then angie drobnic holan on the truthfulness of the campaign promises made by hillary clinton and donald trump and how the truth and accuracy of the candidates' statements are measured. >> ladies and gentlemen, i want to make a major announcement today. i would like to promise and pledge to all of my voters and supporters and to all of the people of the united states that i will totally accept the results of this great and storic presidential election if i win. host: after donald trump's remark this week week on how he

would handle the results of the upcoming voting, we pose the question to you this friday morning. will you accept the results of the november election on the 8th? here are the numbers to call. support donald trump 202-748-8001. supporter of hillary clinton 748-8,000. a third party voter, 202-748-8002. d if you are undecided, call 202-748-8003. if not by phone weigh in by suppose media. c-span wj is our transit twithle handle. post a comment at facebook.com/c-span. this story continues to make front page news just about everywhere we're looking this morning. here's "the washington post" piece by phillip rucker and robert kosta. the headline says trumps' fusal o honor the outcome as well as

g.o.p. angst. a wave of anguish september the republican party with many g.o.p. leaders alarmed by donald trump's refusal to accept the outcome of the election and concluding it's too late to salvage his flailing campaign. as the republican nominee reeled from the performance in the debate on tuesday, senator and house members scrambled to protect their seats and preserve the g.o.p.'s congressional majorities against what republicans privately acknowledge could be a landslide victory for hillary clinton. with 19 days now until the election, the party is in a state of historic turmoil, writes the post, encapsulated by trump's extraordinarily -- extraordinary debate declaration he would leave the nation in suspense about whether he would recognize the results from an election he claimed would be rigged or stolen. the post goes on to say the immediate responses from republican officials were divergent and vague with no clear strategy on how to handle trump's threat.

the candidate was defiant and would not back away from his position telling that roaring crowd yesterday in ohio that he would accept the results, as we just heard, if i win. and reserving his right to legally challenge the results should he fall short. we should point out elsewhere in his speech mr. trump elaborated a little further on what he actually means by what he's been saying. here's a look. >> america's a constitutional republic with a system of laws. these laws are triggered in the case of fraud or in the event of a recount where it's needed. of course i would accept a clear election result, but i would also reserve my right to contest or file a legal challenge in the case of a questionable result. cheers and applause]

>> and always i will follow and abide by all of the rules and traditions of all of the many candidates who have come before me. always. bottom line, we're going to win. we're going to win. we're going to win so big. we're going to win so big. host: before we get to your calls, one more point in this post piece this season. for seasoned republicans who have watched trump warily, they write, the aftermath of wednesday's debate brought a feeling finality. the campaign is over, said steve the dt, a trump -- calling refusal to accept the election results disqualifying, he added the question is how close will clinton get to 400 electoral votes. she'll be north of 350 and trending towards 400 anti-trend line is taking place in red states likes georgia, texas, and arizona. we have dolores on the line from

portland, oregon. clinton supporter, thanks for getting up so early today. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would just like to say that, you know, i have a lot of conflict, but the truth of it all is that i will accept, you know, whatever the outcome of the vote is, whether hillary wins or lose even though, you know, i just see no merit in a donald trump presidency. and one other thought that comes to my mind is that, you know, everybody talks about, well, if donald lose about what all of his supporters who are not going to accept the nomination? well, these people have always, always been there. and they have always been who they are. this is nothing new. the media tries to say they are

left out and feel neglected. no, the truth of it all is that the nation is changing and that they can no longer will the -- weeled the kind of power and suppress the people the way they have been doing. but whether he wins or lose, or however, i will accept the nomination. host: hear from eric in white plains, maryland. trump supporter, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. and thank you for allowing me to speak. i will accept the results. i will accept it because i don't have any choice. what choice do i have? what choice does the american people have when the establishment place hillary clinton in power. remember, hillary clinton, the selection in the democratic party was never fair because they have already elected hillary clinton. that's why trump is saying it's

rigged. but the voting is not rigged because i still think that american people can vote. and also i have a message, this one for my black brothers and my hispanic brothers. remember, hillary clinton, the democrat, every election promise you everything, but what has really changed in the lives of my black brothers on this our first black president? for hispanic, what has already changed in your life? actually owe bama more hispanic than any other president. have a good day. host: undecided voter, from laurel, maryland, it is emerson. emerson is calling this morning. laurel, maryland. go ahead. caller: thank you for the opportunity. what i want to say is that i will definitely accept the election no matter who wins. saying right is

now, just give me the causing fact to think about hillary a little bit because i was having a trust issue as well with hillary, but the way trump is saying this thing that he won't accept the election, and i'm thinking about this, i'm a foreigner. i came from africa, west africa. what other nation like africa, like they'll be looking when they do their election, how will they learn from the united states if trump is saying everything is rigged? you are condemning the united states that have the best system i can think of in the world. it makes me just be afraid of him. host: thank you for the perspective. from your time in africa to hear. let me ask you, not much time left, within three weeks. undecided. how are you going to get there in terms of a position of who

ou're going to vote for? caller: i'm also waiting to hear more from hillary and trump. it ally if donald trump's say something like changing his mind on this election and just come out plain and said, you know what, i'm going to accept the election no matter how if hillary wins or i win, that's going to make me think twice. you know what? he's get into his right mind. without him saying all those things i guess i'm leaning more toward hillary. host: thank you for calling, emerson. to that last caller and anybody looking to hear more from the candidates, we'll have two more live events today. first at 4:00 today right here on c-span. donald trump. he'll hold a rally in johnstown, pennsylvania. and just about at the same time, the same hour, 4:30 p.m.,

hillary clinton will be in cleveland, ohio. that will be live, 4:30 p.m. on c-span2. you can watch both those events tonight in prime time on c-span as well. here's a little bit about what president obama had to say about donald trump and his approach to the results of the election. the president was in south florida yesterday. >> when last night at the debate trump becomes the first major party nominee in american history to suggest that he will losing the espite vote, and then says today that he will accept the results if he ns, that is not a joking matter. no, no. i want everybody to pay attention here. that is dangerous. because when you try to sew the seeds of -- sow the seeds of doubt in people's minds about

the legitimacy of elections, that undermines our democratcy. then you're doing the work of our adversaries for them. because our democracy depends on people knowing that their vote matters. that those who occupy the seats of power were chosen by the people. even when your preferred candidate loses, even when you are the one who is running and you lose, you've got to see the bigger picture and say, that here in america we believe in democracy and we accept the will of the people. host: here's a little bit from the rnc chairman also in this post piece. he intended the trump and party would stand by the results unless the margin is small enough to warrant a recount or legal challenges. he said trump is merely

preserving flexibility in the event of a contested result. all he's saying is, look, i'm not going to for go my right in a recount. we accept the results as long as we're not talking about a few votes where it matters. i know him. i know where his head's at. i promise you that's all this is. bob calling from clifton heights, pa, a trump supporter. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what do you think about all this, sir? caller: i love the way c-span is throwing the articles about hillary how she's going to win. that's great. good move there, guys. listen, the debate the other night when hillary said to -- very smugly looked at trump and said the night she was monitoring the attack and killing of bin laden and where were you? you were doing your "apprentice"

show. and he should have said to her, well, where were you the night of benghazi? and where was president clinton? those questions have never been answered. i'm wondering why hasn't the trump campaign picked up on that? host: why do you think? ller: i have no idea because -- i'll leave it to you guys. you guys seem to be doing a good job for hillary. host: bob, you still there? bob, you still there? bob's gone. wanted to get a sense why he thinks we're doing a good job for hillary clinton. linda from oklahoma. you are a clinton supporter. tell us about the results of the election. are you one that's going to accept them. no matter what? caller: yes, will i accept them. -- will i ack then. i want to encourage people to

vote. if you think hillary will lynn wynn by a landslide, still vote. if people stay home from the polls we could get a surprise. host: what do you make about this whole part of the discussion about accepting the results from wednesday's debate to yesterday's remarks? put it in perspective for the broader campaign, linda. caller: well, i believe in the united states of america. and i believe that for the greatest part that we are honest people. and we need to cast our votes and take us where we think that it will do the best good for all the people. i will accept them. host: maryland marilyn in engelwood,town tfpblet you're a trump supporter. you ready to accept the results? caller: i'll accept the results because there's nothing can i do. here's two things i wanted to

bring up. umber one, al gore in 2000 challenged bush vote. and it went all the way to the court. so trump is not the first person to do this. it's been going on back and forth all through history. number two, is that i heard the speech yesterday, i heard him say that i thought oh, boy, here we go. one sentence, one word. that's it. because he then proceeded to go on and started to laugh and said seriously, folks, then he explained his position. but they don't want to post -- they don't want to talk about that. three words, and i knew this is what was going to be on tv from here to california. and i was right. but we need to look deeper sometimes and not just pick and choose a word here and a sentence here and say actually what these people are saying underneath.

host: marilyn, thank you for your points this morning. in the "post" a little bit more to the point that our last caller just made. other trump supporters took a different interpretation of what's going on. keith kellogg, a retired army lieutenant general accused the media of splitting hairs and insisting the trump was not threatening democratic norms. giuliani argue the any republican would be stupid to accept the integrity of the results before they are known. suppose she wins pennsylvania by 50 votes, speck lated democrats would steal a lot more than 50 votes in philadelphia. i guarantee you of that. i'll tell you how they'll do t they'll bust people in who will vote for dead people. names, four, five, six times or have people in philadelphia paid to vote three, four, five times. that from rudy giuliani in the post today. we have selena on the line from lake city, florida, clinton supporter.

hi. caller: how are you? host: doing fine. how are you? caller: good. as an immigrant m from brazil 26 years ago and. i have a daughter in medical school. i have a son is doing great things for american. we all pay taxes. we all contribute for the contributions. and been paying taxes for the last 26 years they'll put me in jail. how come he get away with this? and look, in the debate the her day, everyone's talking, how can we trust somebody like him? look at his temper. it's bad. we don't need that. americans are better than this. please, please, look at them.

