youth vote in the upcoming midterm elections with george washington university student bridget anzano and university of virginia student robert andrews. later, we will look a key races in the 2018 midterms with charlie cook of the cook political report. ♪ host: good morning. a three-hour washington journal is ahead for you. we will talk about the latest from the midterm campaign trail as well as the prospects for young voter turnout. now just 17 days away. we begin this morning on the topic of marijuana. canada became the second country in the world to legalize recreational marijuana nationwide. our question to you is should the united states to the same? if you think marijuana should not be legal in any form, the

phone number is (202)-748-8000. if you think marijuana should be legal only for medical purposes, (202)-748-8001. if you think medical and recreational marijuana should be legal, (202)-748-8002 is the number for you to call. you can also catch up with us on social media. a very good saturday morning. you can start calling in now. we will get to your phone calls in just a second but first the latest on the disappearance of journalist jamaal khashoggi. new developments including statements from saudi arabia saying that the critic of that country was killed inside the consulate in turkey. this is the front page of the new york times. their story noting that saudi arabia yesterday saying it was effectively an accident inside the consulate after two weeks of shifting stories. saudi arabia said that an agent

strangled the journalist during a fistfight inside the consulate and that 18 men had been arrested in the case. saudi state media reported that a close aide to the crowd print -- crown prince had been along with the deputy director of saudi intelligence and other high-ranking intelligence officials. the saudi prince said the official organize the -- that narrative contradicting earlier accounts from both turkey and saudi arabia. president trump on friday night saying that saudi arabia's statement was credible and that along with its announcement of arrests amounted to quote, good first steps. here is more from the president yes -- yesterday from arizona. [video clip] >> saudi arabia has been a great

ally but what happened was unacceptable. that theyng to see are rest of the people at the table, and large number of people having to do with the event that took place at the turkey consulate. it is a big first step. only a first step but a big first step. host: one more story on this topic. the disappearance and the outcry over it, the washington post noted spurring critics against future saudi arms sales including rand paul who has urged his colleagues to end sales to saudi arabia, saying he will fight the next arms deal the comes before congress. last year, paul and his allies were four votes short of blocking arms sales to the saudi kingdom. quote, we need to have a full debate about supporting war in yemen.

called for quote, ending our military assistance which had given the saudi's free reign in the ongoing horror in yemen. those are just a few of the stories today on the khashoggi case. if the president tweets about it, we will let you know. our question for you in this first hour of the washington journal is about marijuana legalization in the united states. canada this week became the second country to legalize recreational marijuana nationwide. there are a few front pages from wednesday from various canadian newspapers. this is canada's financial post. open for business, ready or not is the headline. that is the front page of the globe, they won after nearly a century in -- century of prohibition in canada. what happens next is anybody's guess. the toronto star and the star metro of calgary, both using the headline green light.

we are asking you our viewers, we want to get your thoughts. here are thoughts from a few members of congress in the days after canada's law became enacted this week. ron wyden saying that canada recognizes what oregonians and americans across the country already understand, marijuana prohibition is outdated and dangerous policy. it is time to bring america's marijuana policy into the 21st century. kamala harris with a tweet, it is time for the united states to follow suit. legalization would make our justice system more fair. it is the smart thing to do in the right thing to do. a democratic congressman from california saying and america -- ending marijuana's prohibition is not a radical idea, but it is common sense. let's create good jobs, generate tax revenue and restore justice to communities that were harmed

by the failed war on drugs. one more tweet from last week. tweeting about drug free friday saying marijuana had been associated with higher levels of opioid pain medication abuse for trauma patients in postoperative studies. we will show you a few of the debates that have happened in recent days were this issue has come up but we especially want to hear from you this morning. your thoughts on marijuana legalization in the united states. if you think it should not be legalized, (202)-748-8000. if you think it should be legalized for medical purposes only, (202)-748-8001. if you think it should be legalized for recreational and medical uses, (202)-748-8002. we will let you lead the discussion. first, russell in maryland. caller: i was a police officer for 20 years in prince george county and it was a disaster what marijuana has done to people.

if you look at the policies and the policymakers, the people that are policymakers, they went to college and experiment with marijuana and got their lives straight. they don't go to inner cities where marijuana use has taken over the lives of people and when we go ahead and legalize it, you will have mothers smoking marijuana just like we have forget mothers smoking cigarettes. it does not matter what the law says or what the doctors tell them. you will have mentally challenged babies from others smoking marijuana. if you look at the process behind it, there is no benefit to it other than it allows people to break the law. if we get rid of the laws, it does not remove the problem. it just stops punishing people for the stuff they have been doing. it does not help them with their lives in any way. host: let me ask you about your predictions for the future. andhis point, nine states

the district of columbia have legalized recreational and narrow -- and medical marijuana use. 30 states have legalized medical marijuana use. do you think this is inevitable? caller: i think it is opening a can of worms that this country is not able to handle. we are giving up on a drug war that we never actually thought. we took the gloves off in this war. we always had some backdoor politicians accepting money from drug lobbyists that were willing to accept selling america down the road. it is a bad idea in every way. there is no time that people are better off intoxicated. i can't imagine anyone thinking that. i understand medically there are certain things that potentially offer medical benefits and if you pay attention to the science on it, the cbd oil content of marijuana is where the medical content comes in. the manufacturers and the

growers of marijuana are not affecting cbd content, they are affecting thc. they want the intoxicating effect. they are not breeding the plants to be better for medical purposes. we have a better grasp on it. honestly, is there any time where it is better to smoke or medicine instead of having it purified and cleaned and done scarily -- and done sterily? it makes no sense. host: thanks for the call. frank on the line for those that marijuana should be legalized for medical purposes only. caller: yes. we are opening a can of worms here. we are not thinking long-term critically, the effects of legalizing marijuana. the effects on the 20-year-olds, the adolescents.

we are going to throw marijuana i thinkf a 20-year-old, there is a medical use for it and you should not have to jump through hoops to get it. i really think we need to think critically about the long-term use of marijuana in this country just like when he to think about the long-term effects of road versus wade, doing away with the , doing- roe versus wade away with the draft. you can't just keep thinking money, money, money. host: what is your fear long-term? the long-term, i think it is going to destroy the productivity of this country. you will introduce marijuana to a long adolescent in his 20's, trying to work his way up in manyand accumulate wealth then you are going to throw marijuana on him or whoever and i just don't think legalizing

marijuana is a very wise thing to do. host: do you think it is going to be worse than the effects of alcohol and young people's exposure to alcohol. caller: wait a minute. i think marijuana should be the inalized.zed -- decrim alcohol causes more death and instruction in this country than anything. i was a child in the 70's. i grew up in high school around it every day. i know what it does to you, especially young adults. when they get exposed to something they don't know how to manage it or control it and the next thing you know, they are moving on to other things. you need to think critically about it. wade.rsus we have annihilated 150 million americans in this country but

nobody think critically. the fact that a 1972, the child that was aborted in 1972 would have given birth to two kids. we killed 150 million unborn americans in this country. doing away with the draft. only 1% of americans do any service to this country. we are in trouble and we have to start thinking critically about these things. host: tony is up next from new mexico on that line for those who think it should be legal for medical and recreational purposes. it should have been done a long time ago. there is lots of evidence that it works medically and the human cannabisimilar to the the cbd isgree working. as far as getting high, i think we need to be careful, but the

criminalized aspect of it needs to go away and that is what i have to say. host: one more from that line. frank in louisiana. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. in my medical side, younger days, i knew women who had their period and they would smoke marijuana to get relief. -- i came down with shingles and that was so painful, somebody -- if somebody had offered me a dose of heroin, i would've taken it. i did not take that but marijuana gave me relief from shingles. you talk about crippling. it is terrible. the people who were sent to jail on felony charges for marijuana,

they need to be pardoned so they can get their second amendment rights back. take away scam to people's second amendment rights among other things. , if it istional part done in moderation. look at the alcoholics out there these days and the people on opioids. and the cigarette industry, you are addicted. smoked, i can't smoke anymore, but when i did, i had withdrawals maybe two days. cigarettes, you are in trouble. look at that industry. it has killed people right and left. host: that is frank in louisiana. a future tweets. and all other drugs should be legal and available to any adult citizen. thorough question is do you own your body or does the government?

you are still responsible for your actions and will be held accountable, maybe. tj saying medical marijuana, absolutely, recreational, absolutely not. we will keep looking for your tweets and calls. believe8-8000 if you marijuana should not be legal in any form. for those who think it should be just for medical purposes, (202)-748-8001. for those who believe it should be legal, medical and recreationally, (202)-748-8002 is that number. we are having that conversation but voters in 17 days will be able to make a decision on that in four states. ballot measures relating to marijuana on the ballots in michigan, north dakota, utah and missouri.

in michigan and north dakota, those issues are on legalization of recreational cannabis use for adults. utah, issues on medical marijuana legalization. that ballot question came up. generalblican attorney discussed whether they support that ballot measure in their state. here is what they have to say. [video clip] >> across michigan today, we have a huge we would crisis. i had a friend of mine who shared with me that his son was an addict and he encouraged me to go learn more about this issue. you go to recovery centers and it breaks your heart. i called the guy back and we cried on the phone when he shared with me that he had to revive his son who was collapsed on the floor because of opioids. because of the situation we have -- i amoids, i have

opposed to proposal one because i don't think we should put more drugs in the hands of children. that is my viewpoint on this issue. the other two proposals, i am going to vote no. >> sensor webb? >> i supported medical marijuana of2008 when i was a cochair the embryonic stem cell initiative as well. i know what the promise of cures and relief during treatment would mean. unfortunately, even though we voted yes, we had an attorney general who did not want to make it workable. now people are going to the ballot for recreational and i am going to be a yes vote in as governor -- as governor, i will create rules so that product is not get in the hands of children , to make sure we get taxes and put that money into education and health care and infrastructure. host: more on proposal one in michigan from the national council of state legislatures. the measure would permit

individuals 21 years and older to use marijuana recreationally and to grow up to 12 plants. it creates a tax of 10% on marijuana sales at retailers and business revenue would go to local governments, k-12 education and infrastructure. it legalizes the production of industrial hemp as well. that is just one state with marijuana on the ballot. we will go through a few others as we continue to hear from you on phone lines for those who think marijuana should be illegal, for those who think it should be legal just for medical purposes, and for those who think it should be legal for recreational and medical purposes. up next in lawrenceville, georgia on that last line. caller: good morning. i prefer to use the word cannabis. marijuana was the title given to

the drug when it was made illegal many decades ago. i think it was a racist move. why was it a racist move? caller: i read an article about anda book about marijuana the whole idea behind making it ofegal was seen as a part because it was used prolifically in the black community. basically had a racist undertones of the reasons behind making it illegal in the first place. the governor of colorado was interviewed recently about the drug. he was actually politically against the legalization and when asked about it, he said it did not bring a whole lot of standpoint,m a tax

but he was surprised to find out they asked him about the usage and he said it had not increased at all across the demographic. people were not using it anymore than before it was legalized except in one demographic. elderly people were using it a little bit more. note, i visited a friend of mine in the hospital a couple days ago who is suffering from esophageal and liver cancer. they prescribed him something called synthetic cbd oil until they can get him on some real whichis derived cbd oil has better properties for providing him relief when swallowing food. painfe has chronic back and she had surgery for lower -- she would benefit

greatly from medical marijuana. georgia is slowly increasing the number of patients who can use medical marijuana but i don't think it is fast enough. final don't see anything wrong with legalizing recreationally as well. host: next up is james in virginia. caller: good morning. i would like to add to that, there was this preacher guy, minister going around in the and made it illegal. host: the minister made it illegal? , like: he made it illegal a crusade type of thing and that is why they made it illegal. that was back in the 30's. i can't remember the guys name. host: what do you think will happen today? medical should

