s one of the areas that probably doesn't get a lot of coverage on the news, doesn't get a lot of conversation and people care about the issues, take the time to learn bout them and vote for candidates that share their position. host: mark nevins, with the dover trategy group, strategy group dot com. check him out at twitter. this iate your time morning as we focus on pennsylvania. guest: thanks, john, i i had fun.it, host: that will do it for the program today. our battleground series tomorrow, we'll focus on the sunshine state of florida buceyeiday we head to the state of ohio. if you missed any of the check s in this series, them out at c-span.org. hope you have a great wednesday, here tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. eastern, 4 a.m. pacific.

29 electoral votes.

this afternoon, vice candidate mike pence will head to utah, the electoral votes, tight race between donald trump, hillary clinton and independent andidate

-- during that trip to chicago. > announcer: sunday night on kahn discussing bobby kennedy. > had kennedy beat richard nixon, america would be a different place, i think smchlt today, we are visiting racial tension and international discord might be a little different if we had tried to years ago.m 50 >> sunday night on q&a. 2016 nouncer: campaign coverage continues with the pennsylvania senate debate tooney and katie mcginty.

-- over the next

pat toomey and katie mcginty. we are glad you look forward to debate.ic before we begin, quick note on some of the ground rules. candidate will have one minute to answer the question posed to them, followed by a one-minute response or rebuttal and to the candidate, the from me, i hope , i hope you won't think

i am disrespectful if i try to time limits.our i will need your help and that.iate your help with by random draw, the first to katie mcginty. around inty, issues pennsylvania, passions on both sides more than the issues of gun violence and the second amendment. ou support background checks and assault weapons ban, a ban n high capacity ammunition clips and no fly, no gun zone. yet one of the country's most advocates of gun control, arizona congresswoman ive ordhas endorsed your opponent. this room, was in what would you say to her? >> i would say, thanks for for being nd thanks

here tonight. the first thing i would say to gifford, thank her for her service and leadership. is a sue of gun violence critical issue, some 300,000 people killed over the last through gun violence and i would take leadership role. be endorsed by >> coming together on some common sense issues, i think we can get it done. to get it done you have to stick with it and that is the difference i have with senator to me. to a bills name that led police away when it fell by a couple of votes. let democrats take the lead. i'm ready to take the lead on this critical issue. to seeomey: it's good you back in the seat and i'm glad you're doing well. thanks to temple for hosting

this. i want to thank my family and friends who came down from the lehigh valley and greater philadelphia to be here. i approach this issue as somebody who is a strong believer in the second amendment. i think that is a very important personal right that we have, and , it's properly enshrined in the constitution. it just never occurred to me that a three-minute background check to try to prevent somebody who has no legal right to a firearm -- that that in any way infringes on second amendment rights. so i got together with joe manchin after what was probably the most painful meeting i ever had, when i sat down with the families of sandy hook, the parents whose little babies were just massacred. those families -- they weren't asking us to ban all categories of guns or do anything unreasonable. they said can't we make progress on a background check. joe manchin and i put together a bill. we had three votes on that bill. i still support that and i intend to reintroduce that, because we ought to be able to keep firearms out of the people who had no legal right to it.

but katie mcginty is the point of politicizing everything and hyper politics. that drives people apart and prevents us from finding common ground. jim: mr. toomey, perhaps because a woman is running for president, has a long-standing issue of profound importance become one of the more visible issues of the campaign and that is equal pay for women. according to wallethub.com, pennsylvania is now the fourth worst state in the country when it comes to gender pay equity in and the world economic forum places the united states 28 in the world. there is something called the paycheck fairness act. it would require businesses to explain why wage gaps exist between their male and female employees and impose tougher penalties against employers for wage discrimination. five times you have voted to reject the paycheck fairness act. are we to think that accurately describes how you feel about a woman's right to make as much money as a man? sen. toomey: the fact is i have

grown up and i've been blessed to have a family full of strong mom, my three sisters, my wife, who had a wonderful career before we got married, and i have a 16-year-old daughter. you better believe i want her to have every opportunity and to be compensated as well as my sons might be someday. the fact is though, the legislation you alluded to was ruled by even "the washington post" editorial age, no conservative page, as a boondoggle for trial lawyers, not as something that would actually make progress. i have supported legislation that makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of the gender of a worker. i voted for legislation that makes it illegal for employers to retaliate against workers who share information about their pay. and i feel very strongly that women ought to get every opportunity and the same level of compensation as men. but i will tell you also -- jim: thank you. we are going to move on. i'm sorry.

ms. mcginty. ms. mcginty: thanks. i believe this country was founded on a basic bargain -- you work hard, you get ahead. the truth is that families, women and families are working as hard as they know how, two jobs, three jobs, but they aren't keeping up with the cost of childcare, the cost of college, and just basic needs that every family has. i believe we need to honor hard work and, yes, i'm for increasing the minimum wage and enabling families to provide for themselves. and i'm for ensuring that a woman doing the same job as a man is able to bring home that same paycheck. these are critical issues, and i do disagree with senator toomey. it's not enough to have platitudes or say that i think highly of women. families need income so that they can support themselves, and the senator has voted against equal pay. he's voted against increasing the minimum wage. he agrees with donald trump that the problem in this country's people are making too much. that's not what i see out there.

he's voted many times against college affordability as well. this is about family needs, and i will fight for those families. jim: ms. mcginty, your opponents claim that you were handpicked to run for the senate by the democratic machine in washington and will be a rubber stamp for the democratic leadership and hillary clinton, should she be elected president. i think we all agree that voters like an independent voice. can you tell us about one issue where you disagree with your party or your potential president? ms. mcginty: thanks, jim. i do stand with secretary clinton, because she is focused on standing up for families and rebuilding the middle class. i think it would be helpful at this late date in the election if senator toomey would similarly let voters know whether he is voting for donald trump or not. jim: we will get to that, ms. mcginty, but i'm asking you about an issue that you disagree. ms. mcginty: i have one litmus test in serving the people of

this commonwealth, any issue, any idea, does it serve our interest as a state and the families working hard in this state? i will tell you there are some issues that i disagree with secretary clinton on. for example, i agree that it was wrong to set up guantanamo bay. we know that has been a tool that has been used against us by terrorists, as general betray us petraeus and others have said. but i cannot today say we should close guantanamo bay because i'm concerned we would have those who would return to the battlefield against us. i know this -- secretary clinton will fight for working families, and that's what i'm going to do as well. jim: mr. toomey, you've been taking a little heat for refusing to say if you will vote for donald trump for president. i know you have been waiting for this debate. [laughter] jim: i know you've been waiting for this moment to say whether or not you will vote for the nominee of your party.

so is it yea or nay? sen. toomey: unlike katie mcginty, i am not a hyper partisan, reflexive ideologue who gives blind obedience to his nominee. katie mcginty does that. i don't. there are a lot of things that concern me a great deal about donald trump, and i've been very public about it. i have criticized him repeatedly, publicly, because i think he has said some terrible things. i think he has taken some badly flawed positions. and i acknowledge the nominee of my party is flawed. katie mcginty is blindly obedient to hillary clinton and she cannot acknowledge a single flaw to what is on the democratic side what is the most badly flawed candidate in decades. she cannot even acknowledge what the dishonesty we see from hillary clinton on a regular basis, maybe because katie mcginty began a campaign with a background,r own claiming she was the first in her family to go to college, when she knew her older brother had gone to college and come

back to temple for a graduate degree before she ever graduated from high school. maybe it's katie mcginty's problem with the truth that allows her to overlook hillary clinton's chronic lies. jim: so, i guess that means you have not been waiting for this debate. [laughter] sen. toomey: that's exactly right. senator toomey, you know there are detractors of yours who will say that you are not completely disavowing trump because you need his supporters to win this election. what do you say to that accusation? sen. toomey: i have refused to endorse donald trump. katie mcginty says that was supporting donald trump. that doesn't make any sense. look, the dilemma is this, jim, donald trump is a badly flawed candidate, as i said. but if he were president, he would probably sign a bill repealing obamacare, which we badly need. he would probably sign a bill that would restore sanctions on iran, which we badly need. so there is this dilemma. if hillary clinton is the

president, we will have a doubling down on all the failed policies that have endangered us around the world, that have weakened our economy and that katie mcginty supports. like a lot of pennsylvanians i know, because i talk to them on a regular basis, who feel stuck, who feel that, i can't believe in a country of 300 million people, we've got these two choices, and katie mcginty can't acknowledge a single flaw in the nominee of her party. jim: i'm not going to badger you to say something that you are not going to say. don't you think your constituents, the people of pennsylvania deserve to know if , you are going to support the nominee of your party? sen. toomey: i don't think my constituents care that much how one person is going to vote. they are going to make their own decision all across the commonwealth about whom they're going to support and whom they are not going to support. i think they care much more about whether i've got policies that are going to help grow this economy, whether i've got policies that are going to help keep us safe. that's the contrast on which they will make their decision.