imagine if he have the power to, you know, go to the middle east or other countries, he'll go and kill people. host: thank you. donna calling from new york. third party caller. what's your perspective on this? will you accept the results of the election, what do you make of this whole part of the debate right now? caller: you have to put it into historical context. one real quick primus of people would be the movie, "american blackout." that looked at what happened in florida and other various techniques that were used to manipulate the vote. you have an unusual alignment of political forces in this election with clinton. both republican and democratic elites are there. you have two or multipolicity, but two main trends of vote manipulation, one followed by the democrats, another by the

republicans. for example the republicans tend to try to suppress the vote in urban areas among black voters and minority voters, ethnic voters, the democrats have other methods that they use to manipulate the vote, and all of those now are available to the clinton campaign against trump. for him to raise the question for people to dismiss it out of hand is absurd. it's historical. that's my context for that. host: anything else, don? caller: yeah. i think what has to happen -- remember john kerry back in 2004, telling supporters that we're not going to allow bush to steal the election again. i have 98 lawyers ready to go fight and all that. then he conceded before sun rise the next day when it was clear later that ohio had probably been stolen. it's really hard to find a democratic politician who has been in office or in practice

since the 2000 election that didn't take a strong public position on the -- assert the fact that this does happen in our politics and it happened to them. it's really hypocritical for them to act this way. host: before we let you go. third party, who are you looking at this year? caller: jill stein without a doubt. host: how come? caller: i probably would prefer ideologically the party for socialism and liberation candidate because she's a community organizer. and monica moya for the same reason. jill stein has been at this for a good while. a good command of the facts. a green party platform for the economy to help working people. called the green new deal. i think that's what's needed. to give voice to that with my vote i'm very happy to do. host: thanks for calling. more of your calls in a moment. dave writes at facebook, yes, he'll accept the results. if their shenanigans hopefully

the perpetrators will be dealt with severely. i would feel better if there were voter i.d. blair writes, not like we have much of a choice. the media has already appointed clinton anyways. angela says, if trump wins, of course, he'll accept the results. with all that talk about voter fraud thank to wiki leaks i'm not trusting it. and tracy writes, yes, like everyone who accept the supreme court decision in 2000, just like in 2000 there will be those who will not accept the election results, jump up and down and be angry, just like 2000 the rest of the country will move on without them anyway. linda from dallas, texas, donald trump supporter. good morning. caller: hi. host: go ahead. caller: i would like all the voters to check out vare it's.com because it's -- varitas.com because it's videotape of thugged hired by the d.n.c. that's gone all the

way up to hillary to the protesters were paid $1,500 a piece to hit people and create all of the turmoil at the republican rallies. and they also talked about voter fraud. they talked about how they were going to bus people in and it was easy to commit voter fraud as long as they were on buses. it was a lot harder to commit voter fraud if they drove up in cars. the only place in america the public can get the true news is c-span, fox, and the religious networks. all the other networks are in the tank for the one world globalists, the progressive liberals. and a vote for hillary clinton is a vote for this nation. host: gloria, in texas, go ahead. caller: yes. trump is -- i'm for clinton.

for many obvious reasons, but all through his campaign something that doesn't go his way, he highs says rigged. i don't know of anyone else, but a little inds me of kid, the rich kid on the block, has the ball, goes to play with his friends, and if something doesn't go his way he takes the ball and leaves. that's his options. host: gloria, let me ask you some of the pushback that donald trump gave and rudy giuliani gave later they are not negligencely saying they won't accept the result period, but not right away if it's especially close. that make a difference to you?

caller: i would hope so because . think that we would show is almost like a dictator, he has that mentality. plus, i'm wondering is he going to tweet -- god help us, if he becomes president is he still going to send out tweets or ? itters it almost seems like he has no clue he has to make the decision for everything. we have congress. he's not going to deal with t what's he going to do? o on a rant on twitter because if congress doesn't do something right? i'm taking my ball and going home. and i just think -- host: finish up. aller: ok.

. i am a texan. there are some democrats here, i can't believe people are believing trump hillary will come in and take everybody's gun. she's not going to do that. she's just going to try to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. like she said she was in arkansas and other places. she's not against the n.r.a. she's not against our amendment ights. i can't believe people believe hat. i'm an american, united we stand. even if he wins but i'm afraid

if he wins that his ego -- he can be coached and you can see times when he's been poached because he'll say we instead of i. but then he goes off. host: gloria, going to let you go. get some other viewers in here. donald trump supporter to come back with herement evan from wisconsin. good morning, evan. are you there? caller: hello. host: there he is. evan, is that you? caller: no. my name is iban from minnesota. host: mispronouncing it. minnesota, donald trump supporter, correct? caller: yes. host: tell us what you think. first of all will you accept the results of the election, and then more broadly what do you think about this whole the dialogue this week? caller: accepting, you really don't have a choice. i guess i wouldn't like it.

when people call and say that they are scared of trump, i'm terrified of hillary. i think that woman is going to destroy this country as barack obama is doing. i am not any better than i was. in fact, i'm worse. i am a small business owner. our taxes are killing us. always been ng has there. it's always been there. trump just happens to bring it out and all of a sudden it's a major story. so i really think, yes, it will be rigged. the media already has elected hillary like your other callers have said. i just think our voting system needs to be corrected somehow because i still don't understand why we need the electoral college.

it's ridiculous. we have enough people to vote, why do we need those kind of people? host: thank you for calling. "washington times" headline, trump says he will accept the election results if he wins. the obamas slammed the candidate's concerns of so-called rigging. that's the "washington times." financial times has this headline, trump stokes furor over accepting u.s. election results. republicans criticized debate remarks. they say in that headline. here's "the new york times," trump stays firm on having option to dispute vote. we're going to win. rallying the base. he said he would accept a clear result. also in the "new york times" is this note fotheo of a young lady, 8 years old, waiting in the front row with her family to see trump at a campaign event on thursday at the delaware county, fair, in delaware, ohio. that's what we caffered yesterday. you can watch the whole thing at c-span.org any time you like. in addition to the events of hillary clinton.

the "washington times" editorializes, donald trump has exposed how the mainstream media cooks the story. the loser of any election must accept result once the result is clear. even if suspiciously arrived at and we can be pretty sure that neither donald or hillary clinton will lead their troops armed with pike polls and pitch 40's down pennsylvania avenue to put things aright. that's not the american way and the stability of the republic is important above of all always. he notion that a losing candidate must not in any circumstance look for fraud is absurd. we have claire from woodbridge, new jersey, on the line. clinton supporter. hello, claire. caller: good morning. host: misread my screen. camille? go right ahead. caller: that's ok. i want to thank your show. i know you're not always the host, but i just want to thank you guys for what you do. i want to uch as

disagree with most of the callers that support trump, i truly honestly think that that is what makes this country great and different from so many other countries. first i want to thank you guys for what you do, and just the fact that you have this show. that said, yeah, of course, trump scares me. and i lived through the horrible things that ronald reagan did to the economy. i was an economics major in college when ronald reagan was in and i was one of the very few people that was forewarning about what he did to the deficit. he almost tripled it. and then george bush what he did o the deficit.

so i can disagree with the conservative movement. that's fine. what upsets me in -- is the anger issues and what's prompted my call this morning is i got into an argument with my husband of 21 years, ok, i got into an argument with him after watching the debate. i truly, truly think that it was two hours of watching a very angry man and then watching another hour, we'll say, i guess all told it was three hours because we watched all the pundits afterwards on all different channels. we watched fox, ms nbc, we watched about eight channels. we're political junkies. i don't know. but he got into such an argument with me. like out of nowhere got angry.

and i said this is what happens after watching three hours of a very angry man and how rude he is and i honestly think that that -- for the first time i said, you know what, this really has to be hitting on the school kids, this has to be hitting on our society as a whole. host: i'll bet your glad -- i'll bet you're glad the debates are over then, based on the arguments you had? caller: yes. nd i honestly was very, very warmed to watch the dinner last night that they had. because for the first time in a while they actually reached over the cardinal and shook hands. and i said to my husband, did you see that? look, they shook hands. host: thanks for calling, camille. appreciate your time this friday morning. camille is referring to the catholic charity dinner that's

held every year. every four years the candidates show up there. we'll show you a little bit from that later in the program. we do want to take a step back here and go back to something an earlier caller mentioned about the 2000 election with al gore and george w. bush. "usa today" weekend has this headline, how trump's rigged election claim misses the mark. there are big differences from the bush v. gore recount. before we read a little bit from the piece. take you back in time to the year 2000 where william daily, the chairman of the gore campaign, informed supporters, this is in nashville, at 4:00 a.m., the day after the election, talking about al gore retracting his concession to mr. bush. here's a look. >> thank you very much. if i could, i have some news to share with all of you tonight. let me say i have been in politics a very long time, but i don't think there's ever been a

night like this one. networksour ago the tv called this race for governor bush. it now appears that their call was premature. let me be very clear about this. according to the information supplied by the secretary of state of florida, with 99.9% of the vote counted, there is a margin of only about 1,200 votes out of millions cast with over ,000 votes left to be counted. this is a very significant for a most important reason and that is for under florida state law this triggers an automatic recount and as everyone knows in america, this race has come down to the state of florida. without being certain of the

results in florida, we simply cannot be certain of the results of this national election. [cheers and applause] >> let me add that vice president gore and senator lieberman are fully prepared to concede and to support governor bush if and when he is officially elected president. but this race is simply too close to call. and until the results, the recount is concluded and the results in florida sure to become official, our campaign continues. cheers and applause] so let me -- cheers and applause] >> so let me -- so let me thank

all of you, let me thank all of you on behalf of vice president al gore and senator joe lieberman for winning -- being out here so late tonight and we hope to have you back very soon. thank you very much. good night. host: november of 2000 in nashville, rick of "usa today" writes the trump stance invokes memories of bush v. gore and the florida recount which until now seemed as messy as a national u.s. leaks could get. an election infamous for hanging chads, photo of a judge glasses on forehead glinting at a balance lofment did not end until 37 days after election day. jeff green felled who covered the recount for cnn, a blend of the federalist papers and celebrity death match. the tenor of the piece here goes on to point it's different now than it was then. he gives several reasons in the piece. the election of 2000 was about how to count ballots not

widespread voter fraud as trump contends could happen this year. they also say election 2000 ended in a dead heat. polls in this election are lopsided in favor of hillary clinton. he lays out a couple other reasons in his piece why it's different than 2000. the election then occurred in time of what greenfield called national rest and involved two relative moderates who didn't arouse strong emotions among most votes. a contrast to this year. also the election of 2000, he writes, could have precipitated a constitutional standoff, but the loser concede and everyone moved on. that's in "usa today" and here is a look at candidate al gore in december of the year 2000. >> this has been an extraordinary election. but in one of god's unforeseen paths, this belatedly broken impasse can point us all to a new common ground. for its very closeness can serve to remind us that we're one people with a shared history and

a shared destiny. that history gives us many examples of contests as hotly debated as fiercely fraught with their own challenges to the popular will. other disputes have dragged on for weeks before reaching resolution. and each time both the viktor and vanguish have accepted the result peacefully and in the spirit of reconciliation. so let it be with us. i know that many of my supporters are disappointed. i am, too. but our disappointment must be overcome by our love of country. and i say to our fellow members of the world community, let no one see this contest as a sign of american weakness. the strength of american democracy is shown most clearly through the difficulties it can overcome. some have expressed concern that the unusual nature of this election might hamper the next president in the conduct of his

office. i do not believe it need be so. president-elect bush inherits a nation whose citizens will be ready to assist him in the conduct of his large responsibilities. i personally will be at his disposal and i call on all americans, i particularly urge all who stood with us, to unite behind our next president. this is america. just as we fight hard when the stakes are high, we close ranks and come together when the contest is done. and while there will be time enough to debate our continuing differences, now is the time to recognize that that which unites us is greater than that which divides us. while we yet hold and do not yield our opposing beliefs, there is a higher duty than the one we owe to political parties. this is america. and we put country before party. we will stand together behind our new president.