be approved by every state. i would like to see the government pay for mine. host: why do you think the government should pay for years -- for yours? caller: because it is medical and pharmaceutical like they pay for pain pills and all of that. are you in chronic pain and have you tried marijuana for that? caller: i have been smoking since 69. host: one last question. one of the callers before you said that he had heard an interview in colorado with somebody saying that they did not think that any more people

were using marijuana after it became legal in that state versus before. do you think that would be the case in virginia? caller: it would be the same. there are a lot of people who don't smoke it and drink instead. i don't drink, i just smoked a little weed. host: james in whiteville, virginia, one of the states where marijuana is not legal either for medical purposes or recreational purposes. nine states and the district of columbia, green on that map, where marijuana is legal for both. blue states are where marijuana is legal for just medical purposes. on the next in michigan line for those who think it should be legal for medical purposes only. what do you think about that ballot in your state? caller: i don't approve of it for recreational use because i

was wanting a news program and they mentioned that people are driving when they are high, the auto insurance rates are going to go up because of these people out driving and we have to worry about people driving drunk and now we have to start worrying about people driving high. i approve the medical thing because i heard some people where you use the cannabis oil and it is not the actual marijuana, it is the oil that helps people with chronic pain and things like that. i hope that they will allow the medical use, but recreational, i have never wanted to see that pass and i am going to vote no on -- in michigan for our election because i don't want to see people driving or doing things that could injure themselves or other people. host: thanks for the call from

michigan. it is proposal one in michigan. we will get to some of the other proposals in the other states. andrew in kentucky, go ahead. caller: i used to live in california before i moved out here and i voted against it when they went to legalize it in california. i have seen it financially , people who used to use it medically and now all of a sudden it is legal recreational use and instead of paying bills, they are now focused more on getting the next marijuana fix. i have seen it destroy people's lives in car accidents. a secured -- i used to be a security guard in california and i have seen people get into people areecause stealing because they need money

for food because they are spending money on marijuana rather than saving it for food. i believe legalizing it is a huge mistake although i do not fore with criminalizing it those people who are caught with it. i think it should be lesser crime than what it is. i do feel that it is not need to be legal in any form. host: what about the idea of expunging existing criminal records for those who have a criminal conviction when it comes to marijuana? believer in a firm it should not be heavily prosecuted the way it is. it,le who have charges for they should be expunged. toneed to figure out a way make it not legal but not as

eavy as in effect -- an effect. host: expunging is something on the decode -- north dakota ballot measure, proposal three. recreational use for everyone 21 and older and also expunge his the criminal record of those -- you can look up the wrapup of state ballot measures, hundreds of different ballot measures that voters will be voting on in just 17 days. a few more tweets. legalize and monetize is one of the tweets that came in. steve says red states will be the last states to decriminalize even after the federal government has done so and hopefully disbanded the --

kevin says regulations set -- means a safe product and ruth -- and reasonable taxation. on enforcement is freed up to pursue actual criminals. whatore saying no matter republicans think they know, smoking marijuana is nowhere near as dangerous as smoking cigarettes. as we have said, this issue has come up in several recent debates that we covered on c-span. one of them was this thursday in delaware. senator tom carper and his republican challenger discussed this issue of marijuana legalization. here is that part. [video clip] >> do you favor the legalization of marijuana? senator carper. >> i think we should pass a federal law, except -- i cosponsored one actually that says it is not a federal crime to have or possess marijuana. it is not a federal crime. i am a recovering governor and i

think the states can be laboratories of democracy here. we have states like colorado who are experimenting and a country like canada was going to experiment in my view is we should let them if they want to try it out, make that legal. let's a couple states lead the way and we will learn from them. >> should the federal government play a role in that or is that a state issue? >> i think for now it is a state issue. there is a role for the federal government but there it should not be a law where people could be arrested and convicted. see would very much like to that the federal government declassify the class one classification for marijuana is it events veterans from going out and getting a natural source of pain relief. i have no choice. our veterans do not have the ability to get medicinal marijuana to be able to make them feel better when need be

because of that federal law. i would totally support that to ensure that not only are our veterans able to have more options but so that more testing can be done to ensure that we know what we've got when it comes to medicinal use. i do believe it should be a states rights issue. and is a natural plant think the government has a tendency to do too much. that is not what the federal government's role is. the power of choice relies on the states. i'm not saying i am supportive of it being legal in delaware or not. tom said there are some states experimenting with it. ultimately the government should at minimum declassify it so our veterans can get cared for. it is just after 7:30 on the east coast. we are talking about marijuana.

should it be legal in the united states? having this conversation the weekend after marijuana became legal for recreational purposes in canada, the second nation to do that. 20 of discussion -- plenty of discussion. ahead tories looking look at happen on the federal level. fox news this week, the white house planning on tackling cannabis reform after the midterm elections according to congressman dana rohrabacher of california. for bakr telling california that the term administration has made a solid bid to fix marijuana legislation. inside the president's entourage, i have talked with them in length and have been reassured that the president plans to keep his campaign promise on this. were bacher says the president has spoken in support of legalizing marijuana at the medical -- medical marijuana at the federal level and leaving recreational marijuana up to the states.

oregon congressman earl since democratic leadership a memo outlining steps that congress should take to legalize the schedule one drug. quote, congress is out of step with the american people and the states on cannabis. polling shows 69% of registered voters support legalizing marijuana. we have an opportunity to correct course it democrats win big in november. ber.n novem he has been on this program many times in the past and you can check out some of his past appearances at c-span.org. back to your calls. if you think marijuana should not be legal in any form, (202)-748-8000 is the number. if you think it should be legal just for medical purposes, (202)-748-8001. if you think it should be legal for medical and recreational purposes, (202)-748-8002.

terry is on that last line from mississippi. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well. caller: i think it should be legal for medical and recreational because people are going to do it anyway. i don't care what the law says. do ite going to regardless of whether you legalize it or you don't. is that you'veon got people out there that are drinking and i have seen a lot of wrecks and stuff. i used to smoke it a long time ago. i have not smoked in years. people that do, they say it brings you up to a higher drug and all of that. to me, that is false. i know people that smoke, that

is all they do. it does not make them want to do heroin or anything like that or any kind of opioids. they just don't do it. they go to work every day. i've got friends that smoke and they work every day and they are productive. they are trying -- they are not trying to live off the government. people out there that drink and stuff, to me, that is worse than smoking weed. you've got doctors wanted to make it legal for medical use -- wanting to make it legal for medical use. people out there drinking all the time. they've got liver problems. all kinds of things with alcohol. if you are going to keep alcohol legal, then why not make

marijuana legal for medical and recreational purposes? if you are 21 years old, it is your body, you want to be able to do what you want with it. host: thanks for that call. charlie is up next from ohio. caller: i am totally for legalization, recreationally and medically. i have a medical marijuana card in ohio and this year, on the fourth of july, during my cities tour the july celebration with fireworks, police officer came ato my property and found marijuana roach and i was arrested and i got six months probation and lost my teaching license. they said you cannot have it in ohio because we don't have it growing here yet. i went to michigan and bought it legally there and they said because i brought it across state lines, that is why i lost

my teaching license. it is still causing a lot of people problems. it is the only medicine that keeps my mind off of my chronic back problems. i am in my 60's and it has caused so much trouble. i am very much a libertarian on this. did you get your medical marijuana card revoked as a result? and nowthey revoked it i have actually turned to opiates for help with my back and i think this is ridiculous. this is the only thing that kept me from needing back pain medication. probation for a few more months. host: is there any chance you are going to get that card back? caller: i don't know. i don't have any teach -- i don't have any chance to get my teaching license back. it took away my way to make a living.

i think it is ridiculous what they are still able to do. i'm sure this has ruined a lot of other people's lives. that little bit of paranoia that marijuana gives you, you drive safer. you look over your shoulders a hundred times and you drive a lot better. then i read a study that the anti-inflammatory aspects of marijuana are helping people with dementia. if you smoke marijuana, you have a less chance of getting dementia. i am all for legalization in every way. host: what age do you teach? caller: high school. host: what are you doing in the meantime? caller: uber driving. host: thank you for sharing your story and good luck to you. david is in texas, go ahead. caller: the biggest reason to legalize marijuana is for the industrial use so that farmers can get back to cultivating

marijuana for industry so that we can stop cutting down so many trees. as far as personal use, i think the government would spend a whole lot less money on educating people on personal use instead of fighting it. host: that is david in texas. staying in texas, wesley, good morning. caller: good morning. i think it should not be legal, but if it does have to be legal, of thee safety net, all welfare and all of that should be cut out for anybody that is using it that cannot prove that they have a medical reason for consuming it. if you are going to use it for recreation, then you should not get any handouts from the

government. host: tell me about the proving aspect and how you go about regulating that. do you think too many people are just saying this helps with this ailment to get a medical marijuana card? caller: you would have to have a doctor's approval that you have to have this to help you medically. host: thanks for the call. more from recent debates. this from that high-profile texas senate race. o'rourke.and beto >> there is a consistent pattern -- [video clip] >> there is a consistent pattern that harassment or work supports more of it -- congressman -- supports more than he wrote a book about that -- libertarians had a

bent myself. i think it should be up to the state and colorado can decide one way and texas can decide another. he did not stop with marijuana. he introduced and advocated for a resolution in the el paso city council calling for a national debate on legalizing all narcotics. that includes heroin and cocaine. that is not a reasonable issue which people can disagree. i suspect he was just calling for a debate on it. we are on a debate stage now and i will tell you i think it would be a profound mistake to legalize all our comics and it would hurt the children of this country and that would be a serious mistake. just to be clear, i don't want to legalize heroin and cocaine and fentanyl. int i do want to ensure is this country, most states have decided that marijuana will be legal at some -- in some form. or medicinal purposes

recreational purposes already minimum, decriminalized so we don't have another veteran in the state prescribed an opioid. another older woman with fibromyalgia who is unable to use medicinal cannabis because it is against the law here and another african-american man because more than likely, that is who will be arrested for possession of marijuana. drugs to end the war on and specifically want to end the prohibition on marijuana. to watch the debate on it -- in its entirety, you can watch it on c-span.org. one note on that texas senate race. -- they write with eyes clear but not starry, we enthusiastically endorse beto 'o -- beto o'rourke.

despite the long odds he faces and then no pollster gives him a 20% chance of winning, a victory would be good for texas not only because of his skills both personal and political, but also because of the manifest inadequacies of the man he would replace. that is the houston chronicle's editorial board today. ted is in warrenton, oregon. go ahead. caller: good morning. as far as the conversation this morning, i find it kind of shocking. here in oregon, we are legal on the medical and recreational. you cannot drive down any oregon town, maine street without seeing at least a half-dozen dispensaries. with that said, you can see the

freedom that has happened over time. beenrently and have always a marijuana smoker. i am 60 years old now. i am a highly decorated air force veteran. i get my health care at the v.a. forthright with them and have told them i am a marijuana smoker and they have no problem with that. with the conclusion of this morning's conversation, i find that the money that has been generated into the state of been a boatload. any state that does not want to do it, i don't understand the whole point. nobody is dying. nobody is a pill head. nobody is on opiates. nobody is dying of fentanyl. it is a moot conversation. host: before you go, did you see

a jump in the number of users in your area after it became legal? we lost ted. maryland on the line for those who believe it should not be legal. caller: good morning. let me first say that i am a recovering addict and today just happens to be my 26 year without the use of any drugs or alcohol. host: congratulations. caller: thank you. my personal experience. your former caller had a good point. it does not affect everybody but the majority of people that are affected are the children and they will be stealing it from whomever is in that household smoking marijuana. the point i'm trying to make is i hope these legislators and his educated people take a look into the drug treatment centers. billions of dollars in money fighting an opioid crisis when

the first drug of choice that everyone uses his marijuana. -- is marijuana. it always leads to another drug and it always turns out bad. this is ridiculous. this is a moot point. it should not be legal. take a look at what is going on in treatment centers. ask those children what their first drug of choice was. nine out of 10 times they will say marijuana. it needs to be stopped. host: i appreciate the call. bill in georgia, you're up next. caller: how are you doing? i am a firm believer of legalizing it. are going to smoke pot whether it is legal or not. all you are doing is creating a boatload of problems for good people. as far as driving and the insurance rates going up, people

have been driving and smoking pot for many years. that thing where all of a sudden because it is legalize, everyone is going to be smoking pot and driving and insurance rates are going to triple or something, that is crazy. noweaker boehner is advocating on the internet about investment opportunities for marijuana. investorss thing with and republicans about investing in marijuana. it is on the internet. all that is is old white people like your last caller who just have this thing about anything new, you can't do it because it is new. host: i am not sure the last caller identified his race. talk to me about the laws in georgia right now. it is not legal for recreational or medical purposes. is there a movement in georgia to start that process on the medical side?