jim: you wanted to say something? ms. mcginty: i do. the center -- senator is in a class of his own on this issue. he's the only person running for senate in the entire country who has not leveled with his constituents. here's what i want to share with people here. in philadelphia, the senator will say he has differences and disagreements with donald trump, but in other parts of the state, what we hear from the senator is how excited he will be to confirm president trump's supreme court nominees. in other parts of the state, we hear the senator saying that he thinks donald trump has put forward incredibly constructive ideas. senator, in politics, the definition of courage and character is doing what's right even if it costs you votes. you have failed that test. sen. toomey: this is televised statewide, katie. i'm sorry if you didn't know that. [laughter] [applause] jim: let's move on. mr. toomey, the first american has been killed in the campaign

to recapture mosul from isis. last february, you appeared to object to president obama's guarantee that the war against isis would never require american boots on the ground beyond our current advisory role. you said this, quote, "we have to recognize that the u.s. military has capabilities that no one else on the planet has and, if we're going to be successful in this, it's going to take american presence." in your estimation, sir, will it be necessary to send ground forces to fight isis? if a vote in the senate were to come up to that effect, would you vote yes? sen. toomey: i don't it's going to take and i don't think it would be a good idea to launch a large-scale invasionary force. i think we have capabilities the iraqis don't have here they should have never been pulled out of iraq, then we might not be in this situation. we need people who can help with logistics, air traffic control, medical evacuation, technology the iraqis simply don't have. we must absolutely defeat

isis. an even bigger meteo medium-term threat for us is the rise of iran, the hegemony of iran and the middle east, which is a direct result of president obama's very mistaken policy. this iran nuclear deal, which endangers all of us unbelievably and that katie mcginty fully supports -- what iran poses now is a very serious, nuclear armed, ballistic missile capable, regional threat that runs from afghanistan to the mediterranean. jim: we will talk about that. sen. toomey: i hope we will. jim: what i want to know is, do you believe that americans should be deployed to the front lines to fight isis at some point in time? sen. toomey: as i said, i think it is the american contribution on the ground should be that of special ops, sophisticated -- i think it is leadership. i think the bulk of the ground forces need to come from the kurdish fighters, sunni arab states that will be absolutely necessary to secure the peace afterwards.

america can provide leadership and technologically sophisticated capabilities that others don't have. ms. mcginty: it's imperative that we defeat and destroy isis. i believe that means our airstrikes supporting local troops, not our combat troops. i think it means, second, that we have to cut off the financial lifeblood of isis, including their access to oil assets. third, we have to take them on in cyberspace as well. what's very troubling to me about senator toomey's record is that he hasn't shown up for many of the key hearings and meetings. the senator has missed some 90% of the key committee hearings and meetings on our critical national security issues. and when the senator has shown up, his votes have been in the direction that takes down our security instead of enhances our security. for example, the senator voting against legislation that moved forward in closing some loopholes in our visa waiver

program, critical legislation. the senator voted against not once, but twice the decision legislation that would close a loophole that allows terrorists to buy guns in our country. jim: a question for you on the economy. there is a frightening prospect for something called "a new normal" in the economy. a federal reserve economist just a week ago said that the long-term economic growth in this country could actually settle at 1.5% for years to come. a new normal. that would mean slower economic growth, fewer jobs, workers' wages and living standards would increase more slowly or even fall in absolute terms. should you be elected, what would your specific blueprint be for fighting the new normal? ms. mcginty: i think we need to ensure that people have training

and -- job-training and apprenticeship programs, skills development, so we can put people back to work in jobs like rebuilding our infrastructure. it's part of the reason, though, that we do need to pay people a decent wage and enable people to fully and engage in the workforce by helping them with the cost of childcare. that's why senator toomey's proposal to hold back economic growth -- small businesses are the engine of economic growth and job creation. that's why learning that senator toomey had launched a bank, his bank has foreclosed in such a predatory behavior against small businesses right here in pennsylvania, killing jobs, hurting those businesses, that senator toomey's own bank's practices are literally considered illegal and predatory in 30-plus states. that's a track record of the senator is working for himself and his own profitability, but he has certainly hurt those small businesses that were creating good jobs.

jim: mr. toomey? sen. toomey: i want to talk about the small business background that i have with my family and how we get this economy going, but i can't let pass -- she just raised this, jim, and said something of shocking hypocrisy. she was referring to a legal device called a confession of judgment. she has scripted ads that have gone on tv, attacking me because of a bank using this. those ads were taken down today because they are so blatantly dishonest. they are off the air across the state because of the lies. but it's worse. it's worse because, the fact is, when katie mcginty was the secretary of the dep, she, through the dep, used the exact same device on their own credit extension. she has the nerve to attack me for what a bank did, a bank that i was an investor in, when she was using the exact same device herself. this is what people are disgusted about with politics, when people like katie mcginty

will be so hypocritical and just won't tell the truth. let me get back to the economic issue. jim: you've run out of time now, sir. [applause] jim: hopefully there will be an opportunity later in the debate. sen. toomey: maybe katie will respond. jim: here's the problem. i want to ask a question about your role as a member of the banking committee and your equity in the bank, and i wanted to ask a question about your experience with nrc energy, and some of the charges that have been leveled against you. you have taken time away from an opportunity to answer that question, and now you don't have time to answer the question about the economy. maybe you will figure out a way to put that in later in the debate. mr. toomey, in june of this year, the pennsylvania house approved a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy instead of the current 24.

opponents of the bill say it is necessary to prevent fetuses from feeling pain during a abortion. opponents say it is an effort by a republican-controlled legislative body that is 82% male to limit a woman's right to abortion. what do you say? sen. toomey: here's what i say. this is a really tough issue, and there are good people on both sides of this issue, good people that i'm very close to on both sides of this issue. the reason it's tough? because it pits two competing values. on the one hand, there is the value of personal autonomy. that's very important all of us. on the other hand, there's the importance of the sanctity of an innocent human life. when those two clash, for me, i come down on the side of life, so i am pro-life. i accept that, under particularly excruciating circumstances like rape,

incest, or life of the mother, i would accept exceptions in those cases because they are so tough. but i think what we ought to do as a society is see where we can find common ground on a really tough issue. there has long been a consensus on a couple things. one, you don't perform an abortion on a baby that's about to be delivered. someone that's very far along, a seven pound baby girl, kicking in her mother's womb, but katie mcginty is fine with that. there's no point at which abortion should be unacceptable for her. we've agreed for decades that we don't use taxpayer funding to pay for these abortions because of the difficulty of this issue, but again, katie mcginty disagrees with that. jim: your response? ms. mcginty: i do stand for the right of women to make incredibly difficult decisions that are medically complex privately, with her family, with her doctor, in conversation with her god. but you know, the senator paints gruesome pictures. i got a call couple weeks ago from a gentleman from southwestern pennsylvania.

that gentleman shared a story that just underscores for me this is a decision for parents, for families, not for politicians. the room was painted. the baby furniture was purchased. the teddy bears were purchased. and it was very late in his wife's pregnancy, when a terrible condition with the baby was understood, and they had to make an excruciating decision to terminate that pregnancy. so, this should not be about politics. your position on this has been decidedly out of the mainstream, joining with donald trump in saying that women or their doctors should have to be jailed for having to make these excruciating decisions. that's not right. jim: thank you very much. we are going to take a one minute break. [applause] we will be back, live from temple university, in 60 seconds. ♪

jim: it is the debate. i don't know if you heard any of that. we are back live at temple university, the debate between toomey and mcginty, one of the highest profile senate races in the country. we have invited our candidates to come off the podium for this segment. one has come and one has decided to stay. sen. toomey: i'm going to join you. jim: thank you, sir. we are going to start with a question that was sent to us on twitter. we can start with ms. mcginty. this is from --

it should be on the screen here. here we go. "how will you proceed with the future still made overfilling the supreme court seat -- stalemate over filling the supreme court seat?" ms. mcginty: the constitution says clearly it is the job of united states senators to consider, advise, and consent on judicial nominees. unfortunately, senator toomey has joined the cabal that now has made a historical milestone that is not a proud one -- the extent of time that a nominee has been hanging out without an appropriate hearing. and it's not the first time that senator toomey has been harshly and determinedly partisan about a position that needs to be above politics. not long ago, he single-handedly held up for some 400 days judge louis restrepo and recently put president obama on notice about another nominee, rebecca heywood, from allegheny county, that the senator won't even meet

with her, won't even allow her to proceed toward hearing. i would do my job. let's get to work. the hearing and review of these nominees that we are supposed to do. jim: mr. toomey? sen. toomey: this is another one of those "she was the first in her family to go to college" stories. i supported judge restrepo. that was all the way through the process. the supreme court, prior to the passing of justice scalia, was roughly balanced. there were decisions that conservatives like. there were decisions that liberals like katie mcginty like. with his passing, the question arises, will the court be in balance or will it swing to the left or the right? and in the heat of an election, with a new president coming in in just a few months, this is an opportunity to let the next president decide. that's my judgment. that's exactly what we should do. i will take a backseat to no one for the work that i've done in confirming judges for the

federal bench. senator casey and i, working together in the six years i've been in the senate, we have confirmed 16 federal judges. 16. those are mostly democrats, because that's the nature of the arrangement when there is a democrat in the white house. but i worked with senator casey to confirm 16 federal judges to the bench, more than any other state in the union except california and new york. jim: we have some questions from students at temple university. they are video questions. the first one comes from morgan. mr. toomey, you will answer it first. let's look at the screen. is a very huge concern among college students across the nation. how would you plan to reduce the student debt for all students? sen. toomey: so, college debt is a big problem. i grew up in a blue-collar, working-class family. we couldn't afford the tuition for college, so, what we did was what a lot of families do, it was a combination of pell grants, student loans, and

working my way through school. that's how my brothers and sisters and i were able to go through college. i think that combination makes sense. i have supported held grants -- pell grants and increasing pell grants and i voted for legislation that puts a cap on student loans. the student needs to bear some of the burden for the education that will help them to earn more over the course of their life. the most important thing we can do is make sure that a graduating student has great job opportunities. katie mcginty is doubling down on the failed policies of the obama administration that don't create the kind of opportunities that allow students to have the income to pay off student debt. that's something we have to change. ms. mcginty: that is an interesting story from senator toomey, however, the record is different. there are many things we can do to bring down the cost of college. we have low interest rates.