host: right back to your calls now. daisy, yonkers new york, third party. thanks for waiting. what do you think? will you accept the results? caller: yes. i will accept results. i think what trump said makes some kind of sense here. in the year that saw so much raud, the shenanigans that the d.n.c. has played on people, i was a gore supporter, now voting for jill stein. but it's almost like the media just waits for trump to do an outrageous event and then they go ahead and work with it. you know what? if the election turns out to be on the up and up and everything is proven to be square, of course we're going to accept the mandate of the people. i don't see any other choice. but again, this year that saw in nce of voter fraud

california, we already knew the winner before people got up to vote. 80,000 people disappeared from the rolls here in brooklyn. it goes on and on. for the media to be running with the shock that gambling is going on when it's proved that shenanigans are going on, it's beyond the pail. host: thank you for calling. al in new york city, undecided caller. al, good morning. first question, what keeps you undecided up to this point? caller: well, i want to all the debates -- was always leaning towards hillary but i wanted to see the debates. but now here's two things. my friend, do you play the ponies? host: do i? caller: you go to the racetrack ever? host: why do you ask? caller: well, ok, here's why. when the horses pass the finish

line, regardless of who says they won, the photo decides who is the winner, correct? and when the horses -- i can't go to the window and say well, i'm undecided now, i'm not sure if i want to accept the outcome of the photo. the photo is the final decision. i'd like to know from a lawyer out there, do we have a mechanism that regardless of who accepts what, or doesn't accept what, that there is an automated photo finish just like in horseracing where there's a body that declares this is the winner even if trump says everything was rigged, that i don't accept the outcome? and number two, trump is a landlord. t comes from the medieval. lord lawed over the land.

that's what trump believes he is. he believes he is a god over every person, place, and thing on the land. i never liked the idea of a landlord running. host: thank you for calling. al, i want to move on. get a donald trump supporter on the line for bay city, michigan. sandy. thank you for waiting. what do you think? caller: yes, i will accept results of the election. ut i want to say why don't you ask the people what if trump wins will hillary accept it? there's two sides to that question. host: we're asking everybody that question this morning. we're getting lots of answers here. anything else, sandy? caller: yes. i just want to make a statement and hope you won't cut me off. we have had 7 1/2 years, almost legislation and

i'm sick and tired of it and i don't want another four years of sex legislation. we had it during this campaign. every time -- let me put it this way. in 2012 we had a black man, republican, running. and they brought a sex scandal against him. we had ben carson running in this election, and they denigrated him and his abilities. and i don't like that. the democratic party has become ever since 2000 -- 2008 has come not a democracy but a dictatorship. the people in the democratic party must agree or they won't get support for their financing for their campaigns. in the republican party, hooray,

we disagree, we don't all have e same opinion, we are a democracy. host: thank you for calling. edith now in holton, maine, hillary clinton supporter, good morning, edith. caller: good morning. host: go ahead with your comment. are you ready to accept the results? the last caller said what if hillary were to lose? would the clinton supporters accept the results. how would you answer that question? caller: i am with clinton but if she loses i will support the person who wins. host: what else would you like to say? caller: well, i'd like to say, i have heard a quote i don't know where it came from. but it said that democracy is the worst government in the world except for all the others. i think that says a lot. we do what we can. and i have been a clinton supporter for a long time.

we don't always agree, but i just want to know that i'm also 87 years old. in assisted living. and quite able to make decisions still. so i'm very glad i got on. host: thanks for calling, edith. about 15 minutes left in this segment. we'll take more of your calls. i want to take a step back and talk a little bit about congress. remind folks about the elections. in the senate the democrats need a net gain of four seats if hillary clinton wins. five seats if trump wins. house democrats need 30 net seats to take the majority. several stories about the congressional elections. one comes from "politico", the r.n.c. grabs 30 million in the race for the senate. they said senate republicans' campaign armed raise $15 million in september and took out an additional $15.5 million line of credit. part of an effort to keep the senate and stave off democrats who are outspending them in key races. they point out without the loan the party would be out of cash.

the dscc raises $19 million in september. this is the democratic senatorial campaign committee. and $19 million in september. the group said this is a record setting haul for a party seeking to regain the senate majority on election day. tammy duckworth, the "chicago tribune," has endorsed her, u.s. senate seat, in illinois. and they write, the reason we're bringing this up, they write that while a stroke by no means disqualifies anyone from office, we cannot tiptoe around the issue of senator mark kirk's recovery and readiness. his health is a fundamental component of this race. hotly contested matchup that could return control of the senate to a democrat. we aren't physicians. kirk's doctor attests to his good cognitive health, but we're voters, writes the tribune, and our reluctant judgment due to forces beyond his control, kirk can no longer perform with the

fullest job of u.s. senator. we're unable to endorse him for another six-year term. kirk is the republican there. he writes back in the "chicago tribune" this way, my stroke changed me but i still fight for illinois families. more specifically, he writes, that instead of judging me for the work i have done in the senate, the "chicago tribune" editorial board sucker punched me by judging me on my health. it would be comparable to the pull lithser prize board judging the ability and stills of reporters solely on the financial sol van hollen sift paper they write for. neither standard makes sense. ill and the first to admit can i not run as fast, jump as high, or swim as quick as i used to, says senator kirk, each day i go to work fighting for illinois families and proud of my results. that from the "chicago tribune." and we go back to calls now where don has been waiting from cookeville,town tfpblet don is a donald trump supporter, hey. caller: good morning. how you-all doing today?

host: fine sir. what do you think about the upcoming results, will you accept them no matter what? caller: we really don't have a choice on that matter. but donald has every right to protest something just as gore did. now, somewhere along the line this country forgot that democracy has rights, privileges, and responsibilities . and those privileges and rights aren't to be handed out like candy at halloween. i think we can learn a lot from iraq. they got it right with their last election. people stood in line for hours and days in 110-degree heat for the chance to get a purple thumb which shows that they voted. and that would exclude people voting three and four, five, times in this nation if they got a purple thumb. they couldn't be cheating. it's a little food for thought there for people. host: thank you for calling.

engelwood, new jersey. clinton supporter. hillary clinton supporter, christopher. thank you for calling. your thoughts this morning? caller: thank you for taking my call. america has always been a center of democracy and to elect a woman for the presidentcy would be a historic opportunity -- presidency would be a historic opportunity to go forward of the regardless of the results of the election, i just hope there will be peace afterwards. this is not just about who is the better candidate, but the future of all of us as a whole. as an advocate with special needs i know what's at stake. my rights as a human being and rights as a person with special needs, as well as the citizens with special needs. because i fought very hard for inclusion. it's not going to be an easy vote to take. all of us as human beings must realize what is on the line here when we go to the polls. regardless of the outcome, i just hope and pray that people

will begin to heal their wounds from the long campaign that happened and that there will be absolute peace in this country. thank you. host: more from the editorial pages, financial times, bitter trump must not poison u.s. democracy, they write. in practice mr. trump's refusal to accept the result would almost certainly make no difference to whether mrs. clinton became president, but a party casting doubt on the entire democratic process and carrying a grievance could do serious damage to trust and the electoral system. if mr. trump could only stomach electoral rejection by cheating, the rest of the republican party must make clear they do not share his reaction. in the financial times. the "wall street journal," the media due scarlett, now donald trump with his usual rank amateur flair scugging if he loses it's because the entire electoral system, encompassing all 50 states, is fixed against to post debate

surrogates to make the distinctions he himself is incapable of making between discreet events. none of the faux fainting spell, we know the normal citizenship of the media class has been replaced by a naive at this of politics. mr. trump's hand handed and self-defeating remark will only feed the widespread public impression that the media are trying to preor gain the election's outcome. -- preordain the election's outcome. hi, mark. caller: hi. host: go right ahead. caller: i want to make a statement that happened during the last election here in mansfield at the voting booth. hi a vote four times for that silly thing because every time i voted for romney it always popped up obama. and biden.

yes, those machines are rigged. i just warn all the trump supporters out there to know they better double wheck -- check when their machines are putting out. soon after the election in cuyahoga county, there is like over 900,000 registered voters and very few voted for romney. hamilton county was over a million plus. very few votes came in. yes, it is rigged. for the democrats. democrats will do anything and everything. i mean, look, bringing up three weeks before the election accusing this man of groping women. i mean if that happened, that tape was out long before all this happened. why did they wait three weeks? yes, i believe that hillary campaign put them women up and probably paid those women to make these false accusations. host: thanks for calling. little more on that different

from last night depending what you read it was either a nice affair or not so nice affair. the "wall street journal" says not so nasty, trump and clinton trade friendly barbs in the election ritual. the new york times piece as we pull it over to the side here in a night of punch lines, trump's routine promps new yorkers to heckle, breaking with decades of tradition at the gathering. once he took the microphone mr. trump set off on a blistering grievance filled performance that translated poorly to the setting. an attempted campaign so caustic the candidates less than 24 hours earlier declined to shake hand on a debate stage. here's about two minutes of flavor from the candidates from last night's dinner beginning with donald trump. a identified' like to address an important religious matter. the issue of going to confession. or as hillary calls it, the fourth of july weekend with

f.b.i. director comey. now, i'm told hillary went to confession before tonight's event. but the priest was having a hard time when he asked her about her sins and she said, she couldn't remember 39 times. hillary is so corrupt. she got kicked off the watergate commission. [booing] mr. trump: how corrupt do you have to be to get kicked off the watergate commission? pretty corrupt. hillary is and has been in politics since the 1970's. what's her pitch? the economy is busted, the

government's corrupt, washington is failing, vote for me. i have been working on these problems for 30 years. can fix it, she says. secretary clinton: donald, if at any time you don't like what i'm saying feel free to stand up and shout wrong while i'm talking. come to think of it, it's amazing i'm up here after donald, i didn't think he would be ok with a peaceful transition of power. [applause] secretary clinton: and, donald, after listening to your speech, i will also enjoy listening to mike pence deny that you ever gave it. i have had the privilege of being at the ausmith dinners in years past and always enjoyed

it. but remember, if you're not happy with the way it comes out, it must be rigged. host: we'll round out this hour with a couple more of your calls. james from stafford, virginia, undecided. hi. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good morning, sir. doing fine. caller: well, to answer your question of course i would accept it. but just the very fact that i'm not undecided tells you that it's not going to make any difference to me which one wins. i'm kind of leaning towards hillary. the problem is is that she's extremely liberal and i lean towards being a little bit more conservative. i have a problem with that. it's why i have been listening for so long. it's why i have been waiting to hear everything that i could hear because from time to time i decide ok, going to be trump, and then something else happens, i listen to him and i'm like ok, it can't be trump. i really like hillary. i think all the things that

everybody says about her are just conjecture. i think that people like to hear gossip and they keep hearing it so the more you hear it the more you believe it. she has never been found guilty of anything. and yet people keep calling her a criminal and saying all these other things. she's never been found guilty of anything. if you have been government for 30 years and they can't get you out based on all the rumors that are going on, it's probably because they are just that. smoke and mirrors. nothing really happening. yeah, i'll accept it. i don't really still know who i want to win. i will accept whomever wins. host: all right. thanks for calling. donald trump supporter from ahead, rolina, go please. caller: i would never accept her as a president. i can't accept a president who lied. on national tv admitted to lying, ok. as far as i'm concerned she's

destroyed government emails. she says there was nothing on the emails. why did she delete them? there was something on the news on channel 4 news, july 11, they were talking about conrad rich who was going to testify on hillary. probably has enough on her and the man gets shot in the back, ok. never took his wallet or his jewelry. i want to know what happened with this investigation. this woman is a criminal. people say why never accept her as a president? i can't accept a president that let people get killed in benghazi. they vote for her but they would feel differently if it was their husband or child that got killed in benghazi. i think a lot mistake and a lote would look at it differently if they look at the background and see the people that were going to testify are all miss of -- missing, now. i don't know why they are covering it up for her.