caller: yes. if we could ever get by the voter problem we have as far as limiting people to be able to stuff, ifll that stacey abrams becomes governor. we had just barely even got to the point where we might have for extreme cases, marijuana oil being used. it is the older people running the show who have no idea. they were brought up a certain way. of course, drinking is no problem. driving while drunk is no problem. because it is a white thing. drinking is associated with

white people and smoking pot is associated with black people. and if it is associated with black people, it must be bad. and a marine corps veteran i am disabled and i would like the opportunity to smoke pot. the problem is if i do, i will go to jail. of black hundreds people, or thousands i should say, in georgia, for a roach, record and having a they cannot get jobs because of that or a decent paying job. you wonder why everybody is up in arms about it. the whole system is rigged against them but it is all for the way people. -- white people. host: john boehner's involvement in this issue. this is the marketwatch story front back in april. the legalize marijuana movement welcomed the news that two

former permanent politicians were joining a cannabis company. .ohn boehner and bill weld joining the advisory board of acreage holdings which owns cannabis license and assets in 30 states were cannabis is approved for medical or recreational use. boehner tweeted that he was making the move because his thinking on cannabis had evolved and that treating it more leniently under the law can help in the battle against america's opioid crisis. that is the story from april. tim in for month. good morning -- in vermont. good morning. caller: good morning. i have seen the pot go from a legal to legal -- illegal to legal and the people i know after it was legal for a year, nine out of 10 of them did not smoke it anymore. you're talking about people who

had been smoking for 30, 40 years. it was more of a thing where it racy -- a little racy. once the quality was up, they did not even bother with it anymore. -- it lead to opioids. in vermont, you could not find heroin, cocaine, any of those once they got tough with doctors, the doctors who are the ones creating the opioid toughs and when they got with the doctors and told them to cut off the prescriptions, the people were left addicted and had to turn to heroin. now we have an incredible heroin

problem in vermont. that is a state where you never heard the word heroin, ever before. now the last 15 years, you've got people dropping dead all over. it is unbelievable. the marijuana was first made he whol by some politicians decided they found a way to make paper and other products from pulp, they own giant tracts of and along the east coast they made marijuana illegal so it would make all of their forest property valuable. that is the whole reason they made marijuana illegal. host: david is in ohio. good morning.

caller: good morning. accu for taking my call. i think marijuana should be legal, with two nonnegotiable prerequisites. one, if not be available in smokable form. smoking anything is not good for you and that is indisputable. two is the legal age to purchase marijuana i believe should be 25. that might be kind of tough to enforce but that is what i think. host: why 25? talk us through that. the older a person is, the more they mature. 25, you are probably graduating from college and you know more of what you want to be and do. , like a lotalcohol

of states, it is either 18 or 21. it should be legalized with those two prerequisites. not only are the states going to generate tax money from it, but it is also money they're going to save from incarcerating people for the tiniest bit. host: thank you for the call. in, dope is for dopes. that to be a national consensus. and possessing it should be league -- illegal in every sense. alcoholics who killed while driving, alcoholics who do not support their families and killed her pancreas and liver has surged -- it's a scourge. one more recent debate where this issue came up, south carolina's first district. katie errington and joe

cunningham discussing legalizing both medical and recreational marijuana. [video clip] >> i do support medicinal marijuana. i think the fda and the career politicians have let that drag on for too long. that should be a schedule two narcotic. my mother, god rest her soul, because i had to give her morphine when she was in incredible pain, dying of copd instead of medicinal marijuana or cannabis, she suffered tremendously and slept. i watched epileptic children come before my committee in the statehouse and their only way to get through the day is through medicinal marijuana. i will work hard to work -- i will work hard to make sure we keep our promise to our community on that but also respecting the law. it should become a schedule does kobe narcotic -- schedule two narcotic. roundtable veterans

in mount pleasant last week and one of the veterans there was talking about going to get treated and they were just prescribed opioids and he got addicted to oxycontin. sometimes, medicinal marijuana would have sufficed. i think medical marijuana should be legal. be anot sure it should schedule two. i don't think it is that strong. as it relates to recreational, that should be left up to the states to decide. the federal government becomes too involved in our lives sometimes and i think that should be a state issue. host: that is south carolina's first sister debate. all of our debates are available at our campaign 2018 website, all available at c-span.org. two more calls. discussing whether marijuana should be legal in the united states.

(202)-748-8000 if you do not think it should be legal in any form. if you think it should be legal for medical purposes. if you think it should be legal for medical and recreational purposes, (202)-748-8002. philip in michigan, good morning. your thoughts on that ballot measure in michigan that would make it legal in recreational form across the state. i got my absentee ballot sitting here and i voted for it. it should have been legalized a long time ago. to your guy from the air force, thank you for your service. marijuana has opioids and it. that is why it is so difficult for those in the military who -- theescribed opiates military will allow you to take both. they are afraid you're going to

smoke pot and take pills and kill yourself. they will cut you off of your pills if you are smoking marijuana. they really cut back on the hydrocodone thoroughly. i have a friend -- most of the people in the state that i know of, they will not give you, allow you to have marijuana and take the pills. i started smoking when i graduated. i am 66 now and i have often drove and smoked. i don't think it is going to change anybody sticky attitudes with regard to that. you have kids out there -- when you will tryger, it and if you like it, you will keep smoking it. they are not going to change anything. like i told people long ago, they should legalize, tax and regulate everything so you know what you are getting and the government gets their money. it could pay off the national debt as far as i am concerned.

i sure appreciate what you guys are doing. host: edward is in connecticut. good morning. caller: good morning. the first thing i want the public to be aware of is the boys and girls in blue are sworn to upload the law -- uphold the law. i think it would make their jobs a lot easier and safer if they had some form of recreational use in a certain amount. it should be regulated sort of like alcohol. agehave to reach a certain before you let the younger ones smoke it because their brains are still developing until they are 25. it might even affect their as far as recreational

sex. we don't need kids having kids. host: do you think 25 should be the age that you can start using recreate -- using it recreationally? you the truth, i don't think it is a state thing. i think it is a national thing because i think the american -- you know how we are supposed to be self governed by default? that is the way america is supposed to be and we vote on the laws that we live by and enforce and just like everything else, the representatives put on the floor of our house, it is we the people of the united states of america that are supposed to be voting on everything. an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. it is our god-given right to protect our right to vote.

it is not supposed to be limited to just representatives. the reason it is is because the queen of england had her eyes on our charter to build her oath her ships limited range, village, and plunder. host: bring us back here to marijuana. caller: it is like the food chain, is what i am saying, and count onke our vote the fourth of july, on main street, at 8:00 in the morning. host: that is edward in connecticut. dee in fresno is our last caller in this segment. good morning. caller: good morning. i am the parent of a special needs child. she had a severe seizure disorder. california made it legal for recreational and 4 -- are you

there? host: yes ma'am, and for medical purposes? yes, for medical purposes. so we are meeting last week, and i am noticing they have my daughter on six seizure medications. never in my life have i seen this amount of seizure medications given to a 100 pound girl. i asked about the cbd oil, stopse it is proven to seizures. they say oh, we cannot give her that because of the federal. think cbd oil and portion of it needs to be looked at the federal level. how can they discriminate against special-needs children and not give the cbd oil, because she is placed in a state-controlled

facility? i do not get this. there is no law that does not require this. isn't because they want the funding for the medicaid, for the drugs? which totally drugs are out. shewas not even, like, could not comprehend anything. so i am wondering what is happening. host: dee, thank you for your call, the less caller on this site might -- the last caller "washington journal on a segment of "washington journal -- the last caller on this segment of "washington journal" today. we will have next bridget anzano robert andrews to talk about youth voting and campaign 2018. later, we will have charlie cook to talk about races you are most interested in in this election cycle.

campaign 2018 coverage, 29 at 2:00 p.m. today. we will be covering president nevada. in we will become candidates for u.s. senate in washington, that is maria, the republican, l, the maria cantwel democrat, and republican susan hutchison. we also have senator sherrod brown, the republican, renacci,an jim the republican in that race. senator elizabeth warren and republican candidate jeff beal responded to a question on the death of jamal khashoggi. [video clip]

an. warren: this is not random killing, this is someone in the press who asked questions of a dictatorship he does not like, and that is a significant part of this. this was an attack on democracy all around the world, and the response should come not just from the united states but should come all around the world. dictators all around the world should not be able to kill journalists who ask hard questions. why isn't anyone asking right now why donald trump is not stepping up here? why is he not being more aggressive with saudi arabia? is it possible that donald trump's hotels are at risk, his financial dealings,, his family's financial dealings? if we can see his taxes, visio money to the saudis? --.co money to the saudis? we do not know. this is the most corrupt administration in living

history, and we are watching a response to that. do we need a strong response to saudi arabia? absolutely. moderator: congressman diehl. diehl: yes, we have to around thernalists world, and a strong ally in the past with the middle east, we need to continue to have a relationship, and yes, there are businesses in massachusetts, very important jobs to keep here the united states, in massachusetts, and those having contracts, it is important, especially considering saudi arabia is using power to check terrorism in their own backyard. the fact of the matter is that the middle east is still unsafe, and it is good to have, in the long haul, an alley like saudi

arabia. israel is obviously an important partner. i'm glad we have continued to strengthen our relationship, moved the capital to jerusalem, and we need to make sure our allies over there are supported by us but at the same time hold them accountable when atrocities like this happen. >> this weekend on american history tv on c-span3, tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern on "reel america," the 1958 broadcast "the nixon answer: southern town hall." nixon: i do not think nuclear weapons should be used in vietnam. i think nuclear weapons should what we cannotr overcome, and there will be great diplomacy. >> and sunday at 6 p.m. on "american artifacts," we will attend the baseball americana

exhibit, which includes the baseball magna carta, documents the spell of the organization and. the game. and at 8:00, on "the presidency," reflecting on the life of former first lady barbara bush. >> she had this motto that you are going to be judged about the success of your life by your relationships with your family, your friends, your coworkers, and people you meet along the way. >> watch on american history tv this weekend on c-span3. >> "washington journal " continues. host: the youth vote in campaign 2018 is our topic. andrews, star robert college republicans chair at university of virginia, and bridget anzano, college

democrats president at george washington university. what is your pitch to your peers on why they should come out and vote in 17 days? 1: there is a mess among the youths that politics do not affect us. you can see different things that will impact us directly that may not impact the older declaration -- generations is muslim of things like education. -- older u.n. generations may not be affected by, like education. released u.n. just more information that is a definite reason to turn out. host: what is your pitch when you are walking around campus? guest 2: apathy is extremely dangerous. being conservatives, you have to

