you. [applause] [cheers] >> in response to the new test donald trump proposed for immigrants, that we heard from the speech senate democratic leader harry reid is saying that mr. trump should take a naturalization test himself. the nevada senator statement reads in part "since donald trump wants to impose new test on immigrants, he should take the one test every immigrant has to pass to become a u.s. citizen. he would almost certainly fail given his general ignorance and weak grasp of basic facts about american history, principles, and functioning of our government.' that purpose statement from senate majority leader harry reid. >> our c-span campaign 2016 boss is in chicago at the national conference of state legislatures, asking elected officials, what initials are most important to you, your district, or your state?

the northern part of louisiana, and probably the most important thing in our state is education by far. all of the things that were at the top of the bad list and about mother good list is because of education. we have to do a better job of starting in early childhood education and going forward. ryan, i'm fromis the u.s. virgin islands. the most important issue in my district right now i would say is having the u.s. grant the virgin islands the right to vote for president in presidential elections. currently we are allowed to vote in the republican nomination and democratic nomination, but we don't have the right to vote for president . historically more americans in combat have died per capita in the u.s. virgin islands for this country than any other state under our flag.

we think it's right to have this year is celebrated by allowing us to vote for president of the u.s. thank you. >> one of the most important issues to me is the economic issue and jobs. peopleblem of impoverished all over this country is that they don't have a voice networks. -- voice that works. ime union member and having a strong voice -- i am a union member and advocate having that strong voice at work. we need people to organize and have that voice. thank you. >> imb state rep from colorado springs, colorado. the most important issue to me right now is criminal justice and criminal justice reform. we have been working in colorado on modifications to incorporate restorative justice [captioning

performed by the national captioning institute, , a way for people to accept responsibility for what they did and repair the harm. >> good morning, my name is patrick jefferson and i have the good fortune of representing district 11 in louisiana. i am currently supporting hillary rodham clinton to become the 45th president of the united states of america. i believe secretary clinton has all the essentials necessary to lead us on a time like this. in addition to past experience, she provides an outlet to tackle the necessary evils of the day. and as a result, stronger we are better together. >> voices from the road, on c-span. >> the commission on presidential debates has released the polls it will use to decide the participants in september's first presidential

debate. candidates need to hit an average of 15% in polls conducted by abc washington post, cbs-new york times, and cnn opinion research, also fox news and nbc-wall street journal. the hill writes that hillary clinton and donald trump are assured of a slot, but as of today libertarian party nominee terry johnson averages 9%, and green party nominee joe stein sits at under 5%. that is below the 15% threshold. the first presidential debate is september 26 at hofstra university in hempstead, new york. candidates meet october 9 at washington university in st. louis. the last is october 19 at the university of nevada in las vegas. all of the debates will be live on c-span at 9:00 p.m. eastern each time. productions for the 2016 presidential elections and a talk on the campaign styles of

donald trump and hillary clinton. [applause] >> our two guests are not prognosticators but study the results of elections and the result of everything in between. on the in this year outsider, status quo politicians are having a hard time practicing politics as usual, everything -- usual, parroting predictable rhetoric, falling flat. the electorate is angry, and donald trump has changed the narrative. i do not necessarily for the better. rather than protect the unbreakable, ucla political scientist will explain the unpredictable. she will speak for 10-15 the american

university historian will explain his system that is correctly predicted every election since 1984. he perhaps might venture a guess about this wild ride we have been on for many months, billions of dollars later. if he throws up his arms and says it's all too crazy and anything could happen, we won't hold it against him. [laughter] then after he has spoken, a conversation for an extensive q&a with the audience. the choices for the presidency have been expanded. no more complaining about having to vote for the lesser of two evils. we not only have donald trump, hillary clinton, gary johnson, and joel stein, but as a yesterday, we cannot include: -- can now include evan that moment, chief house of the republican congress and

representing the republican never-trump movement. of me introduce a professor science at the university of california los angeles, focusing on campaigns, elections, and political advertising. she is co-author of "the logic of american politics." the latest book is "the gamble: choice in chance" and a book about the upcoming elections is called "shattered." [applause] >> thank you. i brought some show and tell items with me. if you have always wondered what it might be like to go be a ucla undergraduate, this will be your 10 minutes.

here, sosed to be thanks so much for the great introduction. we are 90 days out, and everyone wants to know what's going to happen. i'm going to talk about that in three ways. sorry, i am supposed to stay in the light. we are going to talk about the state of the nation's economy, and how that serves at the backdrop in front of which this great play that is the campaign takes place. and then we will talk about the candidates particularly because they all come with constraints. and the third is messaging. the way to think about messaging is leveraging the constraint these candidates bring with them. my system mixes these three things together and comes out with some sense at the end of

what you might expect to happen. that's where we going in the next couple minutes. we will start with the state of the nation's economy. thing,only remember one one thing only from this tenant inrse -- incumbent parties growing economies typically when presidential elections -- win presidential elections. the opposite is also true, challenging parties and chunking economies typically win presidential elections. like a think of this referendum on the incumbent party about the state of the nation's economy. not more personal pocketbook, whether you had a job later or had before, but i was the country doing? that's the relationship i like to talk about when i think about the stage for any presidential election. i think about the post new deal

era, the late 1940's. how does that look? here is a bit about that relationship. axis is the incumbent parties chair of the two-party election.e axis, i'm showing growth for the nation economy in terms of gdp change in the first six months of the election-year. how are we doing? are things growing or shrinking? as growth in the nations -- wrong button -- as growth in the nation' economy increasess, the incumbent party of the two-party vote goes up. there is a nice positive relationship. i totally get that a monkey flipping a coin would right about which of our two parties would win an election 50% of the time. if you want to impress me about