someone should look into it and find out what happened. this is not something that was on the internet. this woman is a criminal and i will never accept a criminal as a president. it sets a bad example for our tell yourbecause you children it is ok to commit crimes and lied to the american people and still become president. host: let's take one more call from california. you are a hillary clinton supporter. will you accept the results? caller: i will. that -- i live in california, we have a democratic governor and a democratic legislature and we don't allow andrepublicans to distract deny programs that will help us, but i think that the problem with the country is, some of

couldpeople -- i wish i look up the retired justice because a few years ago, he said this country could be undermined just like the roman empire because people could not get anything done and the reason why we can't get anything done is because in 2010, when they gerrymandered districts, we have extreme republicans that could care less about the country and instead of trying to work with the democrats and work with obama, they just want to go extreme right and reject supreme court justices, do not pass laws or infrastructure bills in the country is frustrated because we cannot get laws passed. by justice was appointed bush, but he left the supreme cant and said this country

outsidemined up by some organization, but by us taking and of donald trump gets in, it will literally put the country at risk. host: thank you for everyone who called for this first hour. we have two more hours of politics. after a short break, jim barnes will join us to talk about the presidential race, where it stands in this final weeks -- in these final weeks. editor of the fact checking website politico back will be with us to talk about promises. we will also have your called blended in. well to get our first guest all set, we will take a look at more from the alfred smith dinner, last night.

event with ao this little bit of an advantage. i know that so many of you in the archdiocese already have a place in your heart for a guy carpenterd out as a working for his father. [laughter] not for a long time. about three weeks. what is great about the alfred smith dinner is that even in the augh-and-tumble world of really hard-fought campaign. last night, they said that was the most vicious debate in the history of politics.

i don't know if we are supposed to be proud of that, but they did say that. the candidates have some lighthearted moments, together, which is through. i have no doubt that hillary is going to laugh quite a bit, sometimes even at an appropriate moment. [laughter] even tonight, with all of the heated back and forth, between my opponent and me at the debate, last night, we have proven that we can actually be civil to each other. the day, sheaking accidentally bumped into me and she very civilly said part of me

-- pardon me. [laughter] and i very politely replied let me talk to you about that after i get into office. just kidding. hillary was very gracious. she said it somehow she gets ,lected, she wants me to be without question, either her ambassador to iraq or to afghanistan. is my choice. -- it is by choice. [laughter] one of the things i noticed tonight, and i have noticed -- i

have known hillary for a long time. this is the first time ever, that she is sitting down and speaking to major corporate leaders and not getting paid for it. [laughter] >> washington journal continues. host: joining us at the table is jim barnes, senior writer for ballotpedia. is the place to go for all that writing. this campaign different, and put it in the broader perspective of how this country moves forward after what we have been dealing with. because, is different largely of donald trump. you have a total political rookie that goes out there and the republicanns

nomination. you got hillary clinton, who would be the first woman president in the united states. stages been on the public for 25 years or so. it is a rather remarkable combination, that we've got. the big question that everybody -- we saw that in the third presidential debate. we even saw a little bit of it at the alfred smith dinner, last night. how does the country move forward, after such a tough, hard-fought, divisive contest. towill be a challenge whichever one of these candidates inns up winning the election to pull the country together. that is not going to be an easy task.

we live in a pretty polarized country, right now, and this has been a very tough campaign. host: on numbers on the bottom of the screen. supporters of donald trump and hillary clinton, those of the first two lines we will put up, and then we have lines for third-party voters and undecided voters. we believe those numbers on the screen and we will generate some calls and get this conversation moving forward. isind us of what ballotpedia all about. guest: we are a nonpartisan, nonprofit website that really is sort of the encyclopedia of military american politics. we cover everything from the presidential race down to the school race -- school board races and the largest school districts in the country. we have a great feature where

voters can go and plug in their address and take a look at what the ballot is going to look like when they walk into the voting booth. we've got a not of it -- a lot of initiatives and things on the ballots besides they presidential race -- besides the presidential race. tried that, yesterday and it was really easy. i learned a lot about what is going on to get set for november. ballotpedia.org is the place. guest: we are a nonprofit funded by contributions from individuals and corporations. host: we want to get your take on what donald trump had to say at the debate and in ohio about the results and whether or not he would accept them. we know he came out briefly in ohio and said i will accept them

if i win. then he came out later in that same speech and elaborated on what he is talking about. let's take a look. >> america is a constitutional republic with a system of laws. these laws are triggered in the case of fraud or the event of a recount where it is needed. of course i would accept a clear election result, but i would also reserve my right to contest or file a legal challenge, in the case of a questionable result. always, i will follow and abide by all the rules and traditions of all the many candidates who have come before me, always. bottom line, we are going to win.

we are going to win so big. host: your take on this week's dialogue. guest: it certainly was the big moment of the debate, and it was a bit of a self-inflicted wound by mr. trump. he is kind of a rookie candidate. it doesn't necessarily understand or appreciate all the traditions of politics. if you remember the very first , thee that was in columbus very first question was asked by brett mayor of fox. anybody on there was this day, raise your hand if you cannot rule out running as a third-party candidate, i and donald trump raised his hand. he was the only person who did. e forused a big kerfuffl weeks. he ultimately signed a pledge,

sort of a loyalty pledge saying he would support the nominee. this shows this is just a guy who does not like to be pinned down. that,tinctively resists where a politician -- a more experienced politician, somebody who has run for office, they would understand the convention and understand that you just specter of not respecting the results of the election, and i think we saw from that clip, donald trump trying to walk it back, but even at that rally, earlier on, he just could not resist the temptation of tweaking everyone by saying, i will respect the results if i win. this is a guy who loves to thumb his nose at political convention. host: before we go to calls,

some have compared the situation to what he said in 2000 in the bush election. is that adapt collect -- comparison? guest: i don't think it is, because we had a different circumstance. we had a recount situation going , itn florida and ultimately got to the courts and it was decided by the supreme court. for camp so important -- for candidates to concede on election night? what is it about that moment? number one, it is sort of reinforcing the tradition that we respect results and that we have this kind of peaceful change of power transition. time.back to that 2000 over whata cloud happened next.

having to wait for that supreme court decision. it complicated the transition of george w. bush. a person gets elected, they have three months to create their whole government. having something like that did not make it any easier for the bush folks to carry out their transition. you recall they were not announcing nominations during that period. we know staffing up an administration is a pretty big job, and you kind of need every minute you can get. that is another reason why we don't want this kind of question after the election. we want the new president to be able to get on with the business of creating a government, and focusing on how to lead the nation. barnes,rst call for jim

alexandria, virginia, a trump supporter. caller: good morning. i am a trump supporter. i honestly think he speaks more to millennials then hillary clinton. i am a millennial so i can say a little bit about that. host: how so? caller: he is real. he is raw. when you look at what he says, it is unpolished, but it has an integrity to it. rehearsedt it is more and i don't feel the integrity with hillary. it is not so much that there is that whole issue with the security clearances and the documents being translated back in north, it is the integrity of the person and if you watch them

during the debates, it really riews hillary having this ee kind of smile that i just don't trust. i don'talso say that see myself being to go through red tape. may be entered -- other generations see a kind of hierarchal structure to get to a -- get to the next level. hillary has a lot of experience, but it is about having a voice, having a vision, and acting on it and not letting any roadblocks get in the way, that you might consider to be a natural progression and a more traditional style of leadership. host: we know the group that is called millennials is a very large group in this country. are they going to come out and

vote and what are the candidates doing to appeal to them? guest: good questions. younger people tend to vote at a years rate every four then in the midterm elections, so we are still going to be looking at this election, as to whether or not the turnout matches what barack obama brought to the polls in both 2008 and 2012. some question whether mrs. clinton can do that. emily is the type of voter that hillary clinton's campaign worries about, but we have also seen evidence in the polls that younger millennial women, and it confounds the clinton campaign, are really resistant to mrs. clinton, notwithstanding the fact that she is breaking the highest glass ceiling in the land. probably iscampaign

going to focus on social issues, a lot. she talks about her strong support for gay marriage, she talks about other sort of issues related to more of the tolerance arena. i think that is one of her big pitches to younger voters. donald trumps pitch to younger voters is hey, i am a businessman, the kind of guy who can get this economy moving. you are just starting out in your careers, some of you are just coming out of college. i am the guy who was going to create a lot of economic growth and that will create jobs. host: moving on to james. calling from in the district, he is a hillary clinton supporter. caller: good morning.

mr. barnes was very kind when he alluded to donald trump not really being qualified. joke, so much that it is scary, that a gentleman who has the candidacy in his hands has one basically two points substance factors. is going to build a wall, and export 11 million people. my question for mr. trump, who is going to staff your hotels and i don't understand how this if i'mome an issue of -- if i am going to in one breath, he says we are going to win, and then he is already recounting the votes

that are not even occurred. how does this become a national issue? that is my question. it becomes a national issue when he sort of dropped that little bombshell in the middle of a debate with 60 plus million people watching, so it gets a lot of attention and totally dominated the third and final debate and it is an unconventional position to take, to start talking about maybe i will, maybe i won't support the outcome. questioning the election's integrity is not helpful. the caller noted trump is a real

rookie in this. he did not do himself any favors. on the issues front, that is another thing that comes up in the debates, that thou trump does not have the kind of policy death that hillary clinton does, so when he is in these debates, he really can't string together responses to questions where he is highlighting his positions on what he would do if he would get into office. well.id not serve him a lot of times in the debates, he was just sort of reduced to disagreeing with mrs. clinton and he would just sort of say wrong into the microphone. depth hasf policy

been a handicap for him in this election. host: washington times hisorialized about statement that the mainstream media cooks the story. the notion that a losing candidate must not been any circumstance look for fraud is absurd. what is the reality right now, as you see it in this country when it comes to supposed voting fraud? guest: i don't think that there is so much fraud in any jurisdiction, for instance that could swing a state. if you get into a situation that is close enough to florida. we had an election that was ultimately decided by about 500 votes. of, hey,nto questions

our people casting their ballots in the right district? i don't think we have seen enough concrete examples. votes, this, buying is part of our election history, but it is history that goes back to the 19th century, that may have gone back to some of the big-city machines, during the new deal era, the 1930's. -- you back to a time read the excellent series on there are some pretty outrageous examples of voting fraud that happened in the famous 1940 lyndon johnson senate race.

another book talks about the ballot box stuffing that probably went on in the rio grande valley for the kennedy/johnson ticket in 1960. has it happened in the past? sure, but i think this is more of a function of the past. barry in north carolina, a donald trump supporter. caller: good morning. i want to make couple of comments concerning the media. nbc, cbs, cnn and i have been following the election for over a year. i am just curious as to why 75% ourhe commercials put on pro-hillary -- are pro-hillary.

why do you think that is the case? it's the think maybe money spent on commercials. let's be honest about it. host: is it simply money? guest: yes. mrs. clinton and her allies have a lot more money than donald trump. it is probably a more professional campaign, in some sense. they have been plotting out these media buys for months. some people will say it is ironic that she rails against all of the ark money and the darkulated money -- of the money and the unregulated month -- money that has flown to american politics, but there is no doubt about the fact that many of the independent groups that are supporting her campaign , that are running those ads are

funded by that kind of money. host: john in florida, undecided. caller: i think american voters have to think about their own individual interests when they vote as u.s. citizens. looking at america now, financially, only the richest 10% of u.s. citizens can have the same standard of living that educatedas a typically u.s. citizen could have had in the mid-1960's. i don't believe in big tax cuts for the rich, i don't think that helps the economy. the immigration issue and keeping the drugs out of mexico and the crime out of mexico is certainly very important, as is the renegotiation of bad trade deals. hillary is very intelligent, but the thing is,

she and her husband have a long track record of basically serving not so much the regular people, but her big donors who bad actors who use corporations to do bad things against u.s. citizens. offshore jobs, cheap labor, overcharge for drugs, health care and all insurances and banks. foreign lobbies like the one that got us into the iraq war. 2002 andl lobby in then 2003 got us into the war. trumpk on the balance, will be better, but hillary would be a nightmare for the typical u.s. citizen. still undecided, but you just stated your opinion of each candidate. ready you think you are heading?