be engaged to keep people accountable, and the more engaged students are, the more leverage they have in the future of our country. your vote is the leverage. changing the legislature is the manpower we have a citizens. if you do not vote, you are not truly utilizing every tool you can to make changes in our society. host: by the way, special phone lines in this segment if you want to call in this morning, (202) 748-8000 for those 18 to 24 years old, (202) 748-8001 for those 25 to 64-year-olds, and (202) 748-8002 for those 65 and older. we were talking about your pitch to your colleagues, to your peers on campus. was involved in an ad, excuses he hears on why young people do not come to vote. here is a little bit from that ad. [video clip] mr. obama: this year, more than any other year, you have a

chance to change the face of politics, because it looks more like your own. you remember those hearings when the congress was asking mark zuckerberg questions like they had never used the internet before? it is because they have not. "my vote doesn't matter." the last election turned out fewer than 100,000 votes in three states. more people go to coachella. when it comes to something like "dancing with the stars," people actually think their vote matters. but their vote in this november's election actually it willter, because elect people who will make our criminal justice fair and your student loans easier to afford. by the way, you would not let your grandparents think your playlist. what would you let them think your representative, who is going to determine your future? do any ofrt andrews, you? ring true for

absolutely. i am a republican, but i do agree with the former president there. there are not many of you said to not vote. host: what do you think of the term slacktivism? guest 2: i think it is accurate. i think it is important to make your presence known on social media, get the word out, but that means nothing if you do not actually show up to the polls. .com: one chart from 538 showing turnout, midterm election among different age groups, 18 out of 29 euros have ,he lowest turnout in years about 20%, averaging somewhere between 20%, 25%, and you can see the lowest among the other age groups. what are a --,

issues that matter most to people your age? what we're seeing right now is a love movement around women's issues following the nomination --h confirmation, i guess. violencecontrol in gun . that is something members are passionate about. parkland happened last year. the incoming class, a lawyer of the grassroots organizations that followed happened at the freshman level. the students being able to vote. i think that is a really pressing issue. let me ask about the brett kavanaugh conversation and how it played out on your campus. guest 1: on our campus, gw is probably a more liberal campus, so there were a lot of people upset. use of what people going to the supreme court and getting involved that way. hashgoes back to i guess

tag activism, which is great, but we need to make sure that translates to the polls on november 6. host: robert andrews, same question during guest 2: it was certainly a contentious time. there were a lot of opinions. from the conservative perspective, there was a lot of unity and support for brett and itgh's confirmation, certainly brought more energy to our base than has been in a while. this is the most unified the republicans have been across generations since 2010. it was a polarizing issue, but certainly energized both sides of the spectrum. host: how do you see that on campus? guest 2: there are a lot of group me's. are you familiar with group me's? bridget, you know what it is. guest 1: yes. guest 2: so the three of us could be in a group meet if we

have the app. the college republicans, we have one for our members. you see a lot of discussions within their pregnancy posts on social media, having about the issues specifically, with reference to judge kavanaugh, people sharing articles, 100 comments on a facebook post of people arguing back and forth about certain issues that surround his confirmation. that would provide some examples. host: what about the gun rights and gun control issue? tell me about that as an issue among young republicans. guest 2: among young republicans, something i can see of a trend among young republicans is you see a larger and this is on individual liberty, so it is more of a libertarian streak from what i can see. people are trying to preserve their rights. they see the second amendment, and they want to preserve that to protect against ultimately government tyranny down the road, and that is what the original intention was, preserving that right or years

to come. host: was there a march for our lives rally at the university of virginia? guest 2: yes there was. host: what was that like> > guest 2: i did not attend the rally for from my perspective, it became very partisan here this is not a shot at anybody. we can have a dialogue to violence and things of that nature and things we could have done to ensure children are safe in school, but its weekly turned -- it quickly turned partisan, so that was not good to see. bridget anzano, what was it like on the campus of gw> ? guest 1: we organized a group to go to the march for our lives. the turnout was huge. gw in general, just because of the proximity, it was really a monumental moment.

people are definitely excited about it. it definitely moved a lot of people. host: when did you become a democrat? guest 1: when did i become a democrat? i do not know if i have answer. both of my parents are democrats, so i grew up in a democratic household. it was probably my senior year of high school. i will give a shout out to my heh school gov teacher, really got me engaged in politics. i was in high school during the 2016 election. gov class being in a while it all played out definitely made me feel more confident in the views that i already had. what was the original political events that you first remember that you identified with democrats on? guest 1: i remember watching obama's election night in 2008, actually, there is a family in my town or something, they had a

white party with her friends, and i was so young, so i did not know what was going on, but i remember sitting down and watching the tv and ian so excited and waking up in the morning and realizing that he won. so 2008, what was that, 2009? excitedround me were about it, and when i got older, i realized it was actually something that i am excited about. host: robert andrews, same question. when did you become a republican? guest 2: same answer. i have been a republican my whole life. i was raised by a single parent, a republican family. my dad's dad, william landrieu's ii, fought in world war ii, okinawa, and my grandfather and my mom site was a doctor in the army in the korean war. you learn to understand, my dad's dad, he was wounded in battle, and he was literally

fighting. he would have sacrificed his life for our freedom. it shows to me the importance of preserving that theory he was willing to die for our liberties. i see the republican platform to preserve the constitution, the bill of rights, and things we hold dear things that people thought for over and over again to protect and expand for our citizens. and being raised by a single she fought hard, she has her own business, she is a so practicing attorney. government regulations, tax code make it difficult for her, not to make hiends meet, per se, she does well, but she is a strong, independent woman. she can provide for me, and she does not need a handout. she can do it herself. i think with the republican party has done for her as a lever to facilitate for herself and myself as well. host: what was the first

political debate you felt really drawn to in the republican party? guest 2: it was actually 2009, after president obama want, it was the virginia gubernatorial debate. they had a debate and salem, virginia, and in our town, they had one of the debates there. most of the crowd was packed for bob, but you are typically not supposed to apply during a debate environment, but i remember they were talking about transportation. that has been a huge issue in virginia. all the traffic in order virginia. they were asking about transportation plans, and bob had a detailed plan. and they asked, he was attorney general at the time, they asked "here is, and he said his plan," and he held up a blank sheet of paper, "he does not have a plan."

everyone started cheering and clapping. that was my most vivid memory of it. bridget anzano, president of the college democrats at george washington university, , collegedrews republicans chair at university of virginia. if you are 18 to 25, (202) 748-8000. , and 64, (202) 748-8001 65 and older, (202) 748-8002. caller: good morning. i want to ask bridget -- do you think the meeting movement has increased voter is patient, --ecially among millennials voter participation, especially among millennials? guest 1: we have not been able to see yet. i think it will really be telling in november.

i think the meeting movement was really strong last year, and it has continued to strengthen because of the brett kavanaugh confirmation. flowst saw a lot of power back behind it, so i think the movement, the need to movement movemente me too has had a resurgence. host: how do you measure that power, strength that you talk about on campus at gw? guest 1: on campus, you can see, people, even by looking at the pins on their backpacks that say "trust women," "believe women," and you actually know the people and you see them on social media, it is overwhelming the posts you see day-to-day. during the week of the confirmation hearing, it was kind of crazy, but everything will become of posted on instagram about people who were upset, people who were inspired at the same time. i think you can gauge based on people walking around but more so what they are saying on social media.

the college democrats at gw done specifically around this issue, the need to movement -- the me too movement? guest 1: after kavanaugh's testimony, we actually held an event. we held an event that just kind of unpacked what had happened. it was supposed to be a little safe space where you go, sit-down, and kind of talk about what happened to provide people just a space to have dialogue and to feel comfortable with expressing how they felt after everything that had gotten down. it was a hard week for a lot of people. jonathan calling from arkansas on our line for people 65 and older. good morning. caller: good morning. young people that you have on today are the future of our country. i would like them to think about this thing called the electoral college that we have to use to vote for our president.

generally, in an election we have, we use this thing. it is an archaic, outdated, goes back to the 13 colonies days. i would like to see these young people, i would like to hear what they think about, in other words, because i think it is stupid. already in this century, we have had two elections where the person who got the most votes lost the election because of this idiotic electoral college. let's have a direct vote, one for one, like we do every other election. i would like to hear their opinions on the. host: thank you for the call. robert andrews, you are up first on the electoral college. you for yourk input, john, and for making the call. i would have to disagree with you. the electoral college was designed by our founding fathers, and it has many purposes. one was to protect against influence in the election as

well, and it also encourages candidates to go out and get involved in different parts of the country. if we do not have electoral college, new york, l.a., houston, san antonio, chicago would determine our elections and not the states. it gives leverage to smaller states and two different individuals like that in order to have their voices heard. it also, like i said, encourages candidates to get out and visit their constituencies, otherwise they would just be in big cities. hillary clinton, donald trump, you would not see them. they would not care as much about your interests. they would listen to people in larger localities. as someone from a rural area, generally speaking, i want to have my voice heard, and everybody needs to have their voice heard. the electoral college helps to facilitate that. and it is also a massive hedge against voter fraud. it is harder to have a concerted effort to influence an election without the electoral college.

with just a popular vote, it would be much easier to do that. it kind of serves as a hedge against that. i hope that helps provide some insight. host: bridget anzano. guest 1: i am actually going to agree with the caller. i think the electoral college is good in theory, but if you are from california, your vote counts significantly less than if you are from arkansas or montana. the idea of democracy is your voice is your vote, right? but that is person, not really the case when it comes to the electoral college. i think if we want to focus on equality in our country, one person's vote should count just as much as another person's, regardless of where they are from. communitiesority that are a lot more likely to live in these urban areas where the folks are counted less than in the rural areas. i think that unequivocally impacts certain communities as well. host: in chicago, illinois,

andrew on the line for people between 25 and 64. go ahead. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. my question is about the youth. 24, iemographic, 18 to really believe in it. i really think it is powerful. i think robert, you are doing a great job. both ar of you are doing excellent to be on this show. my question is, there was a segment of the other day on the youth also, and there were a lot of callers being very critical about this demographic. he is in international relations major. he is 24 years old and very educated. how do you both feel when caller s call c-span and say, you know, these young kids, they don't know enough about politics? and then went caller yesterday saidarkansas, i believe,