your protection, you have to do better than the monkey. this production will be right, not taking into account much else, about 75% of the time. it does a bit better than a monkey, and that's good. the next logical question, what about the first six months of this year? what does it tell us? the red dot right at 50%. in equilibrium, and that is an important phrase that i want to based on a minute -- the past several decades, this election is meant to be a squeaker. it is going to be close. since neither party is going to benefit from the state of nations economy, you can be barack obama -- you can't be barack obama saying republicans brought you global financial

change, time to change horses. you can't be ronald reagan saying it's morning in america and people will work more than ever before. so they are going to fight to clean this election. they will fight to frame your perception of the real economy or will fight to change the focus off the economy. since it doesn't help either one of them in any profound way they need to change the topic. the issue has to meet three criteria. view, you have to find an issue on which public opinion is lopsided. it does not do you any good to refocus the election off the nation's economy and onto something else on which the public is divided 50-50. that does not mean it for you.

you have to find a lopsided issue. the second thing, you have to be closer to most voters and your opponent. you have to help yourself. you have to know where you stand and know where public opinion is . it better be lopsided, and you better be on that side the third, this issue has to be for can be made to be important. you cannot colonize the men, okay? you can't run on something that no matter how much time or you can convince people. it has to be an issue that's topical. this is because of their constraints. what kind of constraints to i mean?

some are young and some are old, some experienced and inexperienced. they have taken positions and have records. .hey come with constraints the trick is to find those constraints and leverage them. kennedy is running against richard nixon. kennedy is young and inexperienced, and mix and has a lot of experience. kennedy turns election into an all-out war for the future of the free world. what does he tell us about the soviets? they are better at everything, better at science, they get to the moon first. their symphonies are more complicated, there aren't beautiful, their poetry meiser. -- their art more beautiful, thei poetryr nicer.

he says how we are going to be better, and the campaign turns on the new frontier. because he is young, and nixon is old. and what's worse, the election comes down to what kennedy calls the missile gap. it cannot exist, but not too many people knew that. and how was nixon constrained? he was part of the administration that has perpetuated the gap. he let us fall behind the soviets. there is nothing he can do to shake that constraint. that's the kind of thing up talking about. nixon leverages crime and fear and says we will restore law and order in a country reeling from vietnam. it is chaos, and you leverages that. in 1976 jimmy carter does the same thing. a washington outsider running against the most inside the beltway washington insider you

can find. there is nothing forward can do to shake that, -- nothing ford can do to shake that. he found the right constraint at the right time. that's what we're talking about. not as easy as it sounds. whove you very goldwater want to when talking about nuclear war with the soviets, saying that he went into the men's room of the kremlin. he said, disabuse americans of their fear of the word nuclear. 1954americans thought in they thought they would see world war iii in their lifetime, and most thought they would die in it. going around the country saying you are going to start world war iii, you have missed those criteria. he found a lopsided issue, but he's just on the wrong side.

[laughter] let's think about the messages donald trump and hillary clinton are trying to convince. both of these strategies were in place one year ago from now. it isn't the case that donald trump just thought about make america great again. the same thing with hillary clinton. make america great again, the key word is again, meaning it's not great now, but once was. when was a great? in the past? past? becausethe we were different then. how are we different? you can these still that equation how you want, but you can see how that's a nice list message. -- that is an isolationist message. you can see how hillary clinton's message counters that.

these are opposite ideas about the future of the country. here is a still image from one of donald trump's first campaign ads. he talked about the things we might be afraid of -- security, terrorism. ,hat donald trump has done ended in the republican primary, divide the elections by in group and outgroup attitudes based on race and ethnicity. i will show you some evidence. axis i have donald trump's share of the vote in republican contest in 2016. as donald trump's share goes up on average, the other candidates shares has to go down. on the x axis, i have two different measures of the in group outgroup consciousness. the first is a question asking

respondents, when respondents, whether or not they think it's lately that white people will lose jobs to minority. the more likely you are to say that, the more likely you are to vote for donald trump. how important it is you think for whites to come together as a group to change laws that are unfair to whites. we call this white group consciousness, and a positive relationship. i can show you 7-10 more graphs about all sorts of different groups. donald trump do not create these attitudes. these have been out there for a long time. he has chosen to prime them in a way that divides the electorate. he successfully did that in the primary and largely doing it now. hillary clinton is talking about stronger together, telling us and inclusive message. women, nonwhite people, children, everyone to come together. that's her message.

we will be better if we are all in it better than those of us who just live here in some previous time. hulu includes is successful leases voodoo the democratic coalition -- successfully expanding the democratic coalition. this is a huge change. this is not about hillary clinton being a woman. she did not win much against bernie sanders. that is about donald trump. that's about all college educated white women being offended by donald trump's machoism. college-educated white men, she has expanded the party in that way. she's losing them by seven points, but a big improvement over barack obama. -- this white men

story is more of a timeline story. these movements started between mccain and romney and are a bit more with trump. the weight within story is completely episodic. -- the white women story is completely episodic. who is going to be president? i am not in the business of paul aggregating. one of my colleagues at 3:20 updated their whole aggregating o 86% likely that hillary clinton wins the presidency. worth keeping in mind that's not her vote share, that's the probability. it's better than the chance that an nba basketball player makes the free-throw when he goes to the free-throw line. being the average nba player making a free-throw shot.