let's let families refinance outstanding student loans. senator toomey said no. i'm glad you benefited from pell grants. unfortunately, you voted to cut $90 billion out of that program. even though 300,000 of your constituents depend on the program. middle-class families are struggling out there. bipartisan legislation that enabled an extended middle-class tax cut, so that families could afford college, and senator, you voted against that critical legislation. college is an important piece of enabling families to have the skills and opportunities they need. we can get this done. i was proud working with governor wolf to restore funding for public colleges and universities, and we made a deal with the presidents of those universities to get more state money. then you have to put a lid on the cost of college. jim: thank you. our next question from eagleville, pennsylvania. we are talking about a freshman

majoring in bioengineering. let's look at that question. you will be the first to answer, ms. mcginty. >> my question for the candidate is the big question we had been have in this election is how will we make sure that hard-working americans, who do their hard work and their fair share, will have a job in the future, and how can we make sure our economy is doing well and will continue to do well for future generations? ms. mcginty: thank you for that question. i think we had huge opportunities out there. i meet with ceos of small businesses and big businesses. they say they need skilled workers today. but we have gotten away from things like job training and apprenticeship programs. i would step up and i would support that. and i proudly stand with secretary clinton in saying that community college ought to be part of the high school and extended certification and job training experience. i support making community college available.

it's another way kids and families can afford college. when we have those skills -- when i was secretary of environmental protection, i was proud to put the skills to work. we brought 3000 jobs in renewable energy manufacturing here to pennsylvania. unfortunately, senator toomey, if it is not fossil fuel dirty energy, he's not for it. he worked to kill the tax credit to cut those 3000 jobs here. follow the money. one of the single biggest recipients of big oil money in the u.s. congress. jim: mr. toomey. sen. toomey: yes, follow the money. the 3000 jobs katie mcginty brags about came because she funneled your money to a foreign company to come here, set up a subsidiary. they rewarded her very handsomely. she became a multimillionaire by serving on the board of this company, rewarding her for your money going to them. then they folded up shop. every pennsylvania worker lost their job. pennsylvania taxpayers lost

their money. but it worked ok for katie . she became a multimillionaire. that is not how you grow an economy. the other way you don't grow an economy is by repeatedly raising taxes on the middle class. katie mcginty has raised taxes on the middle class on every job she held in government. when she was chief of staff for tom wolfe, they proposed a massive tax increase. it was the biggest tax increase since the creation of the income tax. the fact is, we need lower taxes. that is what i have been working on since i got into public life. we need to push back on the crazy overregulation holding the economy back. that will help us create jobs and get prosperity we've been waiting for. fromjohn harris nazareth, pennsylvania, is a freshman here at temple, majoring in secondary education. he has this question. mr. toomey, you will be first to answer. >> what are you going to do to bring green energy to the state of pennsylvania, rather than focusing mainly on fossil fuel energies? sen. toomey: i think the

question was about green energy. my view on energy is whatever makes economic sense is what we ought to have. if it makes economic sense at to have windmills, and in some parts of the country it does, then that is what we ought to do. katie mcginty's strategy is to use massive taxpayer subsidies to subsidize inefficient sources of energy that make no economic sense. that makes us poorer as a country. even on the upfront cash isn't enough to keep them going. she wants you to have to continue an ongoing subsidy to these companies. it is called the wind production tax credit that forces you are your dollars to go to people who cannot produce energy efficiently. taxpayer loses. the economy loses. everyone has a higher electric bill thanks to katie mcginty, because she forced companies to buy inefficient and expensive sources. it doesn't make sense. as technology advances, we will have the ability to generate more electricity from the sun,

the wind, and as that happens, it will be available and we will buy it. jim: thank you, sir. sen. toomey: in the meantime, we should stick with low-cost energy. ms. mcginty: i think it's interesting the senator should say that the energy companies need to make it on their own, but he's one of the biggest defenders of billions of dollars every year of tax breaks to big oil. i don't know about you, but i think exxon mobil can afford to pay a few bucks in texas. taxes. let's talk about taxes. his whole campaign is based on things that independent fact checkers have repeatedly chastised, because his ads have been untrue, false, misleading. here is the real tax record for senator toomey. so far out of the mainstream, senator toomey has said repeatedly that his view is that the answer is we eliminate all corporate taxes. that is a $473 billion a year giveaway to his buddies in big business.

they rewarded him handsomely, as he's one of the single largest recipients of cash from them. but who pays the bills? the senator's bills would increase taxes on middle-class families by $3000 a year. jim: thank you, ms. mcginty. ms. mcginty: he has voted against taxes for middle-class families for college. jim: we will have the opportunity to talk about taxes when we come back. we also want to thank our students who have supplied their questions, and also on social media. we will take a quick break and we will be back. ♪ jim: we are back live on the campus of temple university.

we are having a good discussion, i think. we hope that you feel that as well. as for the candidates, has this been good for you so far? ms. mcginty: i wouldn't have missed it for the world. [laughter] jim: i want to ask a quick question of both of you. i'm just looking for quick impressions. you don't have to take the full minute. close to $100 million has been raised for this campaign. most of that money has gone to television ads across the state. it seems most of those ads have been harsh, bitter attacks against your opponent. here's my question. when voters hear this bad stuff about each of you for months, on end, every time they turn on the television, doesn't that contribute to the general sense of distrust in and distaste for politics and government that we have been hearing so much about recently? mr. toomey, you first. sen. toomey: there's no question there's been a staggering amount of money spent and a staggering amount of ads. katie mcginty will decry

citizens united, but she is the big beneficiary of it. outside groups have spent far more on her behalf there may have -- then may have against me. i suggested as a way to fight back against this, that we have five debates across the commonwealth. five debates so we can get into more in-depth discussions rather than 30 second sound bites. she refused. i don't think it is there to paint everybody with the same broad brush. there's only one campaign that their ads had to be taken down because they were flagrantly dishonest. that is katie mcginty. that makes a difference. frankly, katie tends to deny many of the things she has done. go to my website. you can see, we have documented the fact that the dep under her leadership used confession of judgment. we have documented the fact that she scripted the ad that had to be taken down. we have documented the dishonesty that has really been a problem in this campaign. ms. mcginty: what is dishonest

is what the senator has just said. there is actually only one candidate on this stage who had to take his ad down, and that was senator toomey. my campaign has had to take no ads down. there's only one person standing on this stage, who repeatedly, independent fact checkers have said that senator toomey's ads are false and misleading. no wonder the senator doesn't want us to look at his record. the record of owning a bank and foreclosing on constituents. i am proud to have the endorsement of an organization called end citizens united. it is dedicated to getting dark, secret money out of politics. senator toomey had a chance to vote on that and voted against overturning citizens united. no wonder. senator toomey has more money coming in from organizations like the koch brothers, then than just about any candidate in the country.

he has 100% voting record doing the bidding of organizations like the koch brothers. jim: thank you. i'm not sure your respective answers had anything to eliminate distress. [laughter] let's go on. "the washington post" did a study of all police involved shooting in and found that black 2015 men, who represent 6% of the population, accounted for 40% of the unarmed men shot to death by police. i think we all agree that the vast majority of police officers are extraordinarily brave and noble men and women, but do you think these numbers show that there is institutional bias in america's police department? ms. mcginty: we've made a lot of progress as a country in terms of taking on racism and discrimination, but we by no means have fully succeeded in eradicating racism and discrimination from our society.

let me say in my faith traditions that i am happy to say black lives matter. from where i stand, when we recognize the dignity of all people, we are all lifted up. when any person is denied dignity, we are taken down. i say that also as the daughter of a policeman, who revered the work of law enforcement. our family would say goodbye to dad in the morning, and we did not know after he walked his feet would he be coming back home. that is why i have moved forward to say, let's give the police force the equipment they need, double the community policing programs, and make sure they have equipment and resources to be active in the community. senator toomey has pushed a punish the police bill that would strip law enforcement of critical resources. i know that works from a tea party point of view, take any government program away. but it hurts our safety, security and community. jim: do you think there is institutional bias?