"what are we going to do, start allowing six-year-olds to vote?" i do not know if you have seen that, but i would like your feedback and what you think about when people are being critical of your voice and your party and you wanting to vote. i know you guys are smart. i know how smart my children are. [laughs] host: andrew, thank you for the call this morning. bridget anzano, i will let you start. guest 1: i do think our generation is educated about what is going on, just thanks to social media, you can check what is going on on your social media featured i think the argument that we are uninformed is not necessarily valid. not necessarily valid, either, because you do socialple engaged on media. but we may not be engaged effectively, and now i think it is on our generation to show up to the polls and to make sure that we do have a say in the

discussion. guest 2: yeah, um, i think, first of all, of the people who are informed, they are extremely because of the ability to access information these days, especially because of the internet and the resources thereof. i understand there is a lot of reactionary politics on social media with twitter. we experience it all the time. someone tweets something, it gets 1000 retweets, and it could be misinformation. i think there are valid points to both sides, however i would push back, and not to sound simplistic, but of those who are informed or would be considered in form, they have a more comprehensive knowledge than generations past, i would say. more people are college-educated now than ever before. in our generation, more people are more likely to have a bachelors degree than they were 20 or 30 years ago. if we can get these people

involved, they have more of an analytical mindset. they have the ability to kind of change the tide. in 2016, i think the millennial turnout was 40% in that election. there needs to be more progress made with engagement overall. however, was we get these people together, very intelligent people in a generation between the gap of 18 to 24 -- it is not a generation in and of itself, but it is a subset of their of -- i think there is room for improvement. host: is there an opportunity in the party to listen to the youngest members? yout 2: it depends on who are talking to. my spirits, i do not want to have m misrepresentation, but the candidates -- in my experience, i do not want to have misrepresentation, but i have been able to speak with members of the house of delegates. he has been very engaged, and he genuinely listens and cares about our issues. he came and had a debate with

his opponent, leslie cockburn, at the bat in school at the university of virginia as well. morgan griffith -- i am not registered in the fifth district, but i came to salem. it has always been very receptive of the young people. i think there is a hunger for more young people in the republican party with more insight. i think the republican party will be smart with adopting things like improving data, data analytics, especially when it comes to the election. that is in part by pushing the young people. we are really going to drive the change in the republican party. bridget, a question, how is it going to drive the party? guest 1: young voters are more likely to lean left anyway. to lean left anyway. out tos sense to reach

young voters. we are seeing the youth the very engaged. there is the parkland example. in the past when things like this have happened, there have students where this happened in the parents were motivating change, whereas the students are motivating change. that is what the democratic party really have to listen to. north carolina, tim, good morning. caller: good morning. three topics. i will to get some feedback on how the young people are addressing today. first, voter suppression and gerrymandering seems to be a big problem in the republican party. second, distribution of wealth. and the third one, going back to -- i thinkcan party the republican party and the

conservative term needs to be completely disavowed. they have no right to even consider themselves conservative after what we have been through in the last generation. robert andrews, i will let you start because two of those are direct it to the republican party. guest 2: the. requires versus pression and gerrymandering. man fromking to a north carolina involved in the north carolina gop. that is a heavily gerrymandered state. and won the democrats' maps regional them in their favor. the parties have been doing this . maryland is a state that is severable to member -- to democrats. i do think it is an issue. there are other solutions but to the table. these artificial -- they use artificial intelligence to draw

the congressional maps, the house maps, just because if you want to hedge against gerrymandering you want a .ruly unbiased way i really do not believe in an unbiased commission to draw districts. it will be consistently partisan. whoever controls the state will ultimately have the power to do that. democratic states do it, republican states do it. republicans have an advantage more so, but it has been done by both parties throughout the years. going to using the term conservative in the republican party. i think -- i can understand where you are coming from there, passing ofwith the the omnibus budget deal, things like that. it does not seem very fiscally conservative. however, there are a lot of fiscal conservatives. i consider myself a libertarian

conservative. i cannot be a democrat. but i can be republican. it will allow me to protect my freedommendment right, to practice religion. the party, enter recognizingg -- that faith in god is essential to the moral fabric of our society. those are very conservative's ideals. sometimes we deviate away but i would push back on that. i am not sure what part i should speak on -- host: whichever one you want. guest 1: in terms of distribution of wealth, we do see a huge income inequality, and i think that our country is at its strongest when our middle class is doing well and also our

lower communities are not in poverty. in order to ask this huge gap, it is important for the wealthy, who have the means to live comfortably and beyond, to be able to give a little of that that. this country provides great opportunities, and i think if you are fortunate enough to be successful with the opportunities this country provides, you should give back. is waiting in johnson, pennsylvania, the line for those 55 and older. good morning. morning.ood i am definitely against the electoral college. that was formed to appease the slave states. i think majority rule should be the rule. you take it out on the

high population states. we ended up with second-best in this country -- we have a war criminal for president now. you have a blow part -- a blowhard and a tax cheat. majority rule should be the rule for voting. it should not have to -- i don't know. it seems that you are taking it out on the large state. you have california with two senators with 39 million people and rhode island would lessen the million people with two senators. something's not right there is far as representation goes either. there should be a change in the voting program. host: thanks for the call. you are riding down some notes during the call? a this: i think there is conception. democracy is essential to our nation, but the most important aspect of our country and what

our founders intended was a constitutional republic. the rightsis where cannot be taken away. be republican.to this idea of majority rule, it sounds good and there he, but it's not the best thing because sometimes the majority -- and i'm not saying that is the case in this scenario or has been in america in modern times -- that we have seen this throughout world history and if you look at other countries, especially in europe, our majority can take over and they have a pernicious agenda and they tend to strip rights away and suppressor citizens. sometimes have other intentions. host: you say that ronald reagan is your favorite republican.

why? -- guest 2: i liked his lighthearted approach. that is why he was able to vote overwhelmingly. after the american people had the chance to watch them leave the country. i also liked that he was strong. he had backbone, but he was pragmatic in a lot of ways and did incredible things. he restored patriotism in the hearts of people. they had gone through a rough time in the 1970's. the result lot of economic downturn. reagan recognized things like having the top marginal tax rate was going to spur economic growth because it helped consumer sentiment and investment in our economy. we had gdp growth during the time he was pregnant -- he was president. he is the face of our party still for a reason. host: where does donald trump

rank on that list? guest 1: what do you -- guest 2: what do you mean by ranking? host: favorite presidents? guest 2: i like his presence on the world stage, how he has restored respect. respect is not mean people like you. people are not going to test donald trump. when you see how things have played out, particularly with north korea, can you believe they'll come to the table? i'm not saying that we can trust the north koreans. they have proven we can't, but we made more headway. nobody really likes the rhetoric. but it comes down to his job is being president of the united states and a lot of his policies are generally conservative and i support that. host: who is your favorite democrat? obama1: i'm going to say because he was president when i

was growing up and beginning to get engaged in politics and he is who i watched and look to as the head of the republican -- of the democratic party. host: what about hillary clinton? do you know that you are an dot daughter of hillary clinton? mest 1: hillary clinton held when i was a baby. for a time i could convince people that she was a godmother. she is not. she didn't hold me when i was a baby. i was at the white house, actually. theom was that she did million mom march, so she was a speaker at a white house event they held. so, i was then held by hillary clinton as a baby. host: do you want hillary clinton to run again? guest 1: no. much liked, either

hillary clinton. i do not know she was the strongest candidate. i do like her. i was out there knocking doors for her. i was devastated when she lost. no, i think the democratic party candidate. 55t: the line for those years old. fella, you said you write comedy. i bet you got a hoot out of the last caller. she said that america is a democracy. she should go back to her teacher. how can she justify the behavior h loan democrats who are breaking other people stuff, getting into people's faces, disrupting court hearings and congressional hearings?

it's like you people never grew up. you're supposed to be mature. host: got your point. guest 1: i do not think it is fair to classify all young by thets or liberals acts of a few. we can see that on either side. it's not fair at all to judge and condemn an entire group based on the acts of a few member of -- few members of that group. i do not support being violent. i would not support being aggressive outwardly. but it is also important to make sure your voice is heard and to get out there, to make sure people are listening to you. host: do you want to jump in? have empathy. i a lot of our democratic candidates have been very cordial. got --stand where he is coming from with rhetoric that --r hearing from everybody eric holder, kick them when they are down.

maxine waters, encouraging members of theb administration, shock to the house. you have republican senators gettingg death threats, spat on, being harassed in elevators. i think that type of mob rule and tactics are being encouraged, and it's not all democrats. that is what i'm saying. there's an increasing number it is becoming disproportionate. that does not mean majority. that does not even need a significant minority. it does mean a substantial portion of individuals pushing this, especially within the hierarchy of silver bullet on the left. it's not everybody. what we are seeing is concerning. the former attorney general of the united states. we should have zero tolerance for that violent rhetoric. talk about the white supremacist march at the university of virginia and the impact on the campus of the political discussion on campus. guest 2: certainly devastating.

i remember i was on my way home from the beach and i saw the "usa today" headline talking about the rise in charlottesville. i had no idea it would become such a tragedy and the first thing that came to mind is this is sad. charlottesville is such a lovely, peaceful community. they are most loving and caring people. it's been a wonderful home to me and to everyone who goes to the university of virginia. and for these insidious, despicable, pernicious individuals to come to our town, gs and chantingla hateful things like "the jews will not replaces." as someone fought indfather world war ii, he must die to oppose that ideology, and for those folks to come and spit on the efforts of men like my grandfather, men and women, it was just sickening. it created a lot of tension.

it created a lot of pain. i think overall we are responding well to it. our community has been able to move forward. university of charlottesville has been a peaceful place. it has been an awesome experience of attending school there. we have been able to move forward. the life for those between 24 and 64. good morning. the focus is on the two bully parties. they want people to believe voting is the most important thing you can do. backbone campaign, we believe you need to actually lobby -- citizen should lobby and write their senators and write their senators. youngsters, to ask

what do you do after voting day to make sure our representatives do what they say they are going to to. actually all our presidents, the last 4 presidents have lied about what they are going to do. host: are you a member of code pink? caller: yes. host: can you tell viewers what that is? was founded innk 2003, around the time of the afghanistan war, and then throughout the last 15 years, it is women for peace and it is a play on the terror alert thing -- wee we want code pink want america to be a peaceful nation, not a warring nation. host: thanks for the call. i think that lobbying

and calling your senators and your congressional representatives, in even at the local level is super important and that is a good thing to do. i think the reason we are emphasizing that voting is the most important thing is that is where it all starts. that determines who you are calling. that does have a large impact. clearly lobbying and different efforts like that, making your voices heard after election day is super important. but really making sure that people are out there voting is our priority. less than two minutes left. robert andrews. you have a call. caller: good morning. i would like to address the young man there, the conservative. i have a couple quick comments and a question for him. first comment, you talked about the patriotism of your family and that is why your republican. my father served in world war ii , under a purple heart, carried

shrapnel in his legs and back. all of his brothers served in world war ii. my mother's brother served in world war ii, and her brother died in a airplane crash in france when he was 21 years old. my husband and brother both served in vietnam. and we are a democratic family. parties -- patriotism is not restricted to a particular party. the second thing i wanted to correct you on, when you're talking about eric holder. he did not say "when they are down kick them." what he said was -- it was a play on the words of, when they go low, we go high. he said, when they go low -- in other words, when you do something or say something horrible -- we kicked him. he was talking in a figurative sense. in other words, going back at people who do say horrible things like donald trump. i have a question for you, young

man. i would like to know how many people in your young republican group on campus are minorities. i would like to out of how many are actually people of color or a minority of some sort. guest 2: yes, well, i would like to thank your family sacrifice. she is right. you do not have to be a particular party to be a patriot. but the reason i am a republican is because i see patriotism embraced by the party. however, patriotism is also standing up for the rights and principles to make your country great and i believe that is what the republican party does. there have been abuses on both sides of the aisle. however i think my party is the impetus for protecting the rights that we hold dear. something else we got to with the eric holder comic. it's not necessarily encouraging specific violence. i apologize if i misrepresented that. they are still promulgating

violent rhetoric on both sides. something was not addressed was maxine waters when she was encouraged to mob members of the administration. there is a reason for that. people, senator spain harassed. people who are members of congress. the question -- we do have minorities. we do not really care about your ethnicity, creed, religious background. we cannot keep a metric, but we have minorities that are part of our executive board. all we care about is what your principles are. we want you to live freely and prosper in this great country and we want to preserve the rights and liberties of everybody. easy enough to find. suva.com.publican

collegedemsgw.com. 10 minutes.or about we have a call. go ahead. caller: hi, how are you guys doing today? i called them because both subject -- both subjects because my life. when i was a juvenile, i was arrested and i was pleased to know him for doing ballads and drug abuse. it altered my life. icause of that experience, went to the library there one day and i picked up a book and i started reading and i had the idea of taking college classes. -- peoplee main idea on the left and people on the right, they teach about marx and nes, andk engels and key