[applause] >> thank you. in american political historian teaches at american university and studies the american right and presidency. "the keys tolude the white house: a sure fire way to protecting the next president." 's prediction system predicted the outcomes of all u.s. presidential elections since 1984. ,.dies and gentlemen the am not going to predict victory of ellen mcmillan. have been collecting elections since 1984, but that's

another story. you may think it's a wonderful prestigious thing. tyco all around the role world protecting the outcomes of american presidential elections. but i have to tell you the only result of that is every four countrymake half of the really angry at me. so i hope i won't anger too many of you. i am not going to predict the outcome of this election. you are going to predict the outcome. 13 keys to thet white house? the was 13 keys are the world's only do-it-yourself election system. to have that privilege, because i'm a professor -- you have to answer a pop quiz first. it's a really easy one. how many of you have listened to, read, or watched any of the

punditry about this election? you all past the quiz, except you have to take the advice of david hume, the great british philosopher, when he talked about works of superstition. consign it to the flames. it's superstition. it's worthless. it's not based upon a theory of how american presidential elections really work. that's why you have to turn to a scientific system like the keys to the white house, which is actually based on a really simple theory. elections don't turn on debates, speeches, advertising, issues, party loyalty, or any of the things the media spends $1 billion a year covering. rather, elections are really simple, it's the joke, plumber theory of -- the joe the plumber theory of elections.

the guy had asked obama a lot of obnoxious questions in 2008? remember you hired joe the plumber to fix your pipes. and he breaks or pipes and fletcher basement. are you going to hire him again> of course not. but if he does a great job, you will consider hiring him again. the same thing with presidential elections. if the party holding the white house governs well enough, then the american people give them another four years. if they break the pipes to the country and flood its basement, then the public terms than out. them out. 13 keys to the white house is a system for demonstrating that theory, any decision rule for .roduction will stop

lynn talked about her students. i would like to say that i came having these keys by years of contemplation in the libraries. but if i told you that, to quote the late not so great richard nixon, that would be wrong. it's interesting how these things derive, entirely by you want but of course based at american university,. i discovered southern california when i spent a year at celtic. -- caltech. i'm in the world's leading authority in earthquake prediction. he said to me, you and i are going to collaborate. being such a brilliant foresight foci, i said, absolutely not.

they may care a lot about earthquakes in southern california, but i have to go back to the sea. -- go back to washington dc. i want to try a harder problem than earthquakes, predicting elections. he was a member of the soviet scientific delegation. in 1963me to washington and negotiated the most important treaty in history of the world. what was that treaty? the nuclear test ban treaty that stopped us from poisoning the atmosphere and mother's milk the earth. he said he became fascinated with politics. he said look, i live in the soviet union protecting it, it's offrget with your head. but you know a lot about american politics.

at this point, i thought the guy was kgb back when there was one. but i had secrets. -- had no secrets. so we put to the test my theory is that elections are primary referendum on the strength of the white house and -- this is 1981 by looking at every american presidential election from 1860-1980. we hadd to our surprise a model, the 13 keys that are simple true-false questions answered prior to an upcoming election, and were an answer of true always favors the election of the party in power. and we came up with a decision rule. if six or more of the keys are false, going against the party

in power, they lose. six strikes, and you are out. dead simple. you don't even have to take your shoes off to use the system, you can just count to six. what do you think academics do when they come up with a big discovery? publish it. in an academic journal, when we suspect at least 4-5 people to actually read it. we published the proceedings in the u.s. national academy of sciences. and thepeople read it, six person was the science reporter for the associated press. at washington university and open the newspaper and there is an couple which said, "odd discovers keys to the white

house." well, it wasn't felix and oscar, right? [laughter] and all of a sudden i'm in the paper. as i published my first production in the washingtonian magazine in april 1982. 2.5 years before the election. ofrevented the reelection ronald reagan, don't boo me. but here is your next pop quiz. what was the state of the economy in 1982? horrible, the worst recession since the great depression. i got a call in my office for a man with a; accent -- with a's heavy southern accent. atwater,his is lee we want you to come to the white

house. atwater, iuse me mr. think you have the wrong guy. he says no no, we know who you are. a braintragically of tumor, he was karl rove before there was a karl rove. and karl rove was a pale carbon copy of lee atwater. we talk about all kinds of history. at the end of the day, he looks me in the eye and we get to what he really wanted to know. he says professor lichtman, what would happen if ronald reagan did not run again in 1984? six keys and url. -- and you are out. take out ronald reagan, you will lose the incumbency key. you are now down 4. you will lose the incumbent

charisma key. george bush, charismatic? forget about it. that's five down. and you have a big party contest, you will lose that key. you go from three keys down in a short -- in a sure win to six keys down and a sure loss. lee atwater says, thank you so much professor lichtman, and the rest is history. the other call was in 1991 after i published my first book from the special assistant to bill clinton. me, based on your system, king george h w bush dashcam -- can h w bush be beaten? that he was asure loser, i sent a memo to clinton, and the rest was history. selection.n to the

2008, i called in 2005. i was notorious saying the democrats could nominate someone out of the phone book and win in. who had heard of barack obama back in the? why is this election so difficult to call? it turns on only one key, and it is a difficult key to cal which is why i want your helpl,. right now the democrats have five keys against them. get to your sheet. obviously the mandate key. related work late in the midterms. that's down. they lost the sitting president key. the hope policy change key, because it goes term by term. that's 3. they lose the incumbent party charisma key.

even hillary clinton says, i don't have that magic. that's four. and they lose the foreign-policy success key. i thought the iran nuclear treaty has been a big success m but it has not been sold to the american people. if it stays at five keys, the democrats win. if it goes to six, the democrats lose. its key number 2, the party contest key. this is such a difficult one to call. the really want on i thought surely it was a big contest. something really strange happened, that has never happened before in our country. 2 words, donald trump. donald trump is such a precedent shattering candidate.