ms. mcginty: i think that we still have work to do. i agree with your assessment. we have good men and women. but we have to look into our own hearts. we have not eradicated racism, discrimination, sexism. we have work to do in society. jim: thank you. mr. toomey. sen. toomey: there's no question there are bad apples in any walk of life. any profession has some. i've seen videos of young black men being shot under circumstances that are very, very disturbing. i immediately called for a thorough investigation and holding people accountable for any wrongdoing. but i'm absolutely convinced that the vast majority of police men and women across the commonwealth and our country are not racist. they are trying to do the very best they can to protect us. the problem with the black lives matter movement and katie mcginty propagating this, is the phrase itself is meant to impugn the integrity of the police by implying they don't think black

lives do matter. and in fact, it is my view all lives matter, and i think police get that. i think police get that. [applause] jim: ladies and gentlemen, please. sen. toomey: i will simply finish by observing that i respect and honor the years that katie mcginty's father spent on the philadelphia police force, but the philadelphia police have endorsed me in this campaign, as have every other major police organization in the commonwealth. [applause] jim: come on guys, please you have been great until now. millions of americans are irate that their premiums and deductibles have gone up under the affordable care act. proponents explain that much of the high premiums are due to the fact that insurance companies can no longer deny americans

with pre-existing conditions, and cannot charge higher rates based on health status or gender. my question is -- do you dispute that, and do you bring costs down, while still ensuring high risk americans that couldn't get insurance before obamacare? sen. toomey: first of all, that's not causing the problem with obama care. the problem is it is fundamentally flawed. we were sold a whole bill of goods from day one. we were told if you wanted to keep your insurance, you could keep it, when they knew they were systematically forbidding whole categories. we were told, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. no, you can't. the new insurance plans were designed to exclude doctors people were satisfied with. we were told the average family would save $2500. it is the exact opposite. costs have gone through the roof. today, it is in a death spiral. it is collapsing. 40% of pennsylvanians in the

individual market have only one choice. you can't fix it, because it is based on a fundamentally flawed design that puts the government in control of something that ought to be determined by mom and dad around the kitchen table, not a federal bureaucracy. what i think what we ought to do is repeal obamacare completely. we will have to have a transition for people receiving subsidies. we cannot pull the rug out from under them. we need to move in a direction where individuals can control their health care. ms. mcginty: my question is, where has the senator been? he's been in washington for 18 years. this is obviously a critically important issue. where is the legislation? we need to make sure to bring down the cost of prescription drugs. where is your legislation to make sure people have full choice and the doctors they get to see? i would take action. i think it is important that people not lose their health insurance because of pre-existing conditions. i think it is important we not kick people off of health insurance because they have a

chronic disease, and they hit a cap. we have to bring the cost down. there are things we can do, i will do, that the senator won't. first and foremost, we have to take on big pharmaceutical companies. we are the only country in the world where federal law prohibits us from negotiating down the cost of prescription drugs, with the consequence that we pay sometimes 10 times as much for the very same drug. i will take that on, but the senator is a little too close to big pharma and big insurance. he will complain, but he has done nothing to fix the problem. jim: let's talk about iran. you have expressed your complete support for the nuclear deal. since that deal was signed, iran nuclear capable ballistic missiles, two of them

with the word israel must be wiped out written in hebrew. iran has also held 10 american sailors hostage at gunpoint. has any of this ever given you pause that may be the iran nuclear deal wasn't such a good idea? ms. mcginty: i think this underscores the fact that iran is not a friend of the united states. that is why it was absolutely unacceptable that iran would be allowed to gain nuclear capability. in my analysis, yes, the agreement on the table was the best way to ensure that iran would not have nuclear capability. however, i've been very clear that we cannot tolerate any violation of either the nuclear deal itself, or other u.n. resolutions, including with respect to ballistic missile tests. i've been very public on the administration for tough sanctions. what we can do is what senator toomey has done. he missed 90% of key committee meetings and hearings on the issue.

number two, when he did show up, he voted in directions that make us less safe, voting against closing loopholes in the visa waiver program, voting against closing loopholes that allow terrorists to buy guns in the country. jim: thank you. we appreciate your response. mr. toomey. you now have the floor. sen. toomey: unfortunately, we know katie mcginty was dishonest about her family story, she was dishonest, blatantly so about the ads, and now she's being dishonest about my record in congress. look, it was a terrible, terrible failure of judgment to give $150 billion to the world's number one state sponsor of terrorism. as we gather here this evening, the iranian parliament has not ratified the agreement. no iranian government official has signed the agreement. they don't consider themselves bound by the agreement. but katie mcginty thinks it is fine. it is not fine. they are launching ballistic missiles that are precisely designed to carry nuclear

warheads. ask yourself, if their intention was to abandon the pursuit of nuclear weapons, why would they spend millions of dollars developing the ability to deliver nuclear weapons? as i said before, this is part of a disturbing pattern by the administration to essentially grant hegemony to this iranian axis that extends from the mediterranean. they are hostile to the united states. they will have nuclear weapons soon. that will probably trigger a nuclear arms race with a sunni arab country. this was a bad agreement. jim: i need a response of about 35 or 40 seconds. we are coming to the end. mr. toomey, i watched an interview you did on cnbc in when you called for the 2007 elimination of all corporate taxes. you said, let's not tax corporations. let them compete most aggressively on the global economy. if you had your druthers, would you get rid of corporate income tax? sen. toomey: i wouldn't.

that was an inartful way to convey a simple message. the message is this. you can raise taxes on business if you like, but who pays that? they don't have a printing press in the basement. if you raise taxes, it ends up being paid by the customers of the business, who buy the products at higher prices. my point is, we should have a simpler tax code. this thing is terribly unfair. it is loaded with corporate welfare, the kind that katie likes so she can reward her preferred industries. i hate corporate welfare. i have been the tip of the spear in the senate trying to end it. so much of it runs through the tax code. what we certainly shouldn't do is all of the middle class tax increases that katie mcginty has advocated, including income -- jim: that leads to my next question. ms. mcginty, you called for raising the ceiling on income for social security taxes from $118,000 to $250,000. you are also supporting a democratic bill that calls for a .2% payroll tax increase to fund personal and family leave. you said you would not support

an increase in middle-class taxes. aren't they just that? ms. mcginty: no, i've been clear i don't support any increase in middle-class taxes. in fact, my whole campaign has been about putting forward tax cuts for middle class families. jim: but aren't they increases? ms. mcginty: let me accurately describe my proposal for social security. i very much disagree with senator toomey, who wants to hand social security over to wall street. that would be $1 trillion in fees for his friends on wall street, but would ruin the retirement security of seniors. i say millionaires and billionaires should pay their fair share to shore up social security. the senator just tried to change history on his own record. he's on record repeatedly saying he would eliminate all corporate taxes. he's on record pushing legislation that would cut taxes for millionaires by $300,000, while increasing taxes on

middle-class families by $3000. and the corporate welfare does not end there. jim: that is all the time we have right now for questions and answers. the candidates will each have 90 seconds for closing statements. i think they have some things they want to say. by random draw, katie mcginty goes first. ms. mcginty: thanks to you and everybody for joining us and tuning in. this country was based on a basic idea. if you work hard, you can get ahead. that was certainly the story in the mcginty family. a total no complaint zone. you pick yourself up by your own bootstraps, all 10 of us the mcginty family. kids, but when we were being raised, if you worked hard, you could pursue your dreams. now what i see out there in every part of the commonwealth is that people are giving us their all, with pride and

dignity and trying their best. but those bills are tough to pay. you have heard spirited debate pay. you have heard spirited debate here. i will go to bat for working families and the middle class. frankly, it is those very same families that senator toomey has left behind, foreclosing on them in a predatory fashion, while he made money on his own banks. tried to take away hard-earned social security and handing that over to wall street. refusing to stand up to china, when china doesn't play by the rules, and takes our manufacturing jobs away. this i know. we have a very bright future to give people the tools to succeed, no handouts. decent schools, college that is affordable, job training and apprenticeship programs. when we do that, no one can compete with the american worker. we will compete and win. i am katie mcginty. thank you for having me here tonight. i ask you for the honor of your

vote and support in this election. jim: pat toomey. [applause] sen. toomey: thank you, jim. first, let me say, it has been an extraordinary honor to have the privilege to be the u.s. senator from pennsylvania for these last six years. you have heard tonight that there is substantial differences. if you want someone who will be a rubber stamp for the hillary clinton administration, katie mcginty is your candidate. if you want somebody who is going to be independent and will criticize the president when he is wrong from whichever party, i will be that candidate. katie and i differ very strongly on many issues. you heard her defend the iran nuclear deal, which i'm certain is a bad deal for the united states. she's also a supporter of sanctuary cities, which i think endanger us in our communities. our differences are probably as start as anything on economic issues. i met with families all across the commonwealth. i met with people who wonder why this economy isn't working for them.

why is it that some people are doing fine if they are a multimillionaire let katie? the hard-working families in counties all across the commonwealth have been falling behind. it is because of failed policies in washington. too much taxes, overspending, massive deficits, and way too much regulation. is it any wonder we are not getting the prosperity we need? katie mcginty would double down on the failed policies. i want to move in a different direction that frees up our economy to begin creating the jobs and elevating the standard of living we've been waiting for. i would be grateful for your vote on november 8. [applause] jim: that concludes tonight's debate. we would like to thank the candidates for appearing tonight. we would also like to thank our host, temple university. we would like to thank you for watching tonight. i'm jim gardner for action news. we leave you with these final words from the league of women voters.