on the right you have john locke, montesquieu, and took a spirit with the girl, i'm study alexisd she montesquieule and in class? host: what you think? we definitely study john locke. i am not very far along, so i of not gone in-depth with political theories. bases, but towards not in-depth like that. i'm fairly new in my studies. host: what you want to do when you graduate? guest 1: i plan on going to law school. host: what you want to do with a law degree? yet. 1: i'm not sure i'm 19. probably become a lawyer afterwards. i'm not sure if i want to do that or do something more political. host: what are you studying? what you want to do when you

graduate? major.: i when econ i would like to go into some kind of management. but things do change as bridget alluded to. one of my professors specifically tells us -- so many times people have a rigid plan for their life, but you need to be open-minded. who knows where i will be? that's the plan, but i am open-minded. host: silver spring, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. to be young again. i saw an article on citizenship --ts for illegal immigrants for illegal immigrants and very few young people would pass. i would advocate when you gradually being able to pass a basic civics test. i want to bring up a couple points. republicans are often labeled

with racist epithets. but the 19th, 20th century legacy of the democratic already was slavery, segregation, lynching. a little hypocrisy. the other thing, kavanaugh opponents likely voted to put bill clinton back in the white house and he had really serious package. the last thing is socialist" a fascist -- socialists and quasi the corporaterol sector. democrats into trend that direction. how do feel about the term democratic socialism? guest 1: i think democratic socialism has a lot of good ideas. we are seeing it gain success, biggeris harder for a book people in our country to get behind because of the term socialism. that is just the word being , something more

popular in europe. i think if people are able to look at it more, look at the , they just hear the and democratic socialist automatically leave it for that. i would not consider myself a democratic socialist. i'm a democrat. but i to not think these policies are given as much credit as they deserve. they are to -- they are dismissed to quickly because of socialist and the connotations it carries. host: robert andrews, that term democratic socialism? think the individuals who say that are not necessarily marxist. they are kind of like neo-marxism in a way because a larger role of the state and different public services and whatnot. of problemste a lot though and something we have

seen advocated is single-payer health care. it sounds good in theory, but you see the quality of health care across the board go down. you see rationing of health services. there's long waiting lists. there was an article in "forbes" the other day. 30,000 people in the u.k. died waiting to get different surgeries and procedures they needed to have done. that is the system. it is the quintessential single-payer health care system. it's recognized as the "number in health care system" the world. there are good intentions, but the results are not beneficial. i am an econ major. massive impotency, reduction in quality. qualityto have the best health care, health services with the lowest cost and that's an example of something that would be lost with democratic

socialist policies, per se. been waiting in willingboro, new jersey. go ahead. caller: yes, good morning. thank you for taking my call. i want to ask each of the panelists about the walk away movement. it is something a was recently made aware of and i just want to on user of thes radars of your organizations and if you have any comments or response? host: sure. explain what that number is. caller: the walk away movement came about four or six months ago. it is a movement of people who are walking away from the democratic party for a variety of reasons, and from what i have seen it looks like a lot of the people are what i would consider -- not elderly, but young voters. host: it has become a bit of a

social media campaign as well. guest 1: i am on familiar with this event. walking away towards more right or leaving the democratic party to move more left? host: leading the democratic party to become republican. guest 2: i am not as familiar -- i'm somewhat familiar, but i think it is independent to the right. host: do you want to say anything about it? guest 2: it is not something we have organization, per se, addressed. we are welcoming to people who want to preserve individual liberty and freedom and prosperity in our country. there are a lot of moderate democrats in the upper district. that's a broad strategy. we are welcoming to those folks if they would like to join the party and get involved with conservatism and what not. host: oxford, pennsylvania, good morning. caller: good morning.

i of been listening to the conversation. thank you for c-span. they were talking about independent voters. the were talking about the radicalism of some of the i didn't hearut anything about the radicalism of the president in the white house . particularly in the very beginning. he mocks that poor handicapped person and then in one of the rallies he was saying, "knock the hell out of them, i will pay your legal fees." and he praised the guy running for congress for slamming the man down on the floor. says the the -- and he press is the enemy of the people. it's a double standard is the way i look at it. i listened to them at first, and when he mocked the heady cap person, i had to vote for hillary, which was not my favorite person.

-- the handicapped person, i had to vote for hillary. as far as socialism goes, that is what social security is, medicare is, and they work very well. it is, it is who pays the bills. host: bob in his opinion. robert andrews, i will let you respond about his comments on the president. comments you cannot justify, they are wrong. i am not trying to attack anybody. you cannot defend some of those things. i agree to an extent that we need to disavow, distance anyelves, and call out malevolent or violent rhetoric. some examples he provided would provide some concerns, and we need consistency with identifying on both sides when there are any instances of malevolence that would lead to some sort of negative externality, especially bring a physical harm to people, and

that is something we need to stop, so i appreciate you bringing it up. what was the latter part. host: well, we're running out of time. the president obviously running again and 2020. in your mind, what democrat would be his toughest competition? guest 2: joe biden. host: why? guest 2: joe barton has -- jill biden has appeal to the -- jill biden has an appeal to the blue-collar republicans who voted for trump. what is your name recognition? everybody already knows you and has an opinion of you. everybody knows joad biden. -- jill biden. -- joe biden. there is no dirt. host: bridget anzano, who would you like to see become the candidate with democratic party? guest 1: i agree joe biden is a

good candidate, but i think the democratic party is looking for something fresh. i think kamala harris from california is going to move ahead. host: why? guest 1: she has been very active. she is on the judiciary committee. she was an attorney general, a prosecutor, and questioning a different test moneys across-the-board, she is very strong, she is very firm, and i think she will have a lot of appeal. host: britain is on with the president of college democrats at george washington university. ofert andrew is the chair the council of pumpkins at the university of virginia. we appreciate you coming. guest 2: thank you. guest 1: thank you. host: up next on "washington journal," we will be joined by charlie cook, and we will talk about a house, senate, and gubernatorial races you are most interested in.

speaking of midterms, c-span campaign 2018 coverage continues today. president trump will hold a rally in nevada. c-span,see that on listen on the free c-span radio we have senator maria cantwell and republican challenger susan hutchinson live on c-span. go live to., we will a debate with the senate candidates from ohio, senator sherrod brown and congressman jim renacci. night, dean heller and democratic challenger jacky who was better student for keeping the trump administration. [video clip] keep a we need to do is check and balance on the president. something you are not willing to do, senator. >> answer the question. >> when we need to keep our

public land in public hands. our tourism industry is so vibrant. hundreds of thousands of jobs of dollars, from our tallest peak to our lowest valleys here in las vegas, and we need to be sure that when we fight president trump and this administration is only way we can, to protect our public lands so that we control them here in nevada. they are secure, they are sacred, and they made an awful lot to us. >> sen. heller: is in question for you. how do you -- heller: first of all, i want her to answer the question. i am working on land deals for deserts, and for landlocked counties. i want to know how many you are working on. we are trying to expand the footprint for the city so we can lower the cost of housing in the

state of nevada. i think this is critical. and yes, he wanted to take that dollar away. guess who stopped him so that we can use it in lake mead, so we can use those dollars at lake tahoe, keep the water bluer. we know the federal government owns 70 percent of the land. i want to know which lands bill you are working on. >> my question was how we're going to -- you said we should fight president trump. for your rebuttal. how would you keep them from doing that, from taking money out of the fund? rosen: if we have a democratic house. what happens in nevada is important. i want to tell you that we need

to protect our land rights. we are with the wilderness ingram, the programs up northern nevada, and it is very important. we need to take care of the public land. >> thank you. senator heller, in your republic, can you tell me how you can stop the president? sen. heller: absolutely. talk to him. the same way i stopped yucca mountain. it was stopped twice in the united states senate because of me. she did not offer a single amendment. you voted for that -- sen. heller: she did not offer a single amendment. opponent is elected to the united states senate, we will have yucca mountain by the end of the year. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we have charlie cook with us of the cook political report with

us to discuss the races you are most interested in, and i want to start with the battle of control of the senate. you wrote a column for the week.nal report" this host: explain. if you just look at the testimony: dr. ford -- it was compelling, and was convincing, it was so good. it is the demonstrations -- i lived in washington for 46 years. i have never seen those kinds come of that kind of behavior in the halls of the capitol and the senate office building. i think they effectively diminished the effectiveness of her testimony.

heartland america, we have seen an incredible reaction in senate races where now, going in, democrats probably had a 30%, 35% chance of getting the majority of the senate. now it is probably about 5%. host: usually this time of year we start looking for the october surprise in elections. was the caps on nominations than what we saw surrounding the october surprise? "est: i do not like the term october surprise." is sort of suggests that one party is going to sabotage the election. our elections are competitive. events dot 15 days, not stop. in the house, i do not think the republican chances of holding onto the house have gone up much, but the chances of getting way down.are going

in the senate, republican chances are already good, and now they are fantastically high. host: so what was the prediction today, and what was it a month ago? guest: democrats have a 23-seat net gain majority in the house. if i were sitting here two months ago, i would have said it would likely be somewhere but i wouldnd 45, have put a little caviar on that. -- caveat on that. i would have said, you know what, if i am wrong, if it is not between 25 and 45, it would be more likely to be north of 45 then south of 25. toay, i think it is more 20 40, which is not that big of a difference, but i the of the chance of it going high. the ceiling for democratic gains

has been lowered and hardened, so while i still think the republicans will lose the majority, it is not going to be a really ugly loss. host: what does it look like in the senate as you see it? see $1 billion spent in the u.s. senate's election cycle. one of the outcomes could be no net change whatsoever. if there is a change maybe republicans will pick up a seat and on a 62, or maybe they lose a seat and it goes to 50/50 with the vice president breaking a even would beeat the most likely scenario. right now, i think breaking even for democrats would be about as good as they can get. we are looking at republicans wo.k up one, pick up t it could have gone over to

clicks that way -- two that way. host: charlie cook is with us until 10:00 this morning, until our program in spirit republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you arewhat races, what most interested in. there is an article in today's "new york times." who is winning the social media and in terms? more democrats have facebook interactions banter opponents. we have seen more articles about voter enthusiasm holes that are polls that are out. what should we be looking at? what gives you a sense of what will happen? i am about a month short of 65 years old, so i am probably not the best person to ask about the impact of social

media, but i will say whatever party is out of power has the most challengers, the most younger candidates is more likely to outdo on social media, and right now, that is democrats. my guess is that is true. we're looking at polling. we're looking at election results since november 2016. we look at midterm election patterns. it all points to a very challenging year for republicans, except in the senate. and this is the most lopsided map in either direction for the senate we have ever seen. it way i would look at it is is like we have elections in two different countries, and one country is red republican america, where the u.s. senate is being fought. of the 17 senate races, where there is any doubt at all about the outcome, 14 of 17 went for donald trump. then there is an election for everything else. house, governor, state legislature. that is looking a lot tougher

for republicans. host: the senate majority pac, political action committee, supporting democratic candidates in the senate. this is supporting bob menendez. [video clip] hugen have amp and lot in common. cut coverage for pre-existing conditions, hugin supported that. ump, the wrong prescriptions for new jersey. snp is responsible for the content of this advertising. host: with so many battles areds in red states, why democrats spending time and money in blue states like new jersey? guest: first of all, democrats

are not happy about having to do this. new jersey is a state that president obama carried by 18 points. hillary clinton carried by 14 points. occasionally, new jersey will elect a republican governor, but for federal elections, it real y go statewide. when you have a democratic incumbent who has been indicted for primary charges, and yes, it was a hung jury, but that does not mean declared innocent by a jury of your peers. it just means the prosecution did not put together a unanimous .erdict against you i still think republicans will win by two points. but if it is closer than it ought to be, and isn't causing some angst among democrats? absolutely. he personally spent $20 million. host: is that what he spent so far? with 21 days to go -- 17 days

ago? guest: yes, and that is after-tax. caller: how are you this morning? host: doing well. go ahead. caller: i would like to say this ford, she did a really good job. that being said, kavanaugh, he what -- what have it, meant in michigan for you, the confirmation, ando kavanaugh what do you think it will mean in 17 days? [indiscernible]

one thing in michigan, the ot, you used to be able to say all party, and now they have changed it, where you have contacts to have to go through -- i am sorry. host: that is all right to think we got the point. charlie cook on michigan. guest: i was into your point and ann arbor last week in michigan. i am not here above the capital kavanaugh -- confirmation. never met him or any of the women. i'm here to judge the political impact of it, and i think it had