he might be erasing the effect of the democratic contest. as ther words, as bitter contest between hillary clinton and bernie sanders happened to be, it's being erased by the fact that all clinton supporters and the vast majority of sanders supporters can agree on one thing, and one thing only, it would be a catastrophe to have donald trump as president, which he may have proved today with his remarks about what supporters of the second amendment could do. by the way, he said after she was elected, nothing about voting, because she's talking about supreme court justices.in the question and answer period, do democrats lose the contest key, for has donald trump erased the effect of the contest key? take a quick poll now, raise your hand.

how many do you think democrats lose the contest key? wow, the audience. you have now turned history, you, this group has turned history. , i thinkn old saying it's probably a curse, may you live in interesting times. no doubt we have that here. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. >> let me begin with lynn. there is a certain amount of certainty in both of you. and i like to talk about the wildcard. i don't think you can rule out an october surprise with the islamic state.

you case the americans don't control their political destiny. and xp or -- an obscure palestinian decided bobby kennedy would not be president and helped elect next -- elect nixon. the ayatollah khomeini helped elect ronald reagan. he had jimmy carter twisting in the wind. you can order that osama bin laden and saddam hussein in 2004. do we really control our political destiny? we get whipsawed by foreign events and far-off lands that we don't understand. more often than not, we get armed down. we get bogged down. i would like to separate the bobby kennedy example from the others.

it's different when someone eliminates a front runner. the second set, is it the occurrence of these events, or what the candidates running, what they do with those moments? that's interesting to think about. say foreignto thaty is rarely the thing decides modern presidential outcomes. what's my evidence for that? even during the vietnam war, if you read all the campaign stump speeches and political advertisements and news coverage, what you will learn is the majorer one of party candidates were making the war in vietnam they are predominant message.

someone is always trying to frame the state of economy for us. and the other person is always trying to shift off of the economy and onto an issue that needs those three criteria. reason foreign-policy is never a choice piece because of the october surprise. if you hang your whole campaign on smart diplomacy, was that the hillary clinton. and all of a sudden the world unravels, you are losing. avoid candidates try to owning the foreign-policy card because of that reason. tone trump has played the isis card prominently. would that not help them? unusuale thing that's -- well there are many things that are unusual [laughter]

this is why he is a good salesman. he has an uncanny ability to know how to sell his product. he reads the room so that when an event happens, whether it's in san bernardino or paris or dallas, he knows instantly how that works in the service of his argument. frame he's trying to cast. i don't want to say he has made this election about foreign policy. he has made this about in group outgroup attitudes, which are separated on race and ethnicity. the use foreign-policy moments only work in the service of his frame because of the ethnic makeup of these moments. that is why they work. it's about your fear.

he uses that. donald trumpd changed the narrative. has any that he effective way, and continues to do so. the link this is a permanent thing? republicans and democratic politicians would say, i respectfully disagree with my good friend and all that funny governance. now it's like, you are a scumbag. [laughter] can we recover from that? allen: obviously if donald trump loses, and you all think he's going to lose. so indeed we can. if he wins, i don't think we can recover from it.

you have to look at the history, and it's not a pretty one of --se who claim, imd answer "i am the answer." and it doesn't matter what i say, you have to believe me and trust in me as a person. i don't like to draw analogies to foreign nations. you have to reach out to find that analogy to donald trump. candidates, folks say here, wen't happen have checks and balances, we have a bureaucracy. that's simply wrong. it has not worked out that way for country after country around the world. isaac closure usually juju is

our country i think is on a dangerous precipice. he has already gone where no candidate has ever gone before. and not just once, twice, three times, but 10 times, 15-20 times. it doesn't matter how many times he has criticized gore caught up in lies or misstatements, it makes no difference whatsoever to donald trump. you can't shame him into changing. all these people that say he will pivot. they are whistling past the graveyard. donald trump is in this campaign when he has been throughout his career and life, essentially a con man. atng the same thing he did "trump university" which was not a university.

not all raw meat world the kings and horses of the republicans will change this board. lynn: i want to entertain this idea about that none of this matters, that the comments he's making. you're saying that he's not getting feedback, he's not changing. ,'ve heard a lot of people say i could say a trump-ism, "some people say." some people say that he is teflon and that he does not pay a price. i want you to think about where he stands in the polls and how much he has cratered in the last 10 days. he's not have one. -- he is not teflon. maybe there is a october surprise. i don't think it's right to say none of this is hitting him.

it's right to say he's not getting any feedback from that he's losing georgia and iowa and utah and arizona. he's not changing because of. >> given that he has a gigantic humiliation?ace he has so many rumblings and rumors about exit strategies. speechwriter's has an op-ed saying that mike pence should be an easy out the door. do you think he will last the distance? again, not putting you on the spot. [laughter] i have never met donald trump. my guess is that you don't get to be that kind of executive unless you have some resiliency.