>> i'm susan, president of the league of women voters of pennsylvania. on behalf of our league members and the voters of pennsylvania, i extend our sincere thank you to the candidates, and to the moderator jim gardner, for providing this opportunity for pennsylvania voters to see the candidates for u.s. senate, and to hear their stance on the most important issues facing our commonwealth and our country. now, it is your turn for your voice to be heard. election day is tuesday, november 8. make sure you go to the polls and vote. it is your right and civic duty. ♪ [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> coming up in about an hour, we will bring you remarks from

former republican presidential candidate mitt romney on how changes to the legal system could impact businesses in the economy. at the u.s.k chamber institute for legal reform that starts life at 12:15 p.m. eastern here on c-span. donald trump continues his campaign swing today and one of his stops is here in washington dc where he will shortly appear with family members at the grand opening of his new hotel. journalist david corn is at the site tweeting out that guests are lining up for real donald trump's opening of his hotel. frank ford is there, noting the signs, saying under budget and ahead of schedule. today is hillary clinton's 69th birthday. her campaign showing a bit of confidence in this tweet -- happy birthday to this future president. hillaryhday aside, clinton is celebrating her day with a campaign rally in florida. she will be speaking with voters and supporters in tampa.

that will be live at 245 eastern. a swing state with 29 electoral votes. we have more road to the white house coverage as mike pence heads to salt lake city for a rally there with voters. that state has six electoral votes with recent polls showing a tight race between donald trump, hillary clinton and the independent candidate, evan mcmullen. you can watch that on her companion network, c-span2. >> this weekend on american history tv on c-span3, saturday morning from nine easter until just afternoon -- >> the british empire and its commonwealth last 4000 years. men will still say this was their finest hour. >> we are live for the 33rd international churchill conference in washington, tc, focusing on the former british

prime minister's friends. later on at 7:00, texas general land office manager george p bush, jose menendez, and phil collins talk about the spanish mission, the alamo, at the 2016 texas tribute festival. >> this group of people were going and they knew they were going to die, but they went, or they were there, crockett went and there was something very noble and romantic. i have learned it was not quite as black and white and that is one of the things i think would ,e good in this day and age that we put it into context. >> been on american artifacts --

>> macarthur's upfront and notice he's not wearing a weapon. he would often lead attacks wearing nothing but at riding crop that you see in his right hand. the man looked at this and realized if the kernel and the brigadier, if the kernel could take it, i can take it to. >> we visit the macarthur memorial to learn about the early life of douglas macarthur who commanded allied forces in the pacific during world war ii. the great leaders also serve as conscious in chief with the highest double of integrity, with their moral compass locked on true north so we can always count on them to do the right thing when times get tough and no one is looking. his 10xplains commandments for leadership and provides examples of each one. for our complete schedule, go to c-span.org.

>> earlier this week, reporters and analysts spoke about the presidential race, recent political polls in the campaign platforms of donald trump and hillary clinton. over one hour. >> good evening, everybody. thank you so much for being here tonight. we are honored by the presence of our panel. trainor,introduce dean i want to thank the student ambassadors who did all the work on this and got in touch with the whole panel and did all of the leg work. we appreciate it. [applause]

way, this ain't happening without them. thank you all very much. to my assistant, without whom, this doesn't happen. i travel around the country as admissions guy and talk about the advantages of coming to georgetown law school -- for child law school. something like this is right at the top of the list. washingtononderful event and if you can tune out the noise about how everybody doesn't like washington, i can tell you that plenty of law school applicants like washington. they all know what is in washington, so how much could being inlike washington? we are honored to have you here. it's my pleasure now to introduce the need of georgetown law school. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you to our student

ambassadors. my role is to thank andy. andy korn blatt is the best dean of admissions in the country and all of our students can recognize that. being a fabulous, unparalleled dean of admissions, he puts together unparalleled programs. a big round of applause for andy. [applause] when i talk about the law school, one of the points i always make is where else would you want to go to law school except washington tc? it gives you the kind of insight you can't get anywhere else and i can't think of a better example. absorbed thehas whole country and away i haven't seen in my lifetime and to have this panel with these insights talking about what is going to happen, what an amazing event. to our panelists, thank you very much.

my other piece of responsibility is to introduce sam. .am is a big deal in journalism he's the cnn senior vice president, a washington bureau chief, three-time emmy award winner, but what's most important is he's a georgetown law graduate, class of 1999. [applause] without further a do, let me turn matters over to sam. >> hi, everybody. record, we are 14 days, three hours and 55 minutes from the polls closing in california. thening we know the answer , it will cap off the most divisive, comparable -- complicated and unusual presidential campaign we have had in history. who better to talk about it than this outstanding panel we are all lucky to have this panel

here. first, a republican strategist who worked in the white house through the entire second term of president george w. bush and then worked for the republican national committee. he's currently an npr and cnn commentator and supporter of donald trump. we have ej dion, author of a whole host of books on politics and is a professor at georgetown university. >> on a regular professor. very proud of my georgetown connection. >> linda lake is a longtime democratic holster and strategist and has worked with dozens of candidates. organized labor, the dnc and it is a supporter of hillary clinton. her is lieutenant general joseph kellogg, a foreign-policy

advisor to the donald trump campaign. he spent 35 years in the u.s. operation desertin storm and his works -- his awards include the silver star and several bronze star. a democratic culture, the founder of hard research and the brains behind the nbc wall street journal poll. and the correspondent for the washington post. she was a longtime correspondent times and isngton our voice of reason on today's panel. us.k you for joining to start with the state of the race, so i will start with peter. given where the race stands and the prospects were donald trump catching up? nbc "walllatest street journal" poll -- i get

paid every time i mention them. the race is a 10 point race, 47-37. more recent polls, you mentioned saw the poll, you washington post, which i believe betweenoints, somewhere those numbers is where the state of the race is, which is the democrat, hillary clinton, has a decisive lead and has a decisive lead in part because of the democratic coalition. she's doing exceptionally well with hispanics and african-americans, doing well big-league, and withe, millennials. all of those things are good. the reason the race is not totally put away is because we don't know who's going to vote. who are most in

question happen to be those who tend to be much more part of the clinton coalition. what i would add to all of this is if you look, this race has not changed in the course of one year. we think of things as moving tremendously, but we had a question we have been asking since 1996, and that is describe your feelings about each of these people as potential president. are you satisfied and hopeful ?hey do a good job are you uncertain and wondering whether they do a good job? are you pessimistic and worried? ?nd are you optimistic you look at it and if you take it one year ago, in october of 15, just when we were starting out, essentially, you have about 43% of the american public saying they were optimistic or

satisfied with hillary clinton. at that stage of the game, it was about 56% who were pessimistic or wondering. with everything that has happened, all the ups and downs, the answer is it is exactly the same. you say donald trump has been a roller coaster, but in october of 15, 32% were optimistic or satisfied and 67% were not. and 65. later, it is 34 for all the things we are looking at an everything that much hasned, so happened but so few attitudes have changed. lead,lary clinton has a fiveuge, but whether it is , how does donald trump catch

up? >> the cnn poll is the best hole i willow with five, but say this. what mr. trump needs to do is continue to message to the american people. one thing people forget is his experience at being a business leader, his experience in the public sector has given him the unique ability to tap into the american people. this is why he was so underestimated the primaries. no one wouldght take him seriously, said he stood on the debate stage and beat out however many that were there competing against him. now what we are seeing is the clinton campaign ratcheting up their attacks. if you watch those last two debates, it was very void of substance and policy. you saw her reinforcing this narrative that donald trump is a sexist and a racist. she knows there are

independents, moderates and the bernie sanders coalition that will not vote for someone who they perceive to be a racist or misogynist, that they will vote for so many shoots straight and speaks directly and means what he says and says what he means, which is not what secretary clinton does. fundamentally, people do not trust her. specifically to stay on message. sometimes he gets on these used chases, but he needs to stay on message and talk about his strengths. his strengths are jobs and the economy. business leader he is. if he stays on message, he will win this election. i don't think it's going to be a blowout on either side but mr. trump has what it takes to deliver it. if you look at the battleground states, the fact he's doing well in ohio and pennsylvania are good indicators he has with it

takes to win in these next 14 days. mention before you give mechance to ask -- your take on the likelihood of donald trump catching up and what he has to do. quick things. i want to salute and the corn blatt. andy and i worked together a lot , helping to set up the georgetown institute of politics. everyone here should get involved at the institute of politics. second, general kellogg, thank you for your service. third, i love that peter -- they aregley

trying to take away from donald trump and i am no-trump fan, as you know. his role as a language innovator, they claim that he is saying big-league and bigley -- i insist he has been saying bigley and the other day, he ggerly. it is awesome. my basic view of the election is unless between now and election day we repeal both women's suffrage and the remaining parts of the voting rights act, donald trump will lose. it's possible he will lose by a significant margin. we don't know what's going to happen in the next two weeks and we don't know what e-mails will come our way from various is caught intrump

what you might call a narrative of defeat that happens to candidates at the end of the campaign. it is bipartisan. when you show up at a replace and the reporters ask you are down in seven point -- down by seven points in ohio, how are you going to catch up? he's going to have trouble turning that around. things from that abc coal, which did in fairness give mrs. clinton a particularly lead, two interesting things -- one is the percentage of republicans who are likely voters was down by seven points in an earlier poll. that should be alarming to the trump campaign. the exactng to find number, but if you look at where republicans and democrats are, clinton was ahead somewhere by 85 points and trump was ahead by somewhere around 75 point.

