latest campaign developments. trail, and more reaction on the death of supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg. "washington journal" is next. forth the nominee next week, it will be a woman. ♪ host: good morning. in northdent yesterday carolina as the white house and senate prepare for a confirmation battle that is now center stage. shipping the next clinical fight between democrats and republicans. here in washington, on the campaign trail, and the future of the u.s. supreme court. it is september 20. we will begin with your phone calls. if you think the senate should vote this year on the president's nominee for the u.s. supreme court, (202) 748-8000. if you think there should be a

delay, waiting until january 20 reelectioner for the of president trump or a new president, (202) 748-8001. you can also send us a text message at (202) 748-8003. we are on twitter @cspanwj and on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. the present aiming to fill a supreme court see without delay. momentum growing among the gop. the supreme court vote before election day. the public relations firm working with the judicial crisis network, which supports conservative judicial nominees, notes that stevens, sandra day o'connor, and justice ginsburg

were confirmed within 45 days. moderate senator joe manchin who kavanaughjo brett may vote with republicans. another question mark is senator cory gardner of new jersey who is behind in the polls. called up to question -- who declined to address the a townf timing during hall saturday. [video clip] united in their commitment to selecting nominees who believe

in applying the constitution as written. both the white house and the senate majority have a moral duty to fulfill the promises they made to the voters, and that is exactly what we are going to do. we said that, if for any reason we have a vacancy, we will fill that vacancy. we have plenty of time. there is a lot of time. you are talking about january 20. crowd: fill her seat. uphold equal justice under the law for citizens of every race, color, religion, and free. i will be putting forth a nominee next week. it will be a woman. host: the president yesterday,

the full rally available on our website. let's get to your phone calls. what should happen? should the senate vote this year? should the senate wait until the inauguration next year. trump is going to name his nominee. it is going to put pressure on namesto produce a list of himself. what happens next is going to depend on who wins the election. if trump wins, he will get what he wants. theiden wins, will republicans try to force this guy through in the lame-duck? media are led by the going to go ballistic. it is going to be world war iii. people are not going to talk about coronavirus all day every

day and race relations. host: thanks for the call from california. we mentioned amy barrett. another name being mentioned is barbara ligula from florida, cuban-american. her name is also mentioned. we know that the body of justice ginsburg will lying in repose. vote this year or wait until next january? what is your decision? caller: i think obama had to wait in 2016 because it was an election year. trump should have the same respect. this lady deserves respect. she is not even buried yet. let's have time to grieve and more and then do the -- and

mourn and then do the process. host: sam is next, vancouver, washington. caller: good morning. i am a 73-year-old black man. i am so sick and tired of these so-called progressives. we have a lot of them out here. they don't know what is going on. they always talk about racism and this and that and the other. i think we should go on and have a vote on a judicial nominee who is not going to show preferential treatment to people like me as progressives like to say people tell her we are all different colors. yellow, whatever you want to call it. it is a mistake for these people to be brainwashed by these democrats and progressives out

here to think we need to help those ignorant people. i grew up when there was real racism. i grew up in the jim crow south. i know racism when i see it. trump is not a racist. the government is trying to be incorporated by a bunch of socialists. they have brainwashed a lot of these young people. i think it would be a big mistake for them to wait for biden or some progressive to try to put a judicial activist in the supreme court. host: thanks for the call. says, i was against the biden ruled and i am still against it. that is because i am not a hypocrite. says, scotus is imperative to keeping our constitutional rights.

lindsey graham made his choice and 2016, unless he was lying then. that is a possibility. bobby joining us from st. paul, minnesota. this year or next year? caller: thank you for taking my call. this year. no question about it. when it boils down to politics, it boils down to opportunity. saiddent at one time obama elections have consequences. this is it. i am center-right. i am not sure where i am going to vote because i want to listen to more of the campaign speeches. biden has come out of his -- i don't want to say basement. he has come out. media is treating him with kid gloves. come on. host: let me go back to your

earlier point. you have not yet decided how you are going to vote? caller: right. host: how does this vacancy affect your decision making process? caller: that is a good question. i am not sure. what i have always thought is that the supreme court should have term limits similar to congress. you have to get fresh blood some time. host: the congress does not have term limits. caller: they do not, but i would like to see them have term limits. two years in the house, six years in the senate, maybe 12 and four terms in the house. i just want to know more about joe biden. it seems like the q&a is starting to come out more and more.