-- it was what i call a color enhancement event, where it made bluer, but id blue do not think it changed a lot of minds. i think it just intensified emotions out there. i'm not here to litigate who was right or wrong. that is not my field, and it is not something i am going to talk about. host: what are you watching in michigan? guest: in michigan, the close,r's race is very and it was like there is a better than even chance that republicans lose the governorship. in michigan, that is a very big deal. well,ot think michigan, if republicans are having a bad night, they could lose the michigan house of representatives. one of the things here in washington, we tend to get fixated on congress and the house and senate, but to me, the unwritten story of this election

is the state election. washington in the last 20, 30 years has been increasingly unable and willing to deal with a lot problems in this country. it created a vacuum. andt of legislators governors have been more aggressive and have taken on more power. gainsicans scored huge during the obama years, a net gain of six governorships and over 700 legislative seats in 2010, two more governorships in 2014, so that republicans now have more elected offices today than at any time since the 1920's. there are a lot of open seats. this will put aside the house and senate. this will be a big-time election. host: the michigan governor seat as leanntly open, rated democratic now by the cook

political report. you can see all the ratings in the house, senate, and governors re es, cookpolitical port.com. we hear from jeff in wichita, kansas, republican. , charlie.od morning, jeff big fan. 4 and anyng at kansas other races you would care to comment on. guest: sure. i was just in wichita earlier this year. host: you travel quite a bit. guest: i do. race, yeah, it normally republicans have no problems. but we are seeing and places like kansas, oklahoma, closer gubernatorial races than you would expect, and i think some

in some of theve greatest republican states -- est republican states taxes cut and education cuts, and there has been somewhat of a backlash there. the canvas race is very close. -- the canvas race is very close. ansas race is very close. the secretary of state is going well. the two races we're most closely, jenkins open seat in kansas second district, and kevin yoder, republican incumbent, in the third district. that when we actually have rated lean democrat.

back in the old days, we used to have a policy at the cook political report of not putting on indicted incumbents, but these elections have gotten so parliamentary, midterms and weten more explosive, so actually have that lean away from him, which we did not used , there are 6, 8, 10 that they looks pretty likely to slip over the sign, and that is quite something. host: we talked about new jersey quite already. vaughn is in edison, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. and a lastquestions comment. regarding kavanaugh, and how he turned up the heartland, how is that fair?

during the obamacare protests, those voters cannot to protest obamacare, spitting on congressman -- that is not hurt the heartland, but the kavanaugh vote did? guest: i have been around for 45 years. there were some tough obamacare behavior on capitol hill. i do not think it was that. is i was there, and i thought this was more -- and the thing is, these people that were protesting -- i passionate, and they were protesting, and it really hurt their cause. if i were dr. ford, i think i would be really ticked off that when she did was undermined by people out in the hall and in the hallways, who were not acting the way you really ought to act in the capital building and the senate office buildings of the u.s. senate. host: raymond in silver spring,

maryland, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i want to ask mr. cook what he thinks about the democratic messaging. it seems to me that they do a terrible job at messaging. i will give you just two examples. on immigration, senate republicans say "oh, democrats are for open borders." the truth is, obama deported more illegal aliens than the previous seven presidents behind. say that.do not on the economy, the economy was already doing well and trending of when obama left compared to what he inherited. democrats --e, the i'm sorry, republicans came in in 2010, promising a replacement to obamacare. but they never offered any replacement.

democrats don't -- host: we got your point on messaging. guest: i was listening to a cable show yesterday morning -- i watch regular cable -- but people were complaining about the democratic messaging, and i thought they were totally, completely wrong. take immigration, for example. yes, the obama administration deported a holy people, and -- a whole lot of people, and more people have been reported so far, but if that is what democrats want to do, and they cannot get latinas out to vote this year, is that really a message democrats want to do? no, i do not think so. i cannot think that is what democrats ought to be talking about. let's of times, the economy gets going, something happens in one administration, and we love in. president clinton was a beneficiary of george h.w. bush

effectively sacrificing his presidency by raising taxes, which cut deficits enormously. clinton was the beneficiary. the thing about it is midterm elections are a referendum on incumbent presidents. that is always true. but when you have a very polarizing president with 3/4 of americans either loving or hating -- 3. is, the democratic simple -- checks and balances. democrats are arguing republicans in congress have not been a check on president trump and a democratic congress would. that is their message. he got the health care. the thing is pre-existing conditions. if you are a democrat and you are talking about single -heyer, you are brain-dead. -- single-payer, you are

brain-dead. the thing is swing voters. that is what is important. i understand the caller's position, but these two parties spending a lot of money on polling and focus groups, and occasionally they are wrong on messaging, but they are more often closer to write them wrong. host: let's talk about republican messaging, especially in pastg we have heard cycles, the messaging about nancy pelosi, tying new york democrat anthony donato to nancy pelosi. [video clip] >> paying too much in taxes? delgado will make you pay more, costing of state families $2700 a year. supports pelosi's radical takeover of health care. to pay for it, they would have to double income taxes on every single taxpayer in america.

delgadillo is another big-city liberal we cannot afford. host: a nancy pelosian ad. for eight years, republicans were able to use president obama and hillary clinton as a foil to beat on and did it fairly effectively some years. they are effectively out of the picture. left.pelosi is what is it is kind of a distant third, but some places, it may make a difference. but if you were going to ask me, for better or worse, is the selection were likely to be about donald trump or nancy pelosi, it is a lot more likely to be about donald trump than nancy pelosi, but it is, you know, in some districts, and works. but for republicans, i think they have got two different messages for two different groups of people. for the hard-core trump base,

tea party, conservatives, white, evangelical christians, the message would be if democrats take over, they want to impeach. they want to remove our president from office. that is the central message. that are notlicans that crazy about president trump -- overall, the kind of like, generally speaking, what is going on. they may not like his behavior and everything. but the messaging -- do you like where the economy is? atyou like unemployment 3.7%, the best it has been since 1969? do you like closer regulations? over, theys take will reverse all of that. without part of the party, it is orientedng that is not toward president trump, where the first part of the party, it is geared toward president trump. host: that is the difference between a west virginia senate race and barbara constant's

halsey -- barbara coms tack's halsey and washington, d.c. guest: i am tired of talking about the kavanaugh fight, but in the district, it did not make a whole lot of difference. town, ruralsmall america, working-class white males. that is where it backlash. the gender gap has been around reagan's first term, but we are typically seeing republicans are running three to five points ahead, and democrats are running anywhere between 15 and 25 points ahead with a massive gender gap, and it is suburban women, college-educated women that republicans are getting buried in these suburban districts. that is where the big fight is

in the house, not the senate, but in the house. host: north carolina, loretta, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say that democrats are tired of losing. we have nothing. usedepublicans have everything to cheat. they are cheaters. democrats are tired of being cheated. they use gerrymandering. democrats might have done some gerrymandering years ago, but the republicans took it and made it nuclear. they have all of the governorships, and now we have this slime in the white house. democrats are tired of losing. guest: you know, if i were a democrat in north carolina, i understand how she feels. -- you know, ina

nonpartisan here, but let's just say republicans were being particularly effective and aggressive in pursuing their agenda. it is not true, i live in maryland, where there is a very democratic gerrymandering. if you live in illinois, gerrymandering is very strong. but these midterm elections are huge. elections,ntial midterm years, three quarters of all of their governorships are ofup, 4/5 of the state legislature seats are up. redistricting is particularly important, and when democrats got married in 2010 before the 2011 redistricting, it was catastrophic. i mean, when you lose badly the midterm before a redistricting, that is a defeat that keeps on defeating for a decade. that is why republicans need to be really nervous.

this shoe maybe on the wrong foot. anyway. host: we get a chance to talk about a guy who's twitter handle is @redistrict. guest: david wasserman and powerhouse editor, a uva grad, one of the students down there, and when i met him, he is just fabulous. i used to know all of the house races by heart. i used to know so pretty well. man, i did not know it as well as david does. we are a great team from top to bottom. host: david wasserman will be joining us, i believe, next week. guest: good. host: charlie cook with us for about 25 more minutes this morning. everett from louisville, kentucky. a republican.

good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say i am a great admirer of mr. cook. i am 51, and i have been watching him since my 20's, and his analysis has always been very fair and very spot on. guest: go ahead, make me feel old. [laughter] my question is -- if the republicans do hold the house of representatives, do you think it nature because the basic of the districts that are voting on will have a republican lean to them, and that there will be on was like a hidden republican vote that comes out and is not being reflected in the pollsters? then i would ask specifically about the lexington race in kentucky so far. thank you very much. guest: let me do polling, districts, and then get to andy barr. the national polls

were not that far off, to be honest. was up by 3.5%, and she popular vote, which is what the national polls measure. they had the race between romney and obama closer than the three once it ended up being. these national polls you see from the major networks are expensive.nsive they are not off by mustard where there was an epic poll failure is looking at the local and state polling, because a lot ,f it is good, but a lot of it and this is a technical term, is schlop.

you have to be careful. there is a wall. there is a clean title wave against a red, republican wall, you have to think about which is going to be stronger, the wave or a wall? it is a pretty good-sized seawall that will protect the republican majority in most of wave wastes unless the really, really big. this year, the wave looks taller than the wall. will mitigate some of the republican losses. it is also true to a certain extent state led, but for the end of the decade, the district lines -- when they are first done, they accurately reflect what they are intended to do, but sometimes they kind of gradually get undone over the course of the year. host: can i get viewers one

number from the cook political report that will give them a sense of the house ratings? the cook political report currently has 95 races in play. that means 95 races anywhere from leans to likely, 95 republican races in play. democratic races in play this cycle -- just 13. guest: yeah, sometimes the party has had winds. sometimes they have tailwinds. where in ther house, democrats have a tailwinds, republicans have a headwind. in 2014, it was the other way around. the six district in kentucky -- host: andy barr. guest: yeah. the best races, most competitive races in the country, and we haven't rated as a tossup. it is actually a surprise

because this is rick, east lexington, redford, this district, nine points were house.can than the this is not investors republicans ought to have to worry about, but amy mcgrath is a marine pilot. that went viral on the internet, raise enormous amounts of money, and a lot of attention, and so this is a that, given where the lines are drawn, republicans should not have to worry about, but it is unique circumstances, and this is a year where women candidates are doing really well, and democrats made a point of nominating a life women with military records, military combat records , and it has worked well for them. republicans have some, too.