caller: when i look at the balance with respect to the best interest of the best majority of u.s. citizens, with the broadest perspective and the most information over the last 50 plus years of history, and look at the way the media has been so criminally monopolized to support one candidate and the fame another, i am kind of leaning towards donald trump as being the best person for the typical u.s. citizen. guest: i can remember a campaign from, i think it was 1992, when you had a lot of conservatives complaining about the favoritism that the media was showing to then candidate bill clinton against incumbent republican president george h w bush.

people said annoyed the media, vote for bush -- annoy the media, vote for bush. the media is probably more liberal than the more broad public at large. .t is interesting i don't think that caller is that much of an atypical person. there were voters out there who are veal -- who feel the media is an institution that lectures and cannot take a joke. the media is an institution that is too politically correct, and there are a fair number of just don't like the media. host: that last caller was undecided. the you have a sense of this year's undecided versus past

years cycles? we have four candidates running, we should not forget that gary johnson is running as a libertarian and jill stein is running on the green party. even with four candidates, even with two well-known -- candidates, you still see into the low teens percentage of people who say in polls that they are undecided. i think we do have a lot of voters out there struggling with their choice. one reason is that a lot of people have commented, both clinton and trump, they have pretty high negatives, their favorability scores are for a low compared to past potential candidates -- presidential candidates. mike, a clinton supporter. caller: thanks.

in pennsylvania, school boards have taxing authority. i live near harrisburg, but i have a summer home four counties away. i could vote here at home, but i can't vote for the school board where my summer home is that i pay a school real estate tax on is illegal,ng twice unethical, but at the same time, i am being taxed there without being represented or having any say in who is on this school board. do i have a point here? guest: i think you are a little off the beaten track. -- if want to stay in the you want a say in the school board where your vacation home is, if it was that important to you, -- host: ohio, richard, a trump

supporter. caller: i would like to say something about -- i was watching the media, the other night. the person on there was asking the questions and they turned around and kind of beat around the bush to answer the question. she just doesn't answer the questions. i was watching the other night, -- they came up with this -- i think if he would've come in there, we finally would've gotten back to the situation and he might've done something about all this. i surely think that hillary not -- [s

indiscernible] was theoss perot third-party candidate. we mentioned gary johnson and jill stein. he is the third-party candidate who burst onto the scene in 1992, in that election and scored the highest national popular vote since teddy roosevelt. impression on the .ountry, in 92 then try to keep his movement .oing to little bit soft the presidency again in 96, but saw his vote share tumble down from 1/5 of the vote to about 7%, the second time he ran in 96.

he sort of reflected a little bit of what donald trump reflects. not is a businessman, experienced in the world of politics, but he says i will go to washington, and i will shake the system of and get it to perform better. as anballotpedia.org early vote by state map. we are seeing a variety of colors. what do they mean, and are you reading anything yet about early voting? map, the states that are in red, those are --ces where there is really you can vote early, you don't need any kind of excuse, you can just vote early. different states have different lengths of early voting, of an

early voting period. carolina will be a battleground state with a relatively long early voting period. are statesin yellow where you can vote in person, absentee or vote absentee. those are states that have kind absentee in-person voting. you will see virginia in yellow. excusesnot have never with absentee voting, but one of the excuses that a lot of voters in this area will appreciate in virginia. if you think you will be at work or stuck in traffic, your commute is going to take up more than 11 hours in the day, you

can cast your vote absentee. in the light shaded states, colorado, oregon and washington, those are states that have mailed my ballot. they vote by mail. everybody gets a ballot and that is their voting system. they really don't have much of an election day turnout. dropnk you are allowed to in a couple of places. , thosetes that are dark are states with very restrictive absentee rules. ,hey don't have early voting and you have to have a good excuse if you are going to vote

absentee. atsequently, if you look those states, state like pennsylvania, states like michigan and new hampshire, on an life -- on election night, you will see a very small number of absentee votes being counted. host: nona, a trump supporter, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to know how everyone can say that the ballots are not going to be rigged, when george soros owns these machines. the caller earlier said that he had to vote four times just to get his candidate, and this governor in california has signed thousands of illegal and i don'to vote believe they have a legal right to vote in our elections. believe work, i don't anyone here illegally should be able to vote.

tv, it showed them lining up by the miles to vote against trump. i do believe -- i am a 60-year-old woman. i remember when the clintons were in. i remember the scandals and the corruption. there is no way that hillary clinton is not going to try to corrupt the system. iso not believe donald trump ,oing going off left field saying it is going to be rigged because it really has been, in the past. guest: i think i have to disagree with the caller on one point, which is you have to be a u.s. citizen to vote in an election. i don't believe that an illegal allowed to cast a ballot under any circumstance in

the united states. i would be really shocked if that was going on in california. host: donna from north carolina, a clinton supporter. that wei have to say don't have a choice but to accept whoever is president. what choice do we have? i am 68 years old. , represent millions of voters baby boomers. they were caught in the middle. i get social security, i don't make enough to support myself, but i make just a little bit too for medicaid and things like that. the candidates have not said boomers.about baby

they are both, baby boomers, donald trump and hillary clinton. i don't think we have heard a lot of issues debated in this election relative to some others. i notice that c-span is running lots of the old residential debates and you can catch them, and i think if you listen to those debates, you will hear much more discussion of issues than we typically have gotten in the three debates that we have gotten this year. one of the issues that i think has gotten the short stick is we have not had a serious discussion about entitlement reform, social security, medicare. chris wallace took a stab at it with a question towards the end of the third debate, but by and large, it is not a topic that

airing in thisod election. one of the reasons why we like issues to have a good airing in election is because then it gives the new president some kind of note -- some kind of mandate or authority to go forward and propose these things. the president is able to say i campaigned on this, i'm going to do what i campaigned on. of course, any kind of major entitlement reform i think is really going to require bipartisan cooperation because if we don't have bipartisan cooperation on something like medicare or social security, which touches so many people, then those changes are not going -- have a lot of popular support and there will not be confidence in these changes.

we see that dynamic around obamacare, the aca. host: 20 minutes left with our guest. ballotpedia.org is the website with a lot of political information. next up is an undecided caller named tom in the carolinas. caller: i have to agree with the last two callers, that there are questionable things going on with the way the voting is done, including when you backup somebody or go up against -- go up against somebody. politics with voting in a new court clerk, and i went

against the court clerk and i am still being ridiculed for voicing my opinion. i made truck signs and i was voting for doyle markham and she is still ridiculing me. i was detained this monday while in her courtroom for calling in a bomb threat. i have numerous people that saw , yet i was detained for 45 minutes, and i know that rating was going on. i can't prove it, but i am doing my best and i will continue to do it. i agree with the other two callers. the millennials are being taken care of. there are people that are not citizens. i've got dual citizenship, which was held against me during the last election. i am both american and canadian. i do not run home to canada to vote. host: thank you for calling.

his interpretation of what is going on, he can't prove it, but he is saying it. guest: i guess this is a ,autionary tale before people not to just dismiss this. this issy for us to say not going on, and i honestly don't believe it is widespread fraud going on in this country, but i think we have to take into consideration that people feel so passionately about -- they don't have confidence, they suspect there is a lot of fraud going on. that is not a great situation and i hope that elected officials can get out there and do things to reassure, both at the local level, the federal level, that we go out and maybe have to go to extra -- go the

extra mile to reassure people that the system does work. just ridden with fraud. host: here is president obama in south florida on all of this, yesterday. >> when last night at the becomes the first major party nominee in america's history to suggest that he will despite losing the vote, and then says today that he will accept the results if he , that is not a joking matter. i want everyone to pay attention. , because whenous you try to sow the seeds of doubt in people's minds about

the legitimacy of our election, that undermines our democracy. you are doing the work of our adversaries for them. our democracy depends on people knowing that their vote matters, that those who occupy the seats of power were chosen by the people. even when you are preferred candidate loses, even when you are the one running and you lose, you have to see the bigger picture and say that here in america, we believe in democracy , and we accept the will of the people. host: i wanted to ask you about the power of surrogates for hillary clinton in this campaign . we have seen the president, we know michelle obama was

campaigning. the strength of those surrogates, this year. guest: it is a great asset for the lenten campaign. they can avoid these well-known surrogates to campaign before constituencies where they will likely be received. function of having a relatively unified party behind your campaign. we saw at the democratic convention in philadelphia, the democrats really coming together. bernie sanders getting on board with hillary clinton. she emerged from philadelphia with a united party. we did not see that in cleveland. in cleveland, what we saw was the runner-up to donald trump basically saying i will not support the nominee. ist is a problem, but it

sort of a function of a party that is not united behind donald trump. i will see -- i will say one quick thing about donald trump. you can blame him for a lot of things in this election. for instance, i think he has worsening ofo political rhetoric. that hiso back and say was ats in the debate, it self-inflicted wound, it was a stupid thing for him to say. that that comment is more of a function of who donald trump is, he is a guy that does not like getting pinned down. he instinctively recoils against this. he likes to thumb his nose at conventions. i don't think as the president suggested in that speech, that donald trump's intent was to

undermine the american democracy. host: we go to tammy in illinois, a trump supporter. caller: i have a question, or a couple of comments that i wanted to make to your guest, regarding voter fraud. i have read where there are five democrats who have claimed voter fraud in the past, and obama was the 2008em, back in election. is an undercover showing thatround, clinton's campaign and the dnc are affiliated with the bird dogging violence going on at trump rallies, as well as the voter fraud.

obama and clinton are claiming we are having hacking going on, so how can we positive -- how can we be 100% positive that someone is not able to affect the votes despite the fact that george soros owns the machines? i am not familiar with everything that the president said in the 2008 election regarding the issue of voter fraud. i do know that he did not make the kind of statement that trump election.tioning the i have heard of the issue with the voting machines. i don't believe that george are in ahis minions back room somewhere, trying to

jimmy these machines to spit out incorrect results. the hacking issue is an interesting one. we have had questions raised about is our election system going to be aborted with stand any hacks on election night, could something happen that could really throw the election into question, could it be hacked in some way? i don't knowthat all the ins and outs of this, although as someone who helped cnn call the elections on election night, i can assure you that people are very sensitive to this issue. i think we've got a fair amount of confidence that on election night, the system and the reporting of votes is going to be insulated from hacking.

once again, we will certainly find out, soon enough. host: let's hear from joseph in florida, a clinton supporter. caller: how are you doing? . host: good, go ahead. caller: i am a clinton supporter, and trump needs his own country because he has everyone scared to vote. does he expect to just be named president? he is unfit to be president. i am from the philippines and i am afraid that he would deport me based on his accusations. i want to let the president -- president of the philippines to we asang on because people of the united states need to come together as one, with peace. racism and all that is happening with our country is ridiculous. we need to come in peace.