the decay in the kind of support he needs, which means if you asked me about control of the senate two weeks ago, i would have said it's about 50-50. aboutk it has gone to 6535 in the democrats favor. the house will probably stay republican, but we are going to watch an interesting range of possibilities. >> you are the voice of reason on this panel. i love your take on the race, but you have covered a number of campaigns. there could be an october or november surprise that could upend the race? voice ofave to be the reason, i have to swear off any if the race is not

over and i close to think we had the october surprise that is probably going to be remembered as the point of no return, which was a few fridays ago when my colleague at the "washington post" revealed the existence of an unknown until then, but no now by everyone audiotape of donald bush,talking to billy host of access hollywood and saying a lot of things about women, bragging about his behavior. there has really been nothing since then that has affected the race -- you can look at hillary -- white women are coming back to hillary clinton and a lot of numbers shifting and correct me here, but it can be traced to the release of that tape. we had the october surprise and

the question is whether there is a november surprise. >> we have had another october all the things that came out in wikileaks -- maybe you don't want to cover it or talk about it, but that is some damming information that is a treasure trove of things that reinforce the narrative that hillary clinton cannot be trusted. talk about it from the media standpoint, but that is an october surprise. but until we are honest about the state of this race and getting back to things that we cany matter, which is talk about what donald trump said 12 years ago what we can talk about what secretary clinton did as secretary of state. >> [inaudible]

>> i think a couple of things. trump fails to basic threshold questions with a big portion of the voters. he does not that have the temperament to be president and that's being reinforced in a lot of ads. you have two thirds of americans saying he does not have the temperament to be president. that comes not from anything anyone has accused him from, it comes from his own behavior and his own words. whether it's mocking a disabled reporter -- if every single one of those were taken and they said this is not how we behave to his language about women, which is completely an acceptable and his behavior toward women, which is completely unacceptable and the number of women coming forward and his behavior toward immigrants and he reiterates it. hillary clinton is a respected secretary of state and senator. you don't turn and say under

woman" and "nasty women are sick of it and we are not taking it anymore. his own behavior has disqualified him. whether it's being sexist, racist and against disabled people or his temperament to be president. one thing that is really interesting is the ads that are adsv, two thirds of the running against donald trump, the two most powerful ones are a gentleman in control of the i was thedes is said one at the other end of the redstone and i play -- i pray that call never came. thank you, general, for your service for keeping us safe so we can be safe in our prayers. that's the most powerful ad in the cycle and then the mother of the disabled child who said this is not how we treat people.

let's talk about wikileaks. >> you have worked for presidents since the 60's. about from the perspective of the trump supporter but a u.s. military officer, donald trump's temperament and address that he's not the right person to be commander-in-chief. >> recently on cnn, there was a really good interview with the president asked about the u.k. voting tuesday in the european union. need to countyou anybody out. it's foolish to think that because you never know and it can be embarrassing to somebody if they said it's over and it's not. i was with mr. trump in grand junction, colorado and i don't

know how crowds work, but we were told as we were coming in that there would be 3500 people at the airport. there were 4000 in the hangar, 4000 outside, 2000 standing in the sidelines and the traffic was six miles long. somebody has to tell me what is going on when you look at crowds like that. they were old, they were young, they were women, they were disabled. wisconsinn green bay, -- i don't know if it is enthusiasm or what, but what i have seen as america out there and i'm very confident in what they have done and what is going on. when you talk about temperament, i would not be with mr. trump if i did not think he had the temperament to the president of the united states. not a lot of people out there with skin in the game. my youngest son is a platoon

leader in the 82nd airborne division. my daughter spent a year in afghanistan. i've got friends and relatives and theyn the military are doing the work of this nation going forward. if i did not believe he was the right guy, i would not be with him and i would not put my son in there with them. we have 200 former officers, including delta commanders, former four-star commanders, people who have served on the joint chiefs and senior commanders in combat. the of 23 medal of honor recipients. talk about temperament -- if you have that many people saying we are with you, but when they talk about it, i think it is flawed. everis the first time i've been involved in a political campaign, and it's probably the last one.

i've been with him long enough to know and sitting in close individuale type of he is. my daughter said you ought to write a story called behind closed doors. an nda and i'm not going to do it. questions, when you are asked the question do you really want to answer because it is so hard? he would say do we need a nuclear triad and then we have two modernize it. get that?you going to the former secretary of defense said we don't need a nuclear triad. i happen to believe we do. i look at his temperament and the way the person is. i'm not talking up the visual

person. i'm talking about behind closed doors. and i liked this comment -- family matters. look at his family. a pretty good family. we did people. getting involved with the rhetoric. the last debate was the best because the first two started off with personality questions. the first question the last debate was about the supreme court. that was the great start of a debate. people who talk about personalities, that's a mistake. this nation has too many issues that have to be solved. back.lay it out and sit when i was asked what you should do, i would ask every american who votes, take a minute, sit and vote not on

personalities but where this nation has to go. >> wide don't you go on. somethingto pick up briefly you mentioned and that was exit. in the united kingdom, many of doubt,ls said with out a they were pretty sure the united kingdom was going to stay part of the european union and that did not happen. parallels, lot of some say between people who voted to leave the european union and the trump phenomenon. can you imagine that the elites pollsters andthe the establishment may just be

wrong on this one? >> pollsters wrong? i cannot accept that idea. andhere are whole thursday pulled her not very popular. >> they are not. >> and that's a poll that told you that. >> exactly. i've gotten the brexit question that every forum i have gone to. it's a fair question and an important question. it goes to the question of turnout. the difference between brexit and the presidential election is one was what i call a referendum, a referendum on ideas. essentially, it has no structure. people who turned out or chose to turn out, it was a turnout

question. what i'm telling you is we have party identification, we have a set group of ideas we are able to lay off with a lot of history. given all of that, i don't see it, i don't think it's there. i guarantee you there will be one poll that shows donald trump winning were multiple polls, but if you look at the vast preponderance of things, i would pick up from where karen started and that is we are going to have to see an awful lot of change in 14 days to see the difference. the major thing i would say is the question of turnout. at this stage of the game, both in early voting and what we see in our polls, it would suggest the turnout is going to be strong on the democratic side. one poll has donald trump ahead right now.

some had a problem with the methodology of those polls. say on brexit, there are a couple of things. it is a bit of a canard to say the polls all showed brexit was going to lose. i'm quoting from a bloomberg news report that morning that said three of four surveys published wednesday predicted a contest to close to call with two points or less separating the camps. have the kind of pulling we have at the moment. we don't know what's going to happen between now and election day, and it is hard to see trump wedding. take a look at that map find us. if you give trump all of the yellow states that are uncertain , then take florida and nevada away from clinton, she still has

an electoral majority. probably haved i disagreements on a lot of issues, when he said personalities come i don't think that's the point. look at that last debate. trump did reasonably well, at least passively for the first half hour. was on thesee down questions of suitability for office, temperament. is he qualified to be president? that usually yields about 65% around there saying no. those are hard numbers for a isdidate to overcome, which why you have so many republicans out there who are on the ballot with them having a hellish time dealing with them.

kelly ayotte in new hampshire is a good example. on the same day, she said he was a role model and a few hours later, she said he wasn't. you have a lot of republicans who don't know where to be with trump. if they had more confidence on these core questions, he would not be having those problems and they would not be having those problems. >> i think the more interesting question on brexit is what produced brexit produced trump. and what produced brexit and trump to a certain extent produced bernie sanders. of themduce all three is producing anti-immigrant movements all over and i think it raises a far more fundamental abouton for postelection what that challenge is. for me, there are three major factors we need to grapple with that are very important to the future of our country. your audience of

millennials are leaders on these questions. white are a 50-year-old blue-collar worker, you have work your entire life and never seen a raise in real dollars. something is fundamentally wrong. lew collare light worker, 85% of your kids think -- 85% think your kids are going to be worse off than you are. >> there is an entire group of americans who feel left out. they are out there. voters thatthe same voted for brexit. voters did wese in the political establishment miss? i don't think in the last few elections we spent a lot of time talking about white working-class men for example.

ago, when the republican party and mitt romney were convinced he was going to win and they were surprised when he didn't, the republicans set out on this leg project to remake themselves. it became how do we reach out to women and young people? the assumption in washington was that immigration overhaul was a foregone conclusion because that was the only way the party could survive. the 2012 election, when this wisdom was setting in as to how the party was going to have to go, a gentleman on fifth avenue in new york wrote a $300 check to the patent and trademark office and sent in an application to trademark the phrase "make america greatavenun ."

theld trump, six days after 2012 election -- i've got it saved on my desktop. it -- you can find it on the internet. had the blocke lettering sketched out and everything. >> you bring up a good point. you put it very simply and what his view is. it has come down to something very simple. the election is either status quo or change. it is that simple. inyou like what has happened the last 4, 8, 12, 16 -- you go back to republicans as well and your path is very clear, you vote for hillary clinton.