host: bringing up that mcgrath ad, on thursday on this program, we will be talking about the best and worst ads of this political cycle. that is one we have already pulled to talk about that a. , news in manchester hampshire. good morning. guest: i was just there. caller: all right. college-educated suburban woman, and i agree with you that the democrats were acting like sam, red-facedsemite and shooting themselves in the foot. a few examples here, the propaganda that comes out of the news organizations -- and it cannot be called anything but that, because they always print mistakes with huge headlines and then correct them

five days later, and it is always in one direction. the mistakes go always in one direction. and then you have the kavanaugh ridiculousness. 26orked in a court for years, and i realized that was not a criminal case, but credibility of witnesses on the yes, you can believe only her story and nothing else, but you have to believe her story, and when someone tells you a story that is 30 years old, and they remember no details of anything, except one detail -- she knows who it was -- and all of the witnesses who said they were there denied being there, that is not a credible witness. guest: i am not here to litigate the kavanaugh case. i am just looking at the political impacts. you have got to get another guest to will talk about that. that is not me. i stay in my lane. host: charlie is in new york. guest: where is brooklyn heights? heights?nd

caller: the reason the democrats are losing is because they are people as by the same the republican party. guest: what are they losing? caller: bill clinton brings in reforms was welfare, nafta, things against the republican people. these are not democratic ideals. identityhave is politics, which is phony liberalism. this is not really progressive is, identity politics. pro-women, prob-blacks. could fight for it is what they got rid of in the 1980's. that brought some balance to the media. they are controlled by same corporations. guest: i am trying to think if

there is anything there i agreed with. identity politics is identity politics, and there is a lot on both sides. conservatives, white, evangelical christians, that is kind of identity politics. small town, rural america, that is kind of identity politics. losing everything -- well, actually, they are about to recapture the house, so i went question that point. the fairness doctrine, whether that was a good idea or a bad idea, how do most people get their news now? from the internet and cable. the fairness doctrine does not apply to either one. it does not apply to cable or to the internet. it sounds to me like when you have is a guy here who reflected a part of the democratic the democratic party has moved away from those people to a certain extent and away

from some of the core emptier coalition. and maybe that was a mistake, but it is not that the democratic party has rejected who they are, they have changed their orientation, and maybe it was the right decision, or maybe it was the wrong decision, but about half of what the caller said, i, you know, i would not go along with. host: when all is said and done, do we know about how much money will be spent on political as in 2018? jennifer figure -- duffy, our senior edito, she is estimating about $1 billion total, and most of that is for advertising. the fact of the matter is our money.is awash in there is an enormous amount of money in our system, and both sides have lots and lots of money. to win orrty is going lose control of the senate based on money. one thing that is important and

is something that is worrisome for republicans is that a tv station or a radio station has to charge a candidate, the smith or jones for congress committee, the lowest unit rate. they can charge a party, a super pac anything they want. so sometimes they are paying two or three times. are raising -- democratic candidates are raising huge amounts of money, and they are getting more bang for their buck. a lot the republican money that is getting raises through the that of super pac's so republicans are not quite getting defined power, and this is something that worries strategists. of a group,esident guy cecil, appeared on our "newsmakers" program that was taped earlier this week and will air tomorrow on c-span. we talked about a money that group is raising.

here is what he had to say. [video clip] to endmuch is this going up raising and spending, and how much is that in the goals to the cycle? guy: sure. we will probably end up raising about $100 million. that will include work we do with partisan politics where we are focused on elections and some of our nonpartisan activities. one of the things we have focused on is litigation, focused on voting rights. for the last nine months, we've had a conclusion in five states, all victories, on behalf of priorities usa and other platonists. -- plaintiffs. that is nonpartisan work we do that is designed to help, one, lower barriers to voting, and to get people of color, young people more engaged

in the process. we are on track for the cycle, but we are certainly still are engaged in seven senate races, 44 house races, and three governors races . ken: just a follow-up on that. we have seen a number of candidates across the country disavowing pac money, saying they will not take it into their campaign coffers, even super pac's coming in on their behalf. do you think in any case you were involvement in the race could be viewed as a detriment to a candidate who is kind of running away from big money? and to think that a step further, in 2020, a democratic nominee who disavows a super pac, will you stand down? guy: as many races as we are involved in, none of these candidates have said they do not want other organizations playing in the race. there are certainly democrats is that they will not take corporate pack money, and i

respect that you think it is a good position to take. i do not believe in unilateral disarmament. host: by the way, if you want to watch the entire interview with guy cecil of priorities usa, tomorrow morning on c-span at 10:00 a.m., also reairing at 6:00 p.m. you can watch it on c-span.org. charlie cook, your take from backlit. guest: $100 million? gosh. started, that was far more than all the money spent on every level from everybody on everythin. courtg as the supreme supports campaign spending as a form of speech, there is not a lot you can do about it. to be perfectly honest, if i could wave a magic wand, i would do redistricting reform. having it is actually gerrymandering, whether it is done by republicans or democrats, i think it has a farmer detrimental effect on -- far more detrimental effect on

the process. i think it has heard both parties, i think it has made governing more difficult. the other thing i will say is right now,tricting, for years and years, democrats had a majority of the governorship, as one of your callers noted before, and democrats did not have a problem with redistricting. what i'm curious about is in the states where democrats pickup governorships i and state , i amator positions curious when they are in control. regardless of who is in control, is the gold standard in terms of redistricting. in fact, the cook political report and the harkin institute

or two ago a month on how does iowa do it and how should it be done, you know, where it is basically not drawn by politi politicians who were not looking to pick their own voters. host: about 10 minutes with charlie cook this morning. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. mark, on that independent line, fort lauderdale, florida, good morning. caller: hello, good morning. as always, thank you for c-span. i am really thrilled to speak to mr. cook, someone who is nonpartisan but realistic. i am calling on the independent line, although i very left-leaning, i left the democratic party far back because i thought they were too weak. i think florida is a perfect example of it. when you have got the usenet and

that raises -- these neck-and-neck races, especially between scott and nelson, someone convicted of medicare fraud, and now here he is running for senator -- and in fact, he is ahead sometimes, lea ds me to one of my favorite sayings. i heard it used by president obama, basically we get the politicians or we get the leaders that we deserve. t there is not a blue around, we time and the democrats deserve everything that comes. if the democrats do not pull out we have beening through in the country has been deserveunder trummp, we

to have him continue to be president not only the next two years but the next four years. the reason why this is likely to be such a split decision election is just which states are up. suburban america, democrats are going to have a good year. senate races, when you are talking about north dakota, indiana, missouri, west virginia, and montana, these are pretty republican states. so everything will democrat in the state could turn out in those places, and democrats could still lose. it is sort of the luck of the draw and the fact that democrats is a will six to 12 years ago. florida, andr said florida is a statement president obama won by one point, president trump won by one

point. it is a classic swing state. yes, there have been some legal issues raised. the voters of florida elected him twice, so it obviously did not bother that many of them, but it is a very close race. senator nelson, the democrat, if he survives this race, i think it could well be because of one of two reasons. either, a, because of the democratic nominee for governor, the tallahassee mayor andrew andum is african-american, he is likely to pull out a very strong african-american vote. and whether he wins the governor's race or not, those gillum voters will be voting heavily democratic in the senate race, but the other thing is parts ofhe republican the state, the panhandle, and that hurricane devastated a lot where republicans were expected to get a lot of votes. those would be the two things.

time, scott has had a pretty good record as crisis manager in previous here is. i am not there -- previous hurricanes. i am not there, so i do not know how this one is going, but it is right on the knife's edge. it is unusual, because most of the senate races are in really red states, not in purple states like florida. host: you gave a tossup rating in the cook political report for that florida race. richard, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. it is a pleasure to speak to charlie cook. i have watched them over the years, and he is really insightful. this has beenum, a mystery to me for quite some time, and i just do not get in sometimes about when it comes to the facts.

an opinion.d then i live in massachusetts, which is a liberal state. it is a democratic state. but there are many areas in this state are rural, and it took me a well to figure out that in these lavrov towns -- rural small towns, they are strongly pulling for the republican -- trump country is 20 miles south of worcester. i live in worcester, mass. they went for trump. they went for reagan. in listening and keeping my mind open about all of the stuff, what is going on in the southern border. charlie just mentioned the catastrophic hurricane in florida. my question is, all of that will have an impact, and really, a hurricane, that is true. i would like to know -- when are the democrats, are the liberals

going to get a radio station or some broadcast over the media, or the radio station, because macron the radio, all i hear is -- when i put on the radio, all i hear is right-wing from one end of the dial to the other. i understand it is free speech, but support for the president really stuns me when facts are thrown out the window. guest: let me do the radio thing second. but identity politics, as i said earlier, goes both ways. when you look at the outcome of the election, the 2016 election, it was disproportionate turnout where small-town, rural america turned out in higher levels than a have ever voted before, and, you know, it tipped the election. 170 million people vote, and the vote came down to 78,000 fizzles, stretching from michigan to pennsylvania.

that is amazing. the good old samuel tilden winning the popular vote by three points and rutherford b. hayes by one. they aren rural, really, really exercised, and they feel ignored or belittled by democrats and by the elite, and that was sort of their revenge in 2016. is the caller, the caller asking a question that i thought about for a long time -- why does liberal talk radio not really work much? the thing is, we used to have something called radio america. in fact, rachel maddow came out of that. what was the name of the guy, who passed away in the last month or two, who had a show on msnbc from north dakota with a liberal hug?

but for some reason, talk radio has -- i am making this up -- 5, ratio.0:1 it has been tried. ed schulz? guest: yeah! it schulz. liberal radio is completely inconsequential. and i am surprised. what is inherent about talk radio that the conservatives draw a larger audience, and liberal talk radio just does not seem to get any traction? it is a great question. i have never quite understood that. but it is absolutely true. host: time for just a couple of questions. peter kater in d.c., republican, go ahead. caller: hi.

i want to ask about the new jersey senate race. it seemed to me that looking at polls, it seems to me comparable to the texas race, but the texas race gets more coverage. can you talk to me about that and if it is a potential pickup for republicans as well? guest: that is an interesting comparison that the caller is making, because in my mind, new jersey is closer than it ought to be, but the most likely outcome is menendez wins by low to mid single digits, something like that, then he kind of falls over the finish line. race has gotten a lot closer than you would expect in texas. my hunch is that cruz is going to win, but not anything like the margin governor abbott is going to have. they are analogous. i think one difference is beto o'rourke is an incredibly

charismatic guy who has tapped into the new media and going viral and has run a brilliant , i mean,and has had the idea of a republican u.s. senator from texas getting outspent -- i am having a hard time getting my arms around it, but it is like every liberal in he country, even assuming loses this race, we could easily see him turn around and run for president and have a heck of a and raising list. that is probably the difference, is vastly -- in new jersey, it is really more menendez underperforming what a democrat should do in new jersey. ted cruz it is both underperforming, and he has, you

know, an acerbic personality. he is one of the smartest people i've ever met in my life, but he has sharp elbows and a charismatic candidate with an enormous amount of money, so much that he has gotten really, really close. but i watch those two races for different reasons. but that is a good all survey should probably caller. host: that set us up nicely for our next caller, ellen from texas, go ahead. caller: my question is about be to and cruz. i do think that beto is very charismatic. there are a lot of things i agree with him on. there are a lot of things i don't. i don't know, he is so scholarly, and he has no personality. i do not want a wall. we have never had a wall.

trouble ists beto in he wants to tax oil and he wants to tax gas. he wants i just don't know. host: thanks for the call. guest: she is sitting there in the voting booth trying to decide which way to go. that sums it up pretty well. has tailoredrke his message to the democratic base. he has been rewarded with a lot of money. senator cruz that wins by five points, this spending that o'rourke is doing,

back in the old days, democrats would raise money for get out the bolt in building the party in texas. this is the first time texas democrats have had an influx in money in a long time. democrats will benefit in the long haul. host: 17 days until election day? decisionwill be in the desk for nbc where they call the races. several of us from the cook political report will be doing the quantitative side. i've been doing that since 1994. if you are in our business, a election night is prom night.