, iht now, my coffee groups am center-right. we have people that are centerleft and way to the left. they know right now who they are going to vote for. i think it is the middle group we are talking. i would like to see them have a vote because this does not come around very often. this is going to be a lifetime appointee. i just hope it is not like what happened to supreme court justice kavanaugh. that was a tragedy. they dragged him through the mud , senator harris. ad for the family. this is going to be like gasoline on the fire. this election is going to be crazy. host: i am going to leave it there. we appreciate the call from minnesota.

this is from politico, ginsburg's death gives the gop -- in 2020 legal fights -- gives edge in 2020 legal fights. this is presumably going to shape the rest of this campaign. absolutely. good morning. we have spent a lot of time that ishis is the thing going to define the election. we have had that happen over and over again. i have been listening to the callers. the supreme court is one of those things that gets people excited and upset and sometimes gets people worried. decades, conservatives have been the group of people, when there is a supreme court seat open, that gets them excited to

vote. if there was one person, one human being whose death could get the left excited, it is our bg -- is rbg. we are all anticipating this is going to affect the election. i don't know that we know how much, especially as we see how mitch mcconnell and president trump operate. someonee looking to put into that seat in the next 45 days. this is something we have not seen before. back and forth about the biden rule, thee whomever president is allowed to do something like this. he is also someone who focuses on how to win. what would make people excited? there is an argument that

president trump is someone who might want to leave that seat open to have a dangling carrot out there for conservatives like he had in 2016. it seems like a million years ago now, but the last election, merrick garland was sitting around hoping to get into antonin scalia is seat. that made a lot of conservatives hold their nose and vote for him. that was in large part a reason why he got so much of the republican vote. host: let's talk about the calendar and the timeline. from the new york times, a look at the past process for the confirmation link of justices current and former. brett kavanaugh took 88 days. neil gorsuch 65. elena kagan 67. 82.el alito

john paul stevens in 1975 took only 19 days. justice sandra day o'connor took 33 days. as you look at the campaign calendar and the senate calendar, what does that tell you? expect we are going to see mitch mcconnell start to push for things that happened very quickly. we know that president trump has had a list of supreme court nominees for years, since 2015. upkeep seeing him bring that as a dangling carrot to those conservatives. we know that they may have already started to look into a lot of those people. they have to vet those people. you talk about the different timelines for all those individuals who made it to the supreme court. you have to vet someone.

we are in the process were president trump is going to pick his person. that person will be vetted by the fbi. barring any issue like we saw ish brett kavanaugh, there time for you. mitch mcconnell is going to this personand how gets in front of all of the other senators. that is another thing that usually happens. they have a one-on-one with almost every single senator. you have to remember, a lot of the senators on the republican side are up for reelection. they want to get home. they want to make sure they have a seat coming up. this throws a monkey wrench into a lot of the plants people have. for someone like mitch mcconnell, whose memoir is game, to makeg sure there is a conservative court around the country is

something he is focused on more than anyone in this country. it is his number one issue. that is something we are going to see, make sure that focus stays on the minds of his voters and the senators as well. host: susan collins in maine, one survey had her down by as much as 12 percentage points. , in fairnesse said to the american people who will either be reelecting the president or selecting a new one, the decision on a lifetime appointment to the supreme court should be made by the president who is elected on november 3. where does that put the republican politics in all of this? guest: susan collins, kind of expected her to do this. alaska lisa murkowski of have been given this hypothetical in the last couple of months.

they both said they would want to wait until after the election to vote on a supreme court as mostnominee very people know, you need for people to stop something in the senate -- you need four people to stop something in the senate because of the majority the sonnet republicans have. most of them are probably going whoever president trump nominates. we are watching lindsey graham. he is the chairman of the senate judiciary. he has said in the past the biden rule is important. the republicans would never vote for someone right before an election. kavanaugh, everything has changed. we expect the senate judiciary would move this forward. like cory gardner

in colorado. any republican senator who has to get the vote of white suburban voters in this election , who may be turned off by trump at this point, and we have seen that happen among white suburban women voters, being turned away from president trump and the republican party, anybody who needs those voters to win, they have a lot to think about, say they are ready to vote as soon as possible, or they say they will vote after the election. host: more details at politico.com. eugene daniels on the phone. thank you for being with us. guest: thank you, steve. host: tony saying, it was wrong to block judge garland. it cannot be right to block the

nominee this time. arguing for blocking this nominee is saying two wrongs make a right. if you expect republicans to follow the same rules they expected democrats to follow, you are going to be disappointed. comments made by lindsey graham, republican south carolina, up for reelection this year at the atlantic festival in 2018. [video clip] justice scalia dies in 2016. the primary process is ongoing. if you look back in 100 years, nobody has been replaced in that circumstance. biden instened to joe bush 41, you should hold it back to the next election. i felt i was doing the traditional thing when it came to sotomayor. i was doing the traditional thing.