can he take humiliation? i suspect that he can. doesn't mean he won't drop out? republicans say that, i think that's wishful thinking. >> if you agree that donald trump has no shame, it doesn't matter. it's that the feedback doesn't matter. it never changes him. h'es already set things up to ise it out, "the election rigged." that will be the narrative if he loses, and how do you disprove that? how do you prove the negative, the election wasn't rigged? he has already set himself up. im.doesn't matter to h

i'm not sure he really wants the job. he really spots -- she really wants the spotlight. this is a man that has walked away with bankruptcy six times. does he really want to be president of the united states, where you are actually held accountable for your decisions? i'm not sure he does. he's planning this exit strategy, not that is going to get out, but saying that if you loses, it was great. rigged. loses, it was have people on both aisles collect your questions. cratering-- lynn: tomorrow he will surge just because i said that. [laughter] the one with consistent thing

is that he drops a bombshell every day. today he hit the second amendment folks to stop hillary clinton from appointing judges on the supreme court. the assumption is that he meant stop her with a bullet. that was just today. is this a downward trajectory? lynn: it's possible. that is basely made on the pole aggregating. it was a different sports analogy. just in that week, so many polls have come out that have double-digit margins. it moved this production into an unprecedented range.

it's possible this is the plateau or goes back up. -- ree with alan that saying 47% of the american people will not vote for you, none of those moments are game changers. debates rarely change the outcome of elections. but what they do is change polls after debates. romney is able is because he lost. people supporting him after the 47%, moved into undecided. himnews was that this hurt that it was a game changer. literally 10 day later, i said to his campaign manager, you guys are brilliant. he had an amazing performance in.e obama phoned it

obama -- was that all the news was that romney had a great night. whoas all those people moved away from him into undecided that moved back to him after the first debate. there had been no change at all. i think move, but the outcome is solid. proved why lynn just predict elections by following the day-to-day events. three weeks ago, the gold standard was saying 55-45% trump. now it is heavily clinton. i want to talk about donald trump's comments about the second amendment people.

he tried to explain this away by saying, i was only saying we want to unify people to vote a certain way. that's not what he said. he was talking about after the election, when hillary clinton was already president, and was making supreme court appointments. how could we stop that? it had nothing to do with voting or unifying people for the vote. it was clearly a veiled invitation for second amendment people, those who love guns, to do something about it. why is it so dangerous? not because uri are going to shoot someone. but what has trump stirred up in this country? the neo-nazis, white supremacists, the ku klux klan. david duke has said, trump has made this my time. all those groups are encouraged by the trump campaign.

it does not strain credulity to think about how some of those groups might interpret what donald trump says. that's why it was so despicable and so dangerous. we have not seen anything remotely like this in our history. [applause] lynn: can i jump in? i think it's important to keep , donald trump is not creating these attitudes. they have existed in the u.s.. levels ofe high racial anxiety all the way to the early days of:. what donald trump has demonstrated is the payoff from priming this kind of explicit racial and ethnic messaging. he has demonstrated the payoff from doing that.

mitt romney and john mccain could have gone to that same explicit messaging. they were running against the first black man nominated in the u.s. they were in an environment where there would have been more of a payoff for going there. both of those candidates are on record saying that they were not willing to do that. i think it's worth pausing to is sayingt what allen is that donald trump is not a member of this class of professional politicians. whether it's honest work anyone, there is a set of norms politicians adhere to. donald trump is not of that. t is a businessman, and it's a

different set of norms. asot of what we see despicable is coming from that he is not of this group. we disparage politicians all the time-- let me just finish this one sentence. allen: i think that's way off. lynn: people disparage politicians all the time. i think this moment actually makes me sit back and say that professional politicians may be deserved slightly more respect than we have traditionally given them. allen: i cannot explain donald trump by saying that he's not a professional politician. we have had my professional politicians before run for office. in 1940blican nominee was exactly like donald trump, a businessman who had never run for office. and he ran an exemplary campaign. up against franklin

roosevelt and had no chance to win, but never appealed to the darker majors in america. dwight eisenhower was hardly a professional politician. he too ran an exemplary company. or disagreeagree with wendell wilkie or eisenhower or others from the political class, they believed they did not come remotely close to stirring up the emotions that donald trump has. i don't think donald trump is explicable at all my saying he's outside the political class. he is outside any reasonable class of human beings. [applause] >> or is a big stack of question. do you think the election is in any way affected by the defections of gop leaders away from trump? lynn: yeah, i do think that will have some impact. always on theing

last two weeks in october of shine couldf the have come off donald trump. >> given what we now know, do you think sanders would have a better chance against trump than clinton? allen: i can't answer that. i don't do that kind of thing. lynn: no, i don't think so. st: is there anything the republicans could have done to foil trump'se rise? lynn: the lack of coordination. buys alook at the ad year ago, they were all attacking each other. guess when they started attacking donald trump?

march. allen: i don't think there is anything that could have done to stop donald trump. the donald trump supporters were not listening to those people anyway. last august when everyone was dismissing donald trump, i was on the air saving you cannot dismiss him. he is saying what a substantial segment of the republican base wants to hear, but the other politicians are afraid to say. that's why he had so much appeal, and there's nothing that jeb bush of this world could do. why does the republican party continue to support trump, and do you think there is a limit? lynn: they take a pledge of support. and he becomes the nominee. what do you do?

i think plenty of people have held back, and a lot have said they won't vote for him. earlier,t happened things might have shaped up differently. i don't know how much differently. at the end of the day, there still has to be a party. contrary to what you might think , there is no master puppeteer killing people in the party what to do. -- telling people in the party what to do. we are back to tea party, none are ready evangelical, broken dysfunctional republican party. if he wins, i'm not sure what happens. [laughter] they have to be worried about the house and senate. allen: i can answer that question into words only, supreme court. want as many as three

supreme court nominations open, you would see much more massive defections. probably paul ryan mitch mcconnell. but where is the action today? washington is in such gridlock, the action is in the supreme court. reason thatonly they are still clinging to donald trump. becausee rise of trump his opponents have no marked accomplishments other than obstructionism? lynn: i don't think so. you had ted cruz in mind maybe when you ask that question. governorssenators and -- those are formidable candidates with a lot of little experience. -- lot of political experience. allen: there wasn't some shadow candidate ready to ride in. what you see is what you get.