i don't believe hundred percent what trump is doing. to me, he is like a dictatorship. is fighting for the low income people as well as trying to help the low income people like myself, struggling. i make $8.05 an hour. we need someone who will be for the people. we don't need anything for the rich and i disagree with a lot of things down trump is saying and i support hillary clinton 100%. i don't see any evidence of voter fraud, and i think we will be doing just fine with the first female president of the united states. host: we are running short on time, that i wanted to ask you about senate races and start with the new york times editorial. they are endorsing katie mcginty

in philadelphia, in the senate race against incumbent pat toomey. that talk about minimum wage and the sensitivity of middle-class families. what you tell us what other states you are watching -- why don't you tell us what other states you are watching? guest: pennsylvania has a very key senate race that both parties have a big interest in. you could probably make the case whoever wins the senate race is going to have a good chance of prevailing in the battle for the senate on election night. one thing that is interesting about the dynamic that we see in other states is that hillary clinton is opening up an advantage over donald trump in the polls, and the question is, that?t toomey with stand

if mrs. clinton wins by six or seven points, pat toomey may have a decent shot at being able to hang on. margin clinton has a big like 10 points in winning pennsylvania, if that happens, then it will be very tough for pat toomey. another place we will see that dynamic at work is in new hampshire. republican kelly ayotte running against maggie hassan. another one where a big highon tied could carry -- in ade could carry hassan important and key race. another big race will be in nevada, the same dynamic will be at play.

if the race is close at the presidential level, the republican has a chance to win. that is the race to replace outgoing democratic leader harry reid. you will see this. in aave seen republicans state like ohio. rob portman is pretty much established with a pretty clear lead. that is a state where trump is expected to do a little bit better. the incumbent senator is well-positioned to hang on against the challenge from former democratic governor ted strickland. virginia, an undecided caller. caller: thank you.

about orve a question a comment on trump, who is now asking for votes. i am not sure whether people are aware that when he held his charleston, four days before west virginia held their election, he told the attendees they did not have to vote. this goes along with what the pollsters are saying or the a newbiene, that he is to politics. i think he is not really aware that not only are we voting for commander-in-chief, but we are voting for our local people. in my county, we are interested in board of education, the sheriff and our other statehouse people that we have to vote in. neglectingng he is

the local, state concerns. not just the commander-in-chief. host: thank you for calling. guest: i can remember during the republican primaries where trump with sort of the choking from the stage, saying will be don't support me, don't vote or there is no voting on tuesday if you won't support me, but one point this caller makes that we touched on earlier is that donald trump is really running this campaign on his own, to a large extent, certainly a larger extent than we have seen republican nominees in the past. he is not campaigning with the whole ticket. -- hes not have the full does not have a unified party. a lot of them are going to vote

for him because they cannot stand hillary clinton, but he does not have a unified party. presidential candidates always campaign to some extent above their party, and let's be clear, this is clinton is looking out for number one as well in this regard, but in particular, donald trump is just sort of a from-- of part -- apart the rest of his party, and is probably unaware, or may not he affectsciate how turnouts which affects races down the ballot. host: jenna on the line for clinton supporters. i was trying since yesterday to get in touch with you, because there were some facts that i wanted to throw out there to have people understand some things, but listening to

jim talk, there has been -- he actually touched on it. keynote issues between the two and also, voting democrat is going to put bernie budget the senate committee in the senate and a things, point of views, can get passed, so people need to understand that, you know, you're still helping bernie out. what i'm saying? host: i think we do. democrats do take the majority in the senate, bernie line to be n chairman of the budget committee, that would probably a little aybe

influence over the process, but i think the end of the day, the really had inord nat amount of influence over setting budget. i mean, congress votes, congress as pro-authorize and appropriate money. i remember in philadelphia, the we have most , progressive platform in our history. to try that is designed to pull in the sanders' but one thing the caller probably should keep in unheard of is not for presidential candidates to elected. they go into the white house and carry ey don't exactly out every platform item that was the document, sometimes have been known to conveniently drop not really were

their own. host: let's get a couple call and wrap up. hey, norman. to er: hey, good morning you. when you can it, orrupt the f.b.i., the whole government is corrupt. manipulate easy to the voting. am 69, i have been around for little while, and i drove a 41 years. i traveled this country from one to the other and it's just, a nation of corruption and it's so sad. i just remember that when they kennedy, you know, after

seemed like our hell. country just went to know much to say about it, but i'm glad on on my way out. norman, thank you for calling. james, last call and we'll hear jim barnes one more time. hey, james. caller: good morning, gentlemen, in.glad to get i believe the lord is involved in this because i was persistent in calling and i was able to get in before the show was over. did. glad you caller: thank the lord for that. i want to mention about king had country, i this believe joseph was, he's a supporter the same as i, i believe he's along with martin had a dream, that is what we should keep in mind. rocket 't take a

scientist to decide this election or decide who you want to vote for. anybody in favor of this country would vote for clinton. clinton, that should be the candidate of the president of the united states and i help fulfill ould martin luther king's dream. thank you. final thoughts from jim barnes on this election. well, i think the callers are interesting, one reflect the country.t he previous caller reflected the pessimism that exists in the land. think there is probably, if woo were honest, probably more pessimism than optimism these we look at polls, more people think the country on the wrong track than the right track. in a funny way, if the country only come together after the election, but if we can pass hrough legislation, sort of

show the public that washington can get some things done and if growth, i mean, eally we tend to see that people have more confidence when there is economic growth. ofnk back to the second term ronald reagan, second term of bill clinton, those were both when we had a lot of tends to rowth, that be the one thing that restores than anything else is an economy that is and obviously since that touches so many americans, you makes sense. host: jim barnes, veteran journalist covering every 1984, co-author almanac on american politics and you can read lots information at ballotpedia.org. left in this hour friday edition of "washington

journal." coming next, angie drobnic editor of the fact-checking website, olitifact, we'll talk about truthfulness of campaign promises and statements made by the two leading candidates. first, while we change guests, more from last night's al smith this time from hillary clinton. >> always a special treat for me in new york. a city that i love and i think embody the best of america. don't you think? [applause] >> people look at the statue of proud and they see a symbol of our history as a immigrants, beacon of hope for people around the world. donald looks at the statue of four.y and sees a the a five, if she loses torch and tablet and changes her

hair. you know, come to think of it, be a good number for 45.oman, digress. now i'm going to try my best tonight, but i understand i am not known for my sense of humor, that is why it did take a village to write digress. jokes. these people say and i hear them, i boring ey say i'm compared to donald, but i'm not boring at all. i'm the life of every to y i attend and i've been three. and when the parties get out of as occasionally they do, it is important to have a responsible chaperon who can get everyone home safely and that is my i pick tim kaine to be

vice president. now, you notice there is no teleprompter here tonight, which is probably smart because maybe dismantle his prompter the other day and i get that. they're hard to keep up with and i'm sure it is even harder when ou're translating from the original russian. dinner y year this brings together a collection of committed mainstream epublicans, or as we now like to call them, hillary supporters. now some of my critics and i that, too, yeah. i only say what people want to hear. and tonight that is true

here is exactly what you want to hear, this election will be over very, very soon. nd look at this, we have charlie rose and mariah and gayle king ws and and katie couricthis, counts as conference, right? > "washington journal" continues. host: angie drobnic holan is joining us, editor for politifact. thank you for joining us this morning. having me.k you for host: how did politifact get funded? and how is it guest: we're independent nonpartisan news website. bayere started by the tampa times, florida's largest newspaper, and our mission is to check what politicians and other political groups say in square.ic

so every report on politifact is we ct-checking report and rate the statements that we look t on a truth meter scale and the ratings go from true to true, mostly half false, false, to pants on fire. are the fact checkers and how exactly do they make their decision? guest: well, we're independent journalists, most of us have and we r backgrounds research by looking at we talk to reports, archives of news articles or data, depending what is. fact check we write up our report and then three editorsl of who edit the report and decide on the rating. new fact checks just about everyday. host: how important is it to do work in this or any

election cycle? guest: it's really important. came out of the thinking that needed more fact checking. 2007, rted our site in because a number of journalists ithin the tampa bay times felt there was too much he said/she said, without telling people what were the facts behind the policy, behind the political statements. checking has been important every year. this year it seems like it is ever, more than discussion around fact checking over whether the presidential donald trump and hillary clinton are speaking accurately about a whole range issues. host: phone numbers on the bottom of the screen. ake calls from hillary clinton supporters, donald trump supporters, third party and been ded folks, as we've do thanksgiving entire show on this friday. our guest is in tampa, editor, editors of politifact

the placefact.com, is to go. lots of information in the various n the statements. angie, this year seems there is a lot of mistrust of the press and people ho fashion themselves as experts on these various topics, how do you establish credibility the work that you do? guest: well, i think with most credibility tions, is earned over time, so we have a track record of being of fact checking, both democrats and republicans. we e is another thing that do to be transparent and show is our our work and that reports are very literal of we this and wewe found saw this. we layout exactly our thinking issue, so they know why we're rating the statement we're rating it. the right-hand side

of every report, we have a links. list with hyper i think we are reporting in a very skeptical age, we don't our readers to just take our word for it. with our source list, they can we consulted at and check it out for themselves. o i think that transparency around fact check suggest very important and that is how people evaluate our work. examples this morning of the fact checking going on. this is a short piece from the debate, hillary donald talking about trump and vladamir putin and the hacking issue. this is a statement we're about politifact rated as half true. here is a look. it very d to make clear, whether russia, china, united anybody else, states has much greater capacity to we are not going sittidely by and permit state our s to go after

information, our private sector information or our public sector information. and we're going to make it clear kinds t want to use the of tools that we have, we don't want to engage in a different of war fare, but we will defend the citizens of this russians need to understand that. i think they have been treating a probing, how far would we go, how much would we do, that is why i was so shocked when donald publicly invited into americans, that is just unacceptable. 50 nationalason why security officials, who served n republican information -- in administration -- donald is chief, o be commander in comments like that really worry people who understand the we face.hat host: to our guest in tampa, why was this rated half true? we focused in on her

statement that donald trump hack d the russians to into american data and we rated that half true. is part of our method, we look very closely at particular statements. went back into the archives, into transcripts and reports, what did donald trump say. what we found, he suggested that russians hack and try to ind the deleted e-mails that were on hillary clinton's private server. now i think you could argue, he was joking, said it in somewhat ironic tone, maybe he wasn't, but regardless, he was not inviting the russians to data, he all american was tashingeting his comment at his political opponent. so we felt the casual listeners not lot of people are political junkies like the rest of us, would get the wrong that, we rate m

today half true. host: first call, keith from tennessee, trump supporter. hey, keith. caller: good morning. my call. for taking my question is this. being said on trump that there is no way you could and you don't go -- do you go after thingos hillary the same way you go on trump? everybody, all the media is trying to turn this hillary and that is wrong. i do believe he's right on it rigged system, it's been rigged as long as ki remember. going back to the '60s. host: thanks, keith. guest.ear from our guest: we do fact check both sides. we fact check hillary clinton donald trump. we are independent and nonpartisan. at evidence and, for