this may make you feel better, but i really don't care. opening comes in the last year of president trump's term, and the primary process has started, we will wait for the next election. i have got a pretty good chance -- hold the tape. host: that from the video library back in 2018. a lot of reference to the biden rule. here is what that senator joe biden said in 1992. [video clip] >> it is my view that if a supreme court justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks or resigns at the end of the summer, president followingd consider the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not name a nominee until after the november

election is completed. mr. president, must consider how it would respond to a supreme court vacancy that would occur in the throes of an election year. it is my view if the president goes the way of presidents fillmore and johnson and presses an election year nomination, the senate judiciary committee should seriously consider not scheduling nomination hearings until after the political campaign season is over. mr. president,, that this is going to be one of the dirtiest presidential campaigns we will have seen in modern times. from 1992. senator joe biden, now the democratic presidential nominee.

the question whether the senate should take up a vote this year or wait until after the inauguration in january next year. can the senate fill the seat before the election? the answer is yes, but it would require a breakneck pace. supreme court nominations have taken around 70 days to move through the senate. the last for brett kavanaugh took longer. there are no set rules for how long the process should take once the president announces his pick. some nominations have moved more quickly. it will come down to politics and vote tallies. what does it take to confirm a nominee? only a majority. the republicans could lose up to three votes and still confirm a justice if vice president mike pence were to break a tie. mitch mcconnell changing the allow rules in 2017 to

the confirmation of justices as democrats threatened to filibuster trump nominee, neil gorsuch. debbie, this year or next year? caller: next year, steve. thanks for taking my call. i would like to send my condolences to ginsburg's family. last night, david axelrod pointed out that in the jewish community, if you die on the eve --russia shauna, you are russia shauna, you are a saint. talk about hypocrisy. all these conservatives and republicans calling in, they are the first to scream how unfair this is. google is unfair. they even do it on this station. you guys are taking more democratic calls this morning. it is not there.

they have no problem with the hypocrisy. another thing i heard yesterday was if they give trump another p ick, that will mean five out of twonine are picked by presidents that did not win the popular vote. ins is just one more chink the armor to him walking around claiming to be the law and order candidate. he is wearing a sash that says law and order, but that is the only law and order journal@c-span.org he is aware of. everybody around him has been indicted and convicted. he is the unindicted co-conspirator to michael cohen's case. sad. host: thank you. we will likely get more details from the supreme court in terms of the services for late justice ruth bader ginsburg.

expect the current justices to pay their respects presumably on tuesday. her burial will take place at arlington national cemetery. her husband passed away 10 years ago. carol is joining us from alabama. good morning. caller: good morning. two quick points. one, president trump was elected for four years, one full term. from what i understand, the president, if there is a republican-controlled senate and republican president, he can nominate. they can vote. they can do it anyway. president obama nominated, but he was a democrat. that is the president. that is the president according to mitch mcconnell. to that they did not want

nominate someone because it was an election year. i wanted to say something about susan collins and lindsey graham. now they wonder why people are not going to vote for them or reelect them. make a decision. if you are not, fine. i think they should have a vote. i wanted to make a comment about the harsh comments we are seeing on social media, specifically from senators like schumer and blumenthal saying if they go ahead with this photo, they better not do it or else. or else what? this is language coming from senators. that is all i wanted to say. host: more from the associated press. didn't senator mcconnell saint 2016 that the senate should not hold a scotus vote in an election year? stunning -- ifll

we can put that on the screen. he announced the senate would not vote on barack obama's potential nominee because the voters would have their say by electing the next president. what changed in 2016? democrats say this reasoning is laughable. the vacancy should be kept open until after the inauguration. back to your phone calls. next in georgia. caller: i just wanted to say the same thing you just said. mitch mcconnell and lindsey graham and all the people screaming we cannot vote on america arlington because we have got -- merrick garland

because we have got an election coming up. that was in february. now we are already voting. they scream we have got to fill that seek. those people are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. they know they are hypocrites. if they sit and lie about that, they will lie about anything. precedent that says if you go from the same party, you get to vote. mitch mcconnell made it up. mitch mcconnell is the biggest hypocrite up there. the announcement from the weekend newspapers on the death of ruth bader ginsburg, calling her a pioneer related to gender equality. good morning. what should happen? caller: first of all, let me give my condolences to the ruth bader ginsburg.