in terms of favoring either candidate, you feel the entry of three other candidates shifts the balance? lynn: i think it's too early to tell. i don't have a good read on where that will go just yet. if their end up being more than two people in the first debate, that could be interesting. allen: that's unlikely. you have to get 15%. the lichtman rule is you take where the candidates are po lling, and slice it in half. the wasted vote syndrome. pollster,to tell a i'm going to vote for gary johnson. you get to the polling place and say, i love you gary johnson, but you can't win, so i'm been a vote for someone else.

without: both1992 clinton and bush. outpolling both clinton and bush. host: well he took a break. [laughter] allen: the only third-party candidate to be in the debates. host: what's your personal hope for the outcome of the elections? lynn: what? } [laughter] allen: i'm definitely all-in for trump. [laughter] lynn: oh man. personally as a political scientist writing a book about the election, my personal hope is that it continues to be interesting. [laughter] not what you want to know. i will tell you what i told my mother, who is 87 years old.

she had watched her first set of political conventions. she has not been. just it, that's how interesting these have been. she says, what do you think lynn ? i had the privilege and honor of hosting hillary clinton at ucla in 2014 when she spoke at a lecture on thought leadership. that was a career highlight for me. i said to my mother, wouldn't it be great i said that i got to interview the first woman to become president of the united states? i guess that's what i say i'd like to be able to tell that. allen: you should go into politics, lynn. [laughter] host: if one candidate is a manifestly incoherent unfit nutcase hated by 50 gop national security scientist, is that

overturn all the keys? [laughter] not!: no! it does i explained how trump affects the keys. this has never happened before, how an opposition candidate affected any of the keys. in this astute brilliant audience, you all explained to me that trump has negated the effects of what would have been a divisive and better democratic contest. perhaps something only donald trump could have done. done, or cann be anything be done to improve andctation, cooperation, compromise in congress? well, i don't want this to soundhokey, but it doesn't

start with the candidates not get nominated -- but it does tstrat with the candidates that get nominated. the problems with the chamber right now, the problem is staying. to change the culture, we have to change the people. [applause] if you've got good people that you think should be running for congress in your neighborhood and the district -- i know this sounds hokey, but you have to talk them to running for congress. allen: are you going to run? lynn: i'm not going to run. allen: oh come on. lynn: i will talk you into running. [laughter] lynn: we really have to change the set of people. as long as the republican party has this tea party-non-tea party divide it will be difficult to have brokers like ted kennedy and john mccain working across the aisle.

even people like dan quayle who had bipartisan bills. that is an error that we have lost. -- an era we have lost. allen: think of what politics have come to when we are yearning for dan quayle. [laughter] host: you're put you on the spot, did you expect for predict donald trump to win the gop nomination? allen: my system does not s.edict nomination sayingst i was on record that i thought donald trump was the most likely candidate to win the nomination. everybody thought i was nuts. somewhat similar to what asked, but how can you evaluate a campaign where one candidate keeps breaking the boundaries of

what is acceptable and were normal? lynn: great question. when i said in equilibrium, this is mentioned would be close. that's essentially what this question is asking. i take all those numbers since the new deal and look at what they mean, and can make a prediction for where that led -- in the sixl be months of this election year. that is assuming the equilibrium we are typically in. two hollyypically, qualified candidates fighting hard because they want to win. that's the equilibrium we are making to prediction in. if someone comes along and does not have any money, never runs a

tv ad, says all sorts of provocative things to get in the -- people always ask me when obama ran, isn't this different? maybe people would say this about this election because henry clinton is a woman, but it's so different about donald trump that they are not saying that. i always say no. when i try to do as a political scientist is generalized, tell an overarching story with data. i have discouraged you generalize to something we can use to make predictions. i want to say no, this time will not be different if we are in that equilibrium. but i don't think we are in this year, so it could be different. host: is there any possible impact of the trump candidacy?

-- positive impact of the trump candidacy? lynn: you are a democrat. allan: hillary clinton has to be incredibly lucky. she's running the worst campaign based upon what you birth said. is talking about trumps words rather than the underlying reasons why people support him and bernie sanders. lynn: some days i wake up and say, if your hillary clinton, you might think you are the luckiest person in the world. she might think, this guy is a loose cannon. i don't know whether she's lucky or unlucky. i have this project in the field called spotcheck, or i'm testing these ads in real-time. it's all on the web if you

google my name. whenactually works best is -- it was a republican super pac called "our principles pac" where women read quotes that donald trump said about women. it's worth checking out. they are offensive statements. this hurts donald trump more than anything else i have tested. that's why you are seeing her do it/ it's effectiv. host: what do second amendment people do in the face of a rigged election? [laughter] lynn: donald trump said recently when a reporter pushed him, what does he mean by rigged? they got to the point where he said people are voting multiple times. and he was asked, and he said 10 times.