if you are tired of what is going on and see the possibility for change, you vote for donald trump. both of them have flaws. both of them have issues that you may be concerned about, but that is what it comes down to. go to allegheny county in pennsylvania and track that one on election night. when president obama one, he won it by 100,000 votes. that's pittsburgh. go out there and start looking at the signs out there. go around your neighborhood's. as signs this year are not prevalent as you have seen in past elections. i live in the people's republic of arlington, virginia. , youming over here tonight know how many hillary clinton signs i saw on the medians? the i saw?,

none. in arlington county, i walk my dog and i see signs -- i don't see trump signs but i think people are frustrated with what is going on and they are trying to find a way to change. that's why i say i've got this thing about people and personalities, but i think there's a frustration of the american people and they are saying when are we really going to see change? i know we hear about it every four years, we're going to change, change a change and nothing ever happens at all. pri and brookings have a poll coming out and we ask a question question to cite one -- do you think america was better off 50 years ago or is better off now?

it splits the country down the middle. you have african-americans and latinos saying we are better off now for obvious reasons come a given the progress being made. upscale americans and college educated americans say we are at or off now. non-college-educated americans say we are worse off now. or title is america 2050 1950. the blue-collar component comes in two parts. some of it is the economic mess a lot of noncollege folks have been for a long time. wins, i thinknton she should spend the three months between election day and january traveling to appalachia and some of the small towns where she will get clobbered and talk about the grievances people have in those places are

absolutely legitimate. the other side is a reaction on race and religion and the sense that the country is not the same country people grew up in. the largest group for those who say we are worse off now is evangelical christians. with the trump phenomenon, you have to be candid talking about an element that is very conservative and another piece overlapping that you cannot completely separate who have some real economic grievances. forsecond is a huge problem the country and it doesn't matter if you are a democrat or republican. the cultural and racial divisions are something that we have to find a way to do something about. >> this map that you see here is

the cnn map that changes every few days. true battleground states, the states that are a lead for clinton. i want to start turning all of these yellow states red. it's give donald trump the your pathtes and then to donald trump becoming president of the united states. all of these things are important, but at the end of the day, these concepts only work if you can convince voters in certain remaining states that donald trump is the guy. , not aa gop commentator pollster. i work for karl rove but i tell

-- if you give him florida this is a rigged election. do you see what just happened? [laughter] it's the media. i went to pepperdine. florida, pennsylvania, there's some traction there. >> i'm voting in virginia, so let's give him virginia. point i want to make that speaks to this. there's a growing group of individuals -- you talk about those white people over 50 that have not had a raise, i don't

know what holds you look at or who you talk to, but if times are hard for white people, it's really hard for black people. i know that because i happen to be black. but based upon my own family and onends and people i speak to a regular basis in the community, there is a growing sense that we, the black community are left behind in this economy. 8.4% unemployment and more black people owning homes in the great depression and we do now, we have some severe problems. there are a lot of black people who look at mr. trump and say -- i'm not going to say this "makely, but in terms of america a great again" which bill clinton said many times, there's a sentiment that america can be great again. when my grandfather who work for

sears roebuck and company and open of his own air-conditioning business, he was able to buy all of his children a car and give them a down payment for the home. my grandmother was not able to do that for me. i always made more money than my mother. at the economy, when you look at jobs and the plight of black americans and certain urban centers like detroit, chicago and baltimore, these are real issues. they will go and vote and think to themselves, what has secretary clinton, who is from chicago done for me lately? what has she done while she was first lady or united states senator? contingent ofing african americans and millennials because student loan and it hast improved not improved if you look at what she has been proposing.

a growing number of people will go to the ballot box and vote for them in this map is not including them. trump campaign will say they are not depicted accurately in the poll. to the your response suggestion that more african americans are going to vote for then we are- expecting. >> since many of the pulls show 0%, i guess even 1% would be more than we are expecting. surery clinton has to make her successful qualifications and leadership do not become an argument for the status quo. i think she has struggled with that throughout the campaign. if you look at the speeches a number of plans she has put out, she is for change as well and

america is for change. everybody agrees this is not working and it's not working for lots and lots of people. i think michelle and barack obama said it best and they will close out the election on this message -- that we unify the african-american community. that speech't seen -- i don't care what you think of barack obama, it's one of the most inspirational speeches of our lifetime. he says i am on the ballot, our ideals are on the ballot, our freedom is on the ballot, our legacy is on the ballot. you can call montana and say you came to this country is a bunch of racists and hope to get our vote. >> that not what he said. you said something about mr. trump coming after african-americans and how he treats african americans and that is patently false. if we are going to make these

claims -- you tell me one thing he has said that has been negative or derogatory, so let's be accurate. >> i'm sorry. he said they come here, they break the law, they are rapists and some of them are nice people. he said that. it's just a fact. it's on tape. i want to agree with you on one that -- the very forces have been hitting working-class white america hit the inner-city about 30 years ago. so you are right, african-americans have been hit by the same forces of industrialization, but his appeal of african-americans, it made the african-american community look like they were in a state of absolute catastrophe. detroit?ere you in have you been to baltimore? >> yes. his picture was of the entire

african-american community. this is why i said i was going to do this one time. [laughter] what happens is we talk about the in norman t of the problems we have in this nation. said whatdown to who about who and you can go back to hillary clinton and the deplorables. half of us are and half of us are not. it is a lot more important and we sit around and talk about some of these things you see in the press and the news out there and that's why i ask these people when i go on these talk shows, sit back and think really hard about things like the supreme court. .he first question the second amendment. the heller decision, which was not about kids. it was about gun control.

that was a five-four decision, followed by mcdonald versus chicago, another 5-4 decision that codified gun control. those are things that are important to the americans that are out there that make up the supreme court, all of those things are important and i ask people to sit back and think hard. where do i want this nation to be that i am part of and how do we get there? that's why i say step back. here that icial map would really like to see happen. because i think hillary will carry virginia. start again. give us the yellow. you are going to love this one. give trump florida.

colorado.s look at main and then i think we have a shot at nevada. what i was going for is i wanted -269. to 69 -- i wanted to go 69-xd9 -- 269-269. let the house of representatives decide this one. i think it would only be fitting for us to go there on this election. >> that would unite the country. [laughter]

message. trump had the discipline of general kellogg, one of these maps might be true. or two realuestion quick. let me pick up something as people are going forward. the thing we need to come back linda and ej have been talking about and that is the division that is here. we picked up an early focus groups all the way back in january of 2015. it was those bernie sanders and donald trump, two sides of the same coin, and it was a vote against the status quo. but the reason hillary clinton is ahead is not because of her programs or where she is at, the voters have rejected donald

trump and it may be a situation where he has not gotten his point across, but it does come down to demeanor and behavior. it's the same thing we have seen from the beginning. >> you are arguing that hillary clinton can be seen as an agent of change. she's the most establishment figure in america. when i have been out talking to trump supporters, these are people who have seen the last three presidents in a row select it on the idea that somehow i can make washington, the system work that are. they don't buy it anymore. the basic premise is you have to blow it up. hillary clinton, you talk about her proposals, they are primarily building on what barack obama has already done. cannot position

herself as an agent of change, so what she has had to do and done this successfully and donald trump has certainly help is reminded people of what they find unacceptable about donald trump. >> the reason this may not be a change election as you have the right track, wrong track number and you have president obama's approval number, which is about 53% or 54% and the argument for continuity can appeal to people -- about a third or more of the people who say wrong track are democrats who are mad at republicans but we are divided. tot is why it's a mistake see this just as a change election. >> one thing that i would add which i think is important is underpinning a lot of these -- it goes back to peter's original point -- the country is polarized and it is in some ways

just reflecting that of people have gone back to their corners but one of the divisions we have is the role of government which underpins the gender gap. a solid majority of women believe there is a role for government. a majority of men say it is a good day when government hasn't hurt you. and at government does more harm than good. when you save low up the system, it's a great message to independent men, but it is not a great message to independent women. there can be a lot of peripheral damage when you blow up the system. how about revamping the system? that message had in it and innate gender gap. remember there are trump supporters in this room and clinton supporters in this room. please be respectful of your sitting next to someone voting different from you. no speeches, you only get to ask the question.

anything that last more than 50 -- 15 seconds is my efficient of a speech. you get to go first. >> thank you so much for this great panel. i have two questions. >> one question. >> if mr. trump wins the election, how will he handle chinese relations and how will that affect policy toward taiwan? >> i want to ask general kellogg to take a moment -- he says he's going to rewrite the deal and and and the bad deals that we have. >> there are three questions instead of one. so it all involves the relations

with china. sometimes i do miss the soviets. they were predict the ball. chinese, it will be mutual respect, but they are an important trading partner with the united states of america and we have concerns, most americans do based on what is happening in the south china sea. even though the hague said it is illegal. there is over $40 billion of trade, so it's an important part of the world. nation is one of respect, sort of like working with the russians. whether you like putin are not come you have to treat a global respect.ower with president reagan did it with

gorbachev. he called them the evil empire but he still had relations with them. i think you have to establish those good relationships with the senior partners who are out there. >> thank you for coming. a great, interesting conversation. if the polls hold, democrats would have won the popular vote in the popular vote in last five out of six elections. with that being said, republicans seem to have taken a waiver during the midterms. with a coalition of democrats that seem to be apt to take the presidency but a coalition of republicans at two taking house in congress. moving forward, how do you see the american medical parties realigning if that happens? >> you started to mention earlier the down ballot races. good question.