example, we have looked at this laim about the elections being rigged and there is just not a you f tangible proof that can look at to say the elections are being rigged. many elections, certainly in the state of florida, are run by and republicans. here's not a power structure controlling local elections that would seem to have the incentive ability to swing it one way or the other. when we look at law enforcement a lot of states put a lot of effort into voter id, making sure the registration process is air tight. it.just don't see then it turns into this conspiracy theory, you kind of is being mething happening and we're fact checkers, we need to see evidence. our site is really focused in on the evident. we look at both sides. there has been a lot of

talk this election about the do a favoring clinton, we not see ourselves that way. we see ourselves as independent. e're just as quick to fact check hillary clinton as donald trump. host: to fort lauderdale now. third-party person, gabe, thank you for weighing in. say?would you like to caller: good morning. is a question related to jobs have been lost here in the states. is, ve heard from both that nafta, different trade agreements and i believe i have that jobs been lost, technology has changed. longer take pictures and wen companies manufacturing, try to print less. technology is changing and i from both talking

about this really the reason those jobs have been lost. would like to fact check that. has been affecting trade us because we are in i don't trade, but listen to both saying that what -- and y the reason of now promising to get back all ohio, to all to to verify, i like you this and get more information. host: thank you. point.understand the jobs and trade. he makes in technology. angie drobnic holan, what are you seeing out there? uest: that is such a great question. we've done a number of reports deals, about nafta, about china. the economists we talked to say overall trade is good for

the united states, it grows the economy. the down side of trade, a plant may close somewhere and notices when the plant closes and jobs go away. thing ght not notice the they want to buy at walmart is cheaper. a lot of stuff in the economy, with people noticing things.t one thing i would say, there has een a lot of talk in the debates about nafta, donald trump saying hillary clinton and nafta, inton supported and it's been a terrible deal. when we delve into the specifics nafta, nafta seems like it has been a wash. for sn't been that great the u.s. economy, but hasn't been that bad, that is what the have told us. when we look at the jobs going the bigger thing behind that is the trade with china. most favoredeiving

nations status. his goes back years, it goes back into the george w. bush administration, the bill clinton administration, george h.w. bush administration. republicans and democrats who have supported china.ade with that is the way a lot of the american job losses have come this with all manufacturing moving to china, where labor is so cheap. is more the issue here than nafta, in the reports we've looked at. i should repeat, again, this is -- these are economy-wide ramifications, it is really hard to tease things out like this and that caused that. when we talk to economists studying the economy, that is they say. host: here is more from the hofstra mber one where university, where donald trump talked about hillary clinton tpp, this trade and

is rated mostly true by politifact. signed nafta, one of the worst things that manufacturing industry. go to new england, ohio, want,ylvania, anywhere you secretary clinton, and you will see devastation with 30, 40, 50%. down afta is the worst trade deal maybe signed anywhere, but certainly in this country. you want to approve trans you were rtnership, totally in favor of it, then you heard what i was saying and you win that debate. you know if you did win, you would approve that and that will almost as bad as nafta, nothing will top nafta. accurate. not i was against it once it was the terms were laid out. i wrote about that -- >> the gold standard. called it the gold standard of trade deal, you said the inest deal have you ever seen

and then you heard what i said about it and you were against it. > donald, i know you live in your own reality, but that is not the facts. hoped it i did say i would be a good deal. when it was negotiated, i was for.responsible i concluded it wasn't. i wrote about -- obama's president fault? -- efore you announced host: very sharp piece of the debate, angie drobnic holan, true there. guest: yes, we looked specifically at trump's tatement that hillary clinton called it the gold standard, trans pacific partnership, and correct. she did call it that. now let me back up a little bit, anybody could make sense of the back and forth. he starts off attacking her on nafta, you and i just talked about that. now he talks about the trans pacific partnership. i'm not sure how many people understand the trans pacific partnership, because this is a deal that does not include

china. it is the barack obama it, ittration negotiated is trade deal between the united states and some of the pacific countries. while the u.s. has been diplomatic in trying to talk it is a trade deal meant to increase u.s. presence the pacific rim as counter weight to china. the deal is not supposed to be china.ng that helps if anything, it is supposed to activity toward the united states. o the obama administration has supported this deal. hillary clinton, as secretary of state, supported the deal. administrationhe of now i would say looking at her public comments seemed to be enthusiastic supporter of it. then the campaign started, opposed the deal, i would say bernie sanders has been very skeptical of trade and the campaign clinton said, well, now that the final been made public,

i -- show no longer supports it. things stand on the trans pacific partnership. host: back to calls. clinton supporter. hey, roger. major facts are important, i think we are inundated from being by white lies that we don't have waytime and the -- with the the media is suffering economically, don't have the esources to check out little things that constantly get cut and pasted and everything you country from e local talk show hosts, to hannity and our newspaper, the news observer paper, they just 1.5 million dollar suit from little tiny statements investigative report hat have huge effects on our crime investigation team in north carolina. the think that what

solution is to hammer people who propagate false little things that have a huge people's general opinions. thank you for the work you are doing. from thank you, let's hear our guest in tampa. guest: i think that reader captures a lot of sentiment, a lot of factual issues in the american political now.ussion right i think people are really concerned about it. seeing ifact, we're highest readership levels that we've had. hen i look at what the rest of the media is doing, i see fact in done by news organizations that really didn't do that much fact checking before. a lot of fact checking is going on. readership levels are very high. people are interested in this kind of journalism. know people are tired of the election and may be feeling cynical right now, when i see the fact checking going on, that

makes me optimistic. host: claudia from kansas city, missouri. good morning, trump supporter. caller: good morning. about the e to talk first issue that you brought up, that donaldyou said russians to hack hillary clinton's e-mails. hat i heard and i heard it several times the same clip, he hack it, ing them to hadas implying that if they already done so, would they look had gh the data that they and see if they could find certain things. at it in that regard, if that is true fthere i didn't ething that hear, then wouldn't have you to completely false? host: angie drobnic holan, what you think?

guest: we rated it half true. comment.peculiar one thing about donald trump is hat he's a very dynamic public speaker. he often says things where his could be interpreted he's been or ironic, difficult to fact check in that way. sometimes he contradicts himself. we've done a number of reports where he says he didn't say say o. that e did one about the russians hacking, was an eyebrow raising statement when he said maybe the hillary can find clinton's e-mails. there is a lot of concern now russia e comment that has been hacking officials in democratic campaigns with the purpose of either the election or maybe just sowing distrust among the democratic

system. it's been a big issue, this campaign. over to dave in alifornia, mckenleyville, california. dave is a third party person. gahead, please. caller: i voted for mcmullin, trump. on trump's behalf, you know, he's not the only one who there was -- that the system was rigged against him. same sanders made the complaint and turned out bernie as right, turned out that the democratic national committee, chairmanship of schultz had been working on behalf of hillary. at least onery got question in advance she would be asked during the debate because brazil, who worked for cnn, had leaked that question to

hillary. and to say that the media is -- hasn't been biassed ludicrous.mp is i'm 68 years old and never i remember a so-called media, r, member of the injecting themselves into a on behalf ofdebate the democratic candidate. if i valid been trump, i would said, excuse me, i thought i was debating hillary, not the media. follow-up from the guest in tampa. media the question of bias this campaign election have been pervasive. i can tell you as a fact checker, we fact check donald trump 250 times, he gets a lot things factually wrong. we give him poor ratings about of his statements have been ated mostly false, false or

pants on fire. i think maybe trump has had the most trouble with the fact things,s because he says large things that are inrack rat and small things that are inaccurate. is to look at the statements and rate them. ratings in ance our the name of objectivity, we have call the statements the way we see them. a have a method, it is transparent method. we lay it out in advance. to hold the t candidates to the same standards nd at the end we hope our reader consist read the reports and come to their own decision. here is a statement rated false by politifact. two and debate number here is hillary clinton. >> you know because it sounds in the business or you're aware of people in the business, you know that we are time ever first energy independent. we are not dependent upon the middle east but the

still controls a lot of prices. the price of oil has been way that has had a damaging effect on a lot of the oil companies, right? we are, however, producing a lot of atural gas, which serves as a bridge to more renewable fuels and i think that is an important transition. we've got to remain energy us much nt, it gives more power and freedom than to be worried about what goes on in east.iddle we have enough worries over there without having to worry about that. a comprehensive energy policy, but it really does include fighting climate change, think that is a serious problem. moving toward more clean renewable energy as quickly as we can, because i the 21st century clean energy super power and new jobs and s of businesses. we i also want to be sure

people behind, i'm the only candidate from the very beginning of this campaign who had a plan to help us revitalize coal country. those coal miners and their fathers and grandfather dug that coal out, a lot of them lost lives, they were injured, but they turned the lights on factories.d our i don't want to walk away from them, we have to do something for them. host: angie drobnic holan, why the false rating here? guest: we focused on her united states was energy independent for the first time ever. that is false. are not energy independent. e are still importing more energy than we use. now we are on a better trajectory, the united states is. we have been producing more of particularly , with the natural gas, but we're not energy independent and it is also questionable whether if we were energy independent, would ever? the first time

there was times in the '50s it orms like we were very close at energy independence. overall, we rated clinton's statement false. host: our guest with tampa bay times since 2005 and previously papers in ther florida, also in alabama, louisiana and new mexico. columbia university, masters there and master library of science, university of south florida. angie drobnic holan, editor of next call fromes carl, who is in kansas city, missouri, clinton supporter. hey, carl. caller: hello. to fact check an assertion that hillary made. hillary, but she said trump was buying chinese steel or his construction projects and i read that, too, and also i so he had a shell company that it wouldn't be obvious where he was getting his steel. he other thing i want to talk

bout, i'm 72 years old, 82-nd airborne veteran from when kennedy was in there and i shake fear when i think if i would have been in there with trump in power. have started world war iii, we were loaded on the to cuba. go the other question on fact hecking that i have, is trump financing his own campaign, is that a reasonable true statement? i hear he's putting everything on credit and then charging the people who ed contribute to his campaign and he's paying himself back. the other thing i -- i'd like to make a comment because i don't want to talk about his valiences indiscretions and over the line behavior with women, it's i am overed, what concerned about is -- i think it s deplorable, i think it is

sucking the air out of the room and these -- the president i'm the one who is a cheater, who is a scoundrel, a charlotte an, have they university the thing? have they fact checked that attorney general in florida that tried to bribe? host: thank you. carl lays a lot out there. o you want to take the steel part first? that was a key moment in the last debate. still looking are into the steel claim and we yet, 't fact checked it unless maybe they publish today while i was here, but i don't think so. the steel ng into claim. we have looked into some of the other claims on trump's business background. check, one of the most popular fact checks about his ankruptcy, those tend to revolve around casino business in atlantic city. we've also looked into the trump the floridassue and attorney general.

if you go to our website or google politifact and whatever are interested in seeing, story.n usually find a and there was something else he said, now i can't remember. on and get move other calls in. new brighton, pennsylvania, dorothy.pporter, caller: well, good morning. host: good morning. you know, clinton ruined name. trump's he's -- he won't lie to you. who knows vladamir putin more hillary? she sold him the rights to remember? now, she's hiring these people go and fight at trump rally. hurt.an already is because she a fix