allan: he said 15 times today. lynn: if you're not voting 10 times, you are not living up to civic expectations. allan: we looked into the question of whether people were voting multiple times or impersonating someone. your chances even in southern california of being hit by lightning are vastly higher than anyone impersonating someone or voting multiple times at the polls. do you know why it doesn't happen? three years of prison. is going to risk three years to cast one impersonating vote, when your chances of being caught are about 25%? that's about the percentage of people who recognize people who come to the polls. this is a complete red herring issue. in onourts have weighed

this, including the most conservative appeals court, the fifth circuit in louisiana. they have all come to the same conclusion, that these voter id laws are not justified by claims of fraud. donald trump is making this out out of whole cloth. host: polarization is such that polls will be, more elastic and volatile from here on out? lynn: i don't think so. inyou asked me this question 2008, i might have said yes. party identification is such an anchor. ,e had this long panels of data and we asked in december before the election, who are you going to vote for? usr 90% on both sides tell that are going to vote for the

person for their party. when we got back to them, they end up doing it. election, maybe it's 13% or more than that. i may have thought the stability was the story. this year makes me think, we have seen a lot of volatility in the last two weeks. it makes me think when you get an exceptional candidate this and get party elites announcing that candidate and endorsing the shake peopleou can off that party identification that is surprising. rallies,n i watch the orking about educated uneducated white men. lynn: noncollege educated. host: i don't see them at these rallies. i see middle-class republicans. lynn: i have been to a trump

rally. yeah, it's hard to say really. i can't say that the crowd felt much different to me from when i -- it wascruz event not that noticeably different. i thought they maybe have had in each order. --maybe have been an age older. dems get back the senate? will hillary clinton be a one term president? election is a sweeping, then we can expect coattails on the democratic candidate's win. she will bring in members of congress and members of the arty.e of her p[a

this is a well-established pattern. you bring people into congress in the presidential election year. then there this reversion, and your party loses. we call that surgeon decline. -- search and decline. we are likely to see a surge. the question, if she wins big, how they can that surge be? i expect it can be pretty big. host: is trump truly a president? was there anyone -- a precedent? was anyone like him in all of u.s. history? allan: he was an independent candidate. he did really well for an independent candidate, getting 13% of the vote. pop quiz, anyone know who i'm thinking okay? george wallace. close tollace was very

what donald trump is doing. citing aampaigned on lot of ethnic and racial issues. he campaigned as a complete outsider. one of his favorite targets was us pointy-headed professors that tell everyone what to do it, but can't even park our bicycles straight. [laughter] host: how will the relationship between you china and usb if clinton wins? .s. be ifen china and u clinton wins? lynn: that is a bit outside of our area, we would not want to say anything. allan: anyone that would dare to say what china would do when we run anyone -- would be wrong anyway. host: do you think gary johnson can get into the debates? lynn: the presidential debates

are different than the primaries. those are put on by television networks. the presidential debates are organized by the commission on presidential debates, which is bipartisan. so it has been in existence for a long time. there are rules about how you get in. highly negotiated atmospherics from both campaigns. 15% is the number you have to be polling. there are some other criteria i don't know off the top of my head. i think it's a tough road. allan: the other question, will donald trump debate? he has already set of the possibility of not debating. not only were the elections, but the debates were rigged.

said i'm to debate under conditions. i doubt if gary johnson will get into the debates. i'm not certain there will be debates. >> if i remember correctly, if he does not want to show up, that is fine but she gets the stage for however long, 90 minutes. so i think that is the role. i'm not sure about that. >> she would be remiss to she does not take advantage of the situation. >> she will. >> why has donald trump not been accused of treason for encouraging russia to hack democratic computers? why has he not been arrested for inciting the assassination of clinton? >> check out my article in the "new york daily news."

i did not say he committed treason, but i did say he was advocating a violation of federal law because he did not sickly say if you have the russians, if you have the hillary clinton e-mails come he said go find them. the only way you can find those assuming you can, is to hack into her private e-mail server. which is a violation of communications act. a violation of federal law punishable by five years in prison. he was breaking the law and another lawyer enough to say but certainly he was advocating a foreign power to break a federal law. the first candidate i know of to advocate a foreign power meddling in the election. ever since george washington as the netherlands french ambassador to get out of the country back in the 1790's, we

have stood staunchly against foreign going until -- meddling until this year. as far as what he said, i've given my commentary on what he said about the second amendment. if you had said that, you'd be in some interrogation room with secret service agents. >> what about hacking the elections? >> i think that is a scary prospect. people have hacked the defense department. i have to tell you, these voting machines are nowhere near as secure, probably not as secure as the dnc. the possibility of the russians hacking, while small, it is not zero. that is a frightening thought. federal officials are well aware of that and i'm not a computer expert, i don't know what precautions they're taking, they

are treating this as a homeland security issue. in treating the security as a -- of our elections as a chief security issue. putin will do whatever he wants to do and does not care what anyone thinks or says. though that sound familiar -- does that sound familiar? >> i may be the pollyanna of this group and i'm not willing to believe that the united states secret service changes its protocol on for a three principal because that person is a nominee. i'm not willing to believe that. >> it was sufficiently ambiguous. >> maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. if a private citizen had say that -- said that, they would have been in some jeopardy. remember come the federal government does not like rocketry to interfere with -- bureaucracy to interfere with a presidential candidate campaign. candidates have a lot of latitude that is not given to ordinary citizens.