ofad the good pleasure dreaming at unc. go --to and also speak with them in their chambers. what i know is when they talk with me, and i was just a guy at the college. they say nothing can be done quickly in law. it must be reflected judicially. it should have due diligence. i am not in favor of voting now. this is important because we have an administration currently that is divisive, and the country demographics are changing. whoever sits in that seek must at reflective -- in that se

must be reflective of a changing country. mcconnell,or mitch following the passing of justice ruth bader ginsburg, who had been battling pancreatic cancer. "in the last midterm election, americans elected a republican senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck presidents last term. since the 1880's, no senate has confirmed an opposite party president's nominee in an election year. we pledge to work with president trump and support his agenda, particularly to the federal judiciary. president trump's nominate will receive a vote on the floor of

the united states senate." harold is next, joining us from illinois. caller: good morning, c-span. real disappointed in what i am hearing. we are arguing about who is going to get to a point of justice on the supreme court - t a justice on the supreme court. why do we know the outcomes of these cases before we are told? 5-4now it is going to be a decision because of the way they were put on. it is supposed to be constitutional law. you cannot have law for some people and not for other people. it don't make any sense why we are fighting. law instead of whose side you are on. that just rolls over into our

politics. our senators and our representatives don't represent their constituents. they represent their parties. i'm saying a person that lives ruralorld area -- in a area might vote for a gun issue different from people in a big city that don't want those gun issues, but because of their parties, they are going to vote along party lines. we need to quit arguing amongst ourselves. clear out all the republicans, all the democrats. start all over. get people that are going to represent you and your particular party, your state, not your party. russia is loving us fighting amongst ourselves. let's just get along. host: thank you.

this is the front page of the new york times. makeshift memorial in honor of justice ginsburg that continues into the weekend with flowers and candles. justice ginsburg was first appointed by president bill clinton in 1993. he will be appearing on cnn's state of the union on c-span radio. this year or next year, what should happen? year,: for sure this steve. all i have to do is ask myself what would nancy do? would do.hat nancy harry reid turned politics into a blood sport when he was over the senate. that is the way it is. power hasparty is in to exert their power and

maintain the power because power is money. politicians down there are in it for the money anyhow. a politician right underneath a lawyer when it comes to their honesty. i think they should go ahead. trump should go ahead and nominate somebody and put him up there. congratulations for your being nominated for the moderator. host: thank you. that is coming up on october 15. debate is next week. our coverage gets underway at 8:00 eastern time. this from national review, replacing justice ginsburg, politics not precedent.

there was nothing inappropriate about president obama nominating merrick garland after antonin theia at died months before 2016 election. nor was there anything wrong with senat senator mitch mcconnell holding his senate majority. if the vacancy had opened up earlier in his presidency or with democratic control of the senate, obama would have nominated someone younger and more left-wing. these politicians are all over the map because the presidents on our art to rely thin camouflage of power politics. that is what dictated their behavior then as now. let's go to charles in maryland. caller: good morning.

thanks for giving me a moment to say what i have to say. i want to say, one thing i have not heard yet for these republican callers, and that's what they are. strong, christian, even joke all right. what you have not heard from any of these callers saying is that we should keep our integrity and keep our word and apply the same standards that were applied under the obama administration. we should stand up as good christian, republican, honest, truth worthy standardbearers of -- party and say what is let's do what our leadership did when president obama had the chance to elect a nominee. they will not. these are the same scumbags who are walking around this country

not wearing masks, killing americans at 200,000 because they are so stuck on their white privilege that they have the right to circumvent the laws while the rest of america has to suffer under the strict on you and laws that are killing black men and women on the streets every day. the republican party has done one more thing in the open to drive honest people out of that party. they are destroying the party. god bless them. they are a bunch of idiots. host: thank you for the call. this is from david, text the pic he says, making now after what happened to obama is a travesty. you can kiss roe v. wade goodbye. if you think citizens united was bad, you have not seen nothing yet. this is the third conservative justice in four years for trump.