i think all republicans should reread the autopsy published in 2013. if you read what it says about the problems republicans were creating with latino voters, young people and women, everything written in 2013 could be about this campaign and i want to build a future for the republican party, they cannot lose all of these groups by the margins they lost in the last election or this one. that's why all things being equal, clinton is ahead and will probably win. the disadvantage republicans have in presidential elections is a huge advantage in midterms. the republicans are much stronger with older white voters. older white voters are a larger share of the mid-term electorate. there are 45 million missing voters.

if you look at 2008, 2014, that's 45 million missing voters. that is the democrats problem. they have to turn out there core constituencies, but i think they are going to have two cut their losses among white working-class voters. while they did well in midterms, their margins were much smaller. i said what i was going to say. it seems to have shifted favorably to the democrats in last couple of weeks, so their odds of taking the senate are higher. not a lot, but they are in much better shape. in the house, i think they will gain in the teens, possibly the high teens. a really good night, they will get in the 20's. it will be really hard to get 30

seats. that would take an extra ordinary blowout for them to regain the majority in the house. >> electoral college works against republicans. that's a given. and i think people make a huge mistake. mr. trump is a populist. that may give you a comment made to me at the gym the other day. voting for trump and i am not voting for comstock. he is a republican. interesting comment. what happens in the republican party, i don't know who has caught on to this when you, but they have to be very, very careful because they have not unified much like the democrats have unified behind hillary clinton. disenfranchised element out there. if they lose it, i guarantee you

-- i guarantee you that the next time this comes around, they will not win the presidential election. i don't care if peter pan runs. they are not going to do it. there is a real frustration among a lot of people out there that the republican party has not come together, unlike the democrat party. and you will see that in the future. this wholepsy of election, they should probably sit back and look at that because i think there is going to be a huge issue. >> [indiscernible] general, you served in vietnam. i was in the streets with others tried to stop the war and bring the troops home. >> you failed miserably. i was there for two tours. [laughter] and was also a canvasser

whole watcher for george mcgovern. i remember that election being about change as well. aside from the fact that he made lots of money, what does donald trump really think was so great about those times that we should change back? >> is not talking about talking back -- about going back. the reason i joined up with him, the frustration a lot of people have, it was said earlier. it has not just been republican. democrats and republicans as well. everybody comes in and talks about change. it doesn't happen. the frustration when you get some at you like me out there, we can't even get a budget passed on time. you can't get a balanced budget going. the national defense authorization act that supports our military has yet to be passed this year. go figure. we had kids out there on the

front lines doing stuff like that. you look at washington, d.c. and in rather listen to people washington, kansas than in washington, d.c. because of the frustration out there. to.'s really what his going that's why a lot of us have come online to do it. nobody's perfect. we got that. that's what i'm talking about. if you want the status quo -- i'm a big reliever in patterns. i mean my patterns is people don't change who they really are over the long term. people here in washington, d.c., once you become -- you come into this system and you stay a, 10, 12, 16 years, 20 years, you invest in washington, d.c., and it's really hard to change. came outy he recently on the whole concept of a constitutional amendment on term limits for congressmen and senators. change the constitution. maybe it's about time we do something like that.

my brother was in state government in the state of california and there are term limits in california. maybe that's where you want to go. i don't know. mr. trump, when he says make america great again, nobody put a year on it. that was the hillary clinton campaign saying we are going to go back to the times of slavery and jim crow. make a group -- make america great again means what it means for you. if for the past four years of the past eight years were really good for you, your jobs have gone up, your students don't have student loan debts, you can pay off your debts and you don't -- and you own your home, good for you. but if there was a time in your life when things were better. if there were times in your past lives when things were better. there were times when my family thought things were better. that is what it means. if it means you want a better a betterme that was place for your economically in your family, that is what make america great again means. it's not what clinton and the

liberal say to go back to a mr.ain time that somehow trump wants to put people back in change, like vice president joe biden said. thatnda and i just said would be a great question for a poll, when was a better time for you? i'd like to see the answer to that. >> [indiscernible] question is actually for ej, my former professor. i stack to the audience with my former students. [laughter] >> i am an african american from baltimore. we are not all underage it -- uneducated and living in hell. in onenot put all of us box.

i have to say that. obama ran against a well-established politician, hillary clinton in 2008. running do think against an antiestablishment figure in the primary, a populist who had much bigger crowds than she did come much higher energy supposedly, how much do you think that is going going to help her in the general election, running as a populist, getting bigger crowds as she is? >> that's interesting. of what my colleagues think, what did bernie sanders due to hillary -- do to hillary. that is the essential question. bernie sanders mobilized a lot of people to politics, just like barack obama. i think there was a period when

it was like to be iffy for her, whether this would help, whether bernie constituency was so disappointed that they were not so much going to vote for trump. that a clinton third-party or the couch. bernie because of what did, because of what clinton did in the platform and on specific andes like student loans, because, with all due respect to my trump colleagues, because of donald trumphings has done to create some uncertainty about the election, get thee -- they might young people though. i used to say that when people called barack obama a socialist,

i have friends who were socialists. they were insulted when barack obama was called a socialist. we had a truncated view of the political spectrum. i think that is usually useful for the country. >> [indiscernible] they are home, to be perfectly honest. the one person who united them was donald trump. when we looked in june, 9% of views voters had positive of donald trump. the idea that somehow they were out there to be grabbed or simply mentioning them in the speech just really had no residence. the only question is would they vote? i still think there is some challenge on that front. there will be a lot of people

who will be sitting back rather than actively involved. the one thing that hasn't been -- whend here tonight this election is over, the chapter that will be written is michelle obama and barack obama. without a doubt. those are the two people who drove this election as much as anything in terms of both moral terms and in terms of being able to stimulate the groups that hillary clinton needed to have. we have timeely, for only one more question. >> paris, as far as i am aware, neither your former boss or his father are willing to endorse the republican candidate. as far as i am aware, either the -- tell me what goes on inside the heads of the party leaders on november 9? >> i think they will be celebrating. >> assuming that the polls are

correct. i'm not going to do that. i'm not going to assume that the polls are correct. what you have to remember is that this is somehow not some .nprecedented time of history back in the democratic midterm election, how the democrats run away from president obama. recall, senator mccain did not invite president bush and they did not campaign together. it is not uncommon for past republicans to not speak at the convention. cannot life of me, i understand why the democrats did not invite jimmy carter to speak at the convention. i think what it boils down to is what you have to do politically.

that's why mr. trump has said you do what you have to do. at the end of the day, speaker in order tohat come advance the opportunity agenda that he wants to do for every american, including minorities and women and children, especially those in d.c., he's going to have to do that with a president donald j. trump and he knows he cannot enact any of that with a presidency with hillary clinton. that's why he is going to support donald trump. that's when he has supported donald trump. and that is why the republicans are staying behind donald trump because they know the alternative is so dire for the american people and the legislative america to ofthat'sd donald trump. the republicans. republicans are going to stick with mr. trump. it will do what they have to do politically because they have to answer to their base or their donors or their lobbyist or whoever. when they go in that ballot box, i promise you, they will vote for donald trump. i think it's going to depend

-- if donald trump loses, it will depend in large part on the size of the defeat. i think if it is a close election, the most interesting surely political story of the next year or two is going to be the recommendations within the republican party between the people who blame the part of the party that nominated 70 that couldn't get elected and the others -- nominated somebody that can get elected and the other side. the party will have to work through the recriminations before they can get to the point of figuring out there cap -- the path forward. >> we can do this all night. you have just got a taste for why this is such a fascinating election. thank you, paris, ej, general peter, karen, it's been a terrific conversation. thank you very much. [applause] thank you all for coming.

a quick lightning round. >> donald trump to 70. >> clinton 347. 325.inton over 269-269. >> clinton 371. can't go there because i still can't figure out how jeb bush did not get the nomination. [applause] [laughter]

hillary clinton is celebrating her 69th birthday today with a campaign rally in florida. she will be speaking with supporters in temp up. we will bring you that live at 2:4 to five eastern here on c-span. road to the white house coverage continues with mike pence. he is in salt lake city, utah for a rally, where evan mcmullen is also on the ballot. live atsee the rally 5:30 eastern on c-span 2.

>> c-span brings you more debates this week from key u.s. house and senate races. today at 7:00, live on c-span, democratic, smith chris van christied republican -- kathy szeliga. antenna clout on c-span, a debate for the florida senate, between republican senator marco rubio and democratic powers and patrick murphy. my thursday night at 8:00 agent, kelly ayotte and maggie hassan debate for the new hampshire senate seat. y watchil election da key races on the c-span networks, c-span.org, and listen on the c-span radio app. c-span where history unfolds daily. >> we are lie this afternoon awaiting remarks