>> i am puzzled by this. a lot of my women friends hate hillary clinton with my -- with a passion. how do you explain the extreme hatred of hillary clinton, does that matter for the election? >> this is one of my favorite questions. how do you explain the animus people feel for hilly clinton? -- hillary clinton? you were around in the 1990's. she is not an unbruised candidate. you have to admit that she had a history that is, there is a pattern to that is just somewhat troubling and i think that is why she is a little bit of a lightning rod but not always.

the other important point is that she had very high approval ratings when she was secretary of state. a lot of what you see now with the high unfavorables is brought out by the campaign. then he that was going to happen, everyone knows that when you get in a political contest, the partisanship kicks in. >> do you think misogyny is kicking in? >> i think there is a gender difference here for sir -- sure. when you watch this ad called quotes with the women reading the statement, i wrote about this, you can read the piece can see all the data, there are very different reactions to this ad by gender. women really hate donald trump a lot after they see this but they don't necessarily like helicopter anymore. it is not her ad.

men are not as moved to hate him i think that is a lot of it. the dislike of hillary is not german as much by gender. -- driven as much by gender. >> do you think donald trump has fundamentally or permanently changed the way politics and the media interact and i would add to that, the only beneficiaries of our broken political system or the media? the 5 billion this election will cost will go to the mainstream media. >> local television. that is not a bad thing. the local stations are going to make a lot of money. that is not a bad thing. if you like your local news, ok -- do i think he has changed the relationship?

i think so but on the way you think. from a reporter buddies, they were telling me that this thing about how the media has made donald trump, the pushes the button's because they desperately want to cover these candidates. that is their job. what does he do? he calls them. sitting around and your producer for the morning show on cnn and donald trump calls you up and you are talking about the thing and he says he has something to say about that. he makes himself so accessible, but my friend said you are doing a form like this couple months ago and he said, i will prove it to. i will get on my phone and we will call it donald trump and he will not answer but i guarantee before the panel is over, he will, back. -- call us back. he made himself so accessible and hillary clinton has not talked to reporters for months. that is attention for them. should they not cover donald trump uw's make himself accessible because clinton will not talk to them. it makes you think a little

differently about how much coverage he got. is that a real change going forward? if you want to own the new cycle, make yourself available. >> he has taken free media to extort very heights -- extraordinary heights. i want to because i'm expecting a train wreck. . watch it -- watch it for extraordinary -- expecting a train wreck. >> why people watch nascar. >> we are approaching the end. i would like to mention here that the final debate live on october the 19th whether or not donald trump is on stage. i think both of you for joining us tonight. -- thank both of you for joining us tonight. [applause] ♪

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> three years after a supreme court ruling overturned part of the voting rights act, courts across the country have struck down a number of state laws saying they discriminate against certain types of voters. c-span's issue spotlight looks at voting rights and the impact on the 2016 election.

we will feature part of the 2013 supreme court oral argument in shelby versus holder. members of congress look at whether to restore the voting rights act, plus a discussion on whether the voting rights act is necessary. here is what the presidential candidates have to say. >> all of this voter id, nowadays, a lot of places aren't going to have voter id. what does that mean? you just keep walking in and voting? >> what is happening is a sweeping effort to disempower and disenfranchise people of color, poor people, and young people from one end of our country to the other. >> watch our issues spotlight on voting rights saturday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span and c-span.org. at c-span.org, you can watch our public affairs and political

programming any time at your convenience on your desktop, laptop, or mobile device. go to our home page c-span.org and click on the video library search bar. speaker,he name of the the sponsor of a bill, or an event topic. click on the program you would like to watch or refine your search with our many tools. if you are looking for our most programs, our homepage has many current programs ready for your immediate viewing, such as today's "washington journal." c-span.org is a public service of your cable or satellite programs,provider. if you are a c-span watcher, check it out at the span.org. host: joining us now, reid wilson with "the hill." good morning. are there new battleground states emerging this cycle? guest: the clinton campaign is not calling them battleground states. they are calling them expansion

states. even if they don't win, they will force your republicans to play defense. a senior in chicago, clinton official was talking to democratic state legislators. they let me in the room for some reason. she mentioned a couple of states in particular. arizona and georgia are where the clinton campaign is starting to invest staff. no democrat has seriously competed there since bill clinton who won georgia in 1992 in arizona in 1996. that was because ross perot was on the ballot. now you have a very different type of candidate on the ballot, so the clinton campaign thinks they can expand in those states. they have hired senior staff in both places. they are starting to open offices. one of the things they are paying attention to is the fact that both states have competitive u.s. senate races. not as competitive in georgia, but in arizona senator john mccain faces a tough reelection fight.

he himself believes it is going to be tough reelection fight if donald trump ends up is an hour across -- out across -- albatross against republicans' necks. host: as far as the emerging states or even in battleground states, what is the machinery like on the ground for candidate clinton and donald trump? guest: the clinton machine is only beginning to be formed. these are states where democrats have not competed well at the statewide level. democrat who won in arizona was probably janet napolitano in 2006. in georgia, it has been a very long time. the democratic party structure has atrophied in a lot of these states. what the clinton campaign hopes to do is build a real organization that can win now or

force republicans to spend in some of the states. every dollar you spend in arizona is a dollar you are not spending in ohio. i possibly set of democrats for success in the long run. the trump campaign structure is nonexistent and a lot of the states, a lot of battleground states as well. the trump campaign is not built a traditional campaign. whether that is good or bad, we will find out in november. the fact is there's not much of a trump campaign in any of these states. the republican national committee has opened offices around the country. they are more organized and involved. they have staffers in a lot of key states. for the most part, summary like john mccain running for reelection is going to have to rely on his own campaign and state party which has its own kirkpatrick, the nominee, will get a

lot of help from the clintons and the democratic national committee. reid wilson is joining us from "the hill." him,u have questions for call the numbers on your screen. a lot of talk about the current status of relationship between the r.n.c. and key republicans and donald trump. do you see a parking of the way at all -- parting of the ways at all? guest: struggling to think of the moment in history like this. it is tough to figure it out. whether or not become campaign and the r.n.c. are seeing things i try, the republican national committee -- seeing eye to the republican national committee is a huge role in electing other republicans. they will play a large role in the paragraph state --