-- ms the people in america he had nothing to do with that. the universe girl should apologize to donald trump. host: thank you, anything you want to add, angie? we did a report on who donald ing fights at trump rallies. donald trump mentioned this in debate.rd and final it's been something that has been hard to parse. was like undercover sting james democrats by o'keefe's organization, he is andn for disguising himself trying to get people on tape. he tapes are all edited, it is hard to evaluate them independently. story,ling a complicated

i urge people to look for the eport on the fight at trump rallies. it is not clear who is causing t, democrats going there looking to have a fight, sanders supporters, the chicago rally a lot of student involvement, students organized themselves. situation.plicated host: question about your ratings, what percentage would pants on t rating of fire? guest: over the long-term, i 20% of the statements get the pants on fire rating. think it is important for me to say, we don't pick statements andomly, we don't do random sample f. something sounds wrong to us, we'll say, let's fact that f. something sounds ridiculously wrong, we want to fact check it. first mission is debunking the statement. i would say our ratings tend negative, that is what we want to correct. diversity of

discussion in american politics and some statements are true, politifact, we have orientation toward the negative. pantos fire rated statement by donald trump from the debate in las vegas couple talked about six billion missing from the state department while hillary clinton was there. >> you were very much involved in every aspect of this country, much. you have experience, one thing you have over me is experience, but it is bad experience because have you done has turned out badly. for 30 years, you have been in a position to help, if you say i use something else, make it me to do that. i wouldn't mind. the problem is, you talk, but don't get anything done, hillary, you don't. just like when you ran the state $6 billion was missing, how do you miss 6 billion. you ran the state department, $6

billion was either stolen, they gone.know, it's 6 billion dollars. if you become president, this going to be in some mess, believe me. tell us moreguest, about the pantos fire rating here. this got our worst rating, really wrong there is ot $6 billion missing from the state department. this was not missing under watch.y clinton's the rationale, i don't think it is even a good reason, there was inspector general's report that looked at how they're handling the paperwork. they said the state department needs to do a better job of contracts.g they found that amount of ontracts was $6 billion that needed the better paperwork, but it wasn't that the money was missing or stolen. he suggests it was stole know there is zero evidence that the thereis missing or stolen is only this report that is

telling the state department, ey, make sure to document the contracts correctly. that is different from what he worst rating.he host: to a third party voter. good morning. caller: good morning. hello. on the air, u are sir. caller: thank you. good morning. read, i forget where i read it, it said hillary clinton had uranium, and 0% of after that happened, clinton $145 ation received million. is that true? find that n, i disturbing. host: thanks, let's hear from our guest. guest: we have looked at the uranium claim, something you see a lot on the internet. now hillary clinton did not sell thatum to the russians, so is just wrong. what did happen and this is a example of how things get

pun out of basic facts, but people spin them and distort them and exaggerate them. there was a is toronto-based company that had uranium mine in the united states. toronto-based company wanted to sell itself to russia company, now because it had uranium on in the united go through regulatory process, the federal government the deal and basically the federal government had the opportunity to object say, no. it is not a public process, private hese involved companies. so it went through this process and the federal agency signed it. on the company was sold. now one of the federal agency state department. it is not clear hillary clinton knew about this or not, because involved private public s, it's not a

process. one of the questions we asked during reporting, was russia buy thanksgiving company to get to the u.s. uranium mines? on these to experts deals and the world uranium market. they said, no, russia would -- doesn't even seem ossible russia could export uranium from the united states, they don't have proper permits. what it was, this toronto-based company in addition to having the mines in the united states, in kazhakstan. that is what russia wanted to acquire. the president had the ability, not hillary clinton, to stop deal. it was not stopped and that is basis for ory is the the claims about uranium. we have a couple different i orts on our website, encourage people to read them. this is a classic example where down for to boil it t.v. because it involves international companies, nternational finance,

regulations, it is complicated hillaryt the sound bite clinton sold uranium to russian system inaccurate and incorrect. politifact.com, the place to find out about those more.ments and richard calling from santa cruz cruise, california, hillary supporter. good morning, richard. caller: hi. the show. i was going to kind of supporter concerned with the revelation in the wikileaks and the project there uncovering pretty much proven voter fraud the gentleman resigned from the was planning hat go and rack up voters at the 50 years. that is one of my questions and the you just answered uranium question. 'm looking up now, i believe years ago, i guess would be bill

one of our biggest china, so just kind of oncerned you were selling, you know, america, little by little, here, tort sell-out america, so, yeah, i veritos, ject wikileaks, bernie sanders know, the as, you nomination was stolen from him. host: angie drobnic holan. guest: the first issue, i haven't thought about that in years, we checked that during 2008 election. i thought it was dubai.

politifact, i think you will find an old report on that, i haven't heard in a while. let's talk about bernie sanders and the election being, the stolen e election was from him somehow. we've looked into this quite a fact checked debbie wasserman schultz and critics during the appened democratic primary. didn't find evidence the rigged in primary was any way. the people came, they voted, and primary cuses votes, more people voted for hillary clinton to be the voted for bernie sanders. so, i don't think the election evidence , we see no of that. what you can say is that democratic national committee debates on some emocratic debates on weekend and right before holidays and a ot of people thought that was aimed at favoring hillary

clinton over bernie sanders, but of strange argument because i would say the democratic debates were for inconvenient times, we all had to work to fact check them. thinking why are we fact checking on friday or saturday night. that help ow does hillary clinton? a lot of people thought hillary debates,id well in the i mean, this is where you get spin-off into speculation. i would say when we think about whether the democratic primary as stolen from bernie sanders, it is like, let's look at the votes and the evidence of that nd i don't think there is evidence to suggest that votes were miscast or anything like that. democratic ore primary voters wanted hillary clinton to be their nominee. is another example from the debates this is again, las vegas, hillary clinton and on guns, this was a statement by hillary clinton rated half true.

>> and so when i think about do, we have to 33,000 people a year who die from guns. think we need comprehensive background checks, need to close loophole, close the gun show loophole, other matters sensible, that are the kind of reforms that would make a difference that are in any way conflicting with the second amendment, you decision the heller and what i was saying that you reference, chris, i disagreed applied way the court the second amendment in that the district what of columbia was trying to do was toddlers from guns. they wanted people with guns to them.y store the court didn't accept that reasonable regulation, but they have accepted many others. i no conflict between saving people's lives and defending the

secretary amendment. host: to our guest, why the half true rating here? focused on her statement that the regulation ssue was protecting toddlers from guns. this is actually referring to washington, d.c. in the district of columbia, the city, and the regulation pretty much banned most handguns, it would be very to legally r anyone own a gun under these aimed at s, not just gun safety or toddlers. because rate it false what we found in looking through all the legal filings is that district of columbia, trying to keep the ban n place kept saying that is aimed at protecting children, we think it is very important to keep guns either out of the home or that they be dismantled or way, certainly official legal filings from the district where they said, we are

trying to protect toddlers and children. having said that, regulations more aimed ating, trying to limit gun ownership. why we rated half true. california, im in lacerville, california, hey, tim. we are here, go ahead, tim. sorry. okay, i'm there is some statements made by the democratic candidate for congress, efore before congressional committee, nd then later on, that was followed by the head of the telling the and ame committee that there would -- brought against the reasonlinton and

hey said they didn't bring these charges is because they she did it ve intentionally. question to you is this. handbook for true that is it not they tell their attorneys, if lies, it creates guilt?ion of tim, you still there? caller: yes, i asked a question. host: let's hear from our guest tampa. thank you, tim. the : i have not looked at justice department handbook, i can't speak to that. we have spent a lot of time fact checking hillary clinton's e-mails. now just to recap what happened, she was secretary of state,

wanted to keep her personal personal otected, her e-mails are not subject to public record law. her staff set up a server, her own server, where e-mailing of her from. then when the public records requested for her public e-mail, her team went through the e-mails and determined which were public which weren't. that is a lot of the problem, what is public record and they are on a private system. was it illegal to do this? a hard question state department has discouraged the staff from using is onal e-mails, but that something that evolved over the years and other secretaries of colin powellcularly did use private e-mail, but their own server.

that makes hillary clinton different. co comey, he james prosecute clinton for charges related to the e-mail because he just said this not a good case. he said she was careful to have e-mail on a private server, the e said that it was not kind of case they would bring. that is what we found on the e-mails. host: sorry, didn't mean to cut you off. clinton s arizona, supporter. good morning, lynn. caller: hi. how are you this morning? doing fine g. ahead. caller: great. want to say i feel this election has turned into a reality t.v. show, like never never seen i think the introduction of donald just don't matter anymore. i'm thrilled to hear people are facts when it

relates to some things that are happening. networks being s accused of bagging one or the for ratings.rching this is great for the reality t.v. america that has been created. my question about fact check, powell t mentioned colin and other secretaries of state. i lived in the northeast and i my work that gh admitted it, e-mail has evolved n. interest of e-mails, she is getting beat up for having a private server, but here were things marked classified under the bush rice, tration, i believe here were classified documents deemed classified after the fact, just like hillary, that over regular personal -- i mean e-mail, which would not ave had the protection or at

least the attempt to protect from a private server. so i just think they were lax cal in understanding of how e-mail is hacked as e-mail came into the part of how we communicate. i want to hear from your guest there, you know, if she found hat to be true or not, pass secretaries of states and that it was just as careless for them withoutnicate on e-mail even a private server. host: thank you, lynn. ahead, robnic holan, go please. guest: what we found with previous secretary of states is use e-mail as t did.as hillary clinton so it's hard to compare between the previous secretaries of states. there is two dational things to mention about clinton. and aid she is sorry wouldn't do it again. then the other thing is that it her hillary clinton and state department took a lot of steps to try to keep classified e-mail off of her private e-mail

server. under the formal system, if classified information, it gets a header at the top of he e-mail and so none of the headers were in her private e-mail. happened is some classified information was not properly labeled. talking about approximately 100 e-mails out of e-mails. i don't think and i think this is what comey was saying, look e-mails, they did work pretty hard to keep classified information off the just a few little things that weren't labeled properly got through. in our discussions with experts on the e-mail system, i ean classification thing has taken up a lot of public discussion, but a lot of the the e we talk to says bigger problem is archival issues, these are government ocuments and should be in a government system, so professional archivist should decisions about what should

be public and what should not be. that got lost e in the discussion. host: time -- guest: classified system was separately. host: time for couple calls. ena, you are on, go ahead, please. caller: hello. lot ifact seems to make a of determinations once they do research. ho owns politifact, since you claim to be nonpartisan and who fact checks you? thank you. guest: that's a great question. i would say as far as who fact us, everybody fact checks us. we're extremely transparent in we list all sources. our readers fact check us, they lot when they disagree or think we missed something. look atws organizations our reports and are more than willing to tell us when they hink we've missed something or gotten something wrong and the partisan website look at us all and publish critiques

of our work. so just like everybody else on get fact et, we checked ourselves. as far as our ownership goes, tampa bay is owned by times, the tampa bay time system florida's largest newspaper. times owner is nonprofit alled the pointer institute, unusual arrangement. what happened, the last private times washe tampa bay nelson poynter, he didn't want to a chain r sold after he was dead. nonprofit ed a institute to own the newspaper after p it independent his death. and so we're owned by the institute, we and the profit from the newspaper go into the organization, difficult time for newspapers, be e're working to sustainable and but we're not owned by a corporate interest, owned by a private

institution. nonprofit institute run by journalist. politifact.com, about us, if you click on the far right there, it says about there, there is a pretty easy way for folks to send in suggestions for you to own fact checking, right? guest: there is. we're on twitter and facebook. people can contact us that way. i would say e-mail is the most direct way and it seems to be the way most readers prefer. host: one more call from deborah. caller: in it's not against the law forer to