tweeting,mala harris justice ginsburg was a titan and legal mind for the ages. the stakes of the selection could not be higher. areions of americans counting on us to win for their health, their families, and their rights. good morning. this year or next year? caller: this year for sure. i get a kick out of these self-righteous democratic callers, pretending the circumstances are exactly the same as they were four years ago. they are not the same. it was a democratic president in the oval office when that happened. that is why they did not let garland get a hearing. predicted this was going to happen 12 years ago when he said the chickens are coming home to roost. his name was jeremiah wright.

remember him? i cannot get over how truly wonderful this situation is. nextme, democrats, to the 50 years of republican rule in the supreme court. good morning. welcome to the conversation. this year or next year, what should happen? caller: good morning. how are you? host: how are you? caller: i'm fine. if and when a democrat is elected to the presidency, and the democrats controlled the senate, there is nothing in the constitution that says a democratic president cannot elect more judges -- nominate more judges to the supreme court. constitution, there is no number of how many supreme court justices can be on the court. if the democrats have a problem,

and i am not a democrat, but i have a problem with this, what the republicans and trump are doing. the president-elect more judges. can elect moret judges. i don't think they will do that. i have noticed the democrats don't know how to fight. they talk a lot. they say a lot of things. they don't back it up. we have been clear for many years that this is how mitch mcconnell does things. how many federal judges have been put on the bench since trump has been elected? over 220? it was always about the courts. in 2016, there were a lot of people calling up on "washington journal," saying they were not

going to vote for hillary clinton. a lot of people stayed at home. why did you do that? now do you see how important the court is? go and vote in person. don't leave it to absentee voting because they can invalidate your absentee voting there he easily by saying -- very easily by saying the signature does not match. host: thank you for the call. this is from another viewer, the left is sure angry. if you are listening on c-span bbc parliament xm, the on serious question whether or not the senate should vote this year or wait until after january 20 of .ext year

should the senate wait until after that? tommy is joining us from new york city. caller: i say this year because it is not going to make a difference. the last three votes went to the left. it is supposed to be a conservative court. once the judge gets nominated and is on the supreme court, they vote according to the law. whether he gets on this year or next year, whoever it is is going to vote according to the law. the last three supreme court decisions went to the left, and we supposedly have a conservative court. they are voting according to the law. it is not what to make a difference. that is my point. host: from mother jones, the headline, to honor ginsburg,

democrats have one choice, go nuclear. democrats and progressives can waste no time prepping for the battle royale that lies ahead. it took senate leader mitch mcconnell minutes after the news to declare theg senate will vote on whoever donald trump sends its way. it is a grand political class. they have been hell-bent on reshaping the entire federal judiciary, and especially drool over the prospect of locking the highest court into a right-wing course that will last decades. this is there holy grail. should the mcconnell tried to ram a truck nominee through, schumer to val that democrats will demolish the filibuster, senate to allow the

make washington, d.c., estate, and that they will add two or four more seats to the supreme court. they willords, implement a republican nightmare, which can be justified on arguments of equity and fairness. in 2016, senate leader mitch mcconnell on his decision to withhold a senate vote or hearing. [video clip] like lincolnobama once served in the illinois legislature. it is a place he returned to talk about killing the divide in our country. here is what he said. it has been noted that the tone of our politics has gone better since i was inaugurated. in fact, it has gotten worse. myt of my regrets is t

failure to reduce the polarization in our politics. this is his moment. he has every right to nominate someone, even if doing so will plunge our nation into another bitter struggle. that is his right. thatif he never expects nominee to be confirmed, but rather to wield it as an election cudgel, he has the right to do that. he has the right to make a different choice. he can let the people decide and make this an actual legacy building moment rather than just another campaign roadshow. decides, his own vice president and others remind essential point. presidents have the right to nominate, just as the senate has its constitutional right to provide or withhold consent. in this case, the senate will withhold it. host: that is from senate

majority leader mitch mcconnell after the passing of antonin scalia appeared a month later, president obama nominating merrick garland. the senate did not vote. the gop's word is worthless, and they have ruined this country. when a group cares only about money and power, we should be focusing on climate change instead. they will deny it until we are extinct. grace is on the phone from new jersey. caller: good morning. i think i will be outnumbered here in the number of conservative calls you are taking this morning. that we elected president trump for four years, not one year, two years, three and a half years.

,e elected him for four years and we expected him to serve us and do his job for four years. senate antics in the where they make these different rules are not according to the constitution have nothing to do with it. president obama nominated merrick garland, we a majority republican senate at the time, and it was up to them to do their jobs representing us who elected that majority. president trump should not have the power for his last months in office to do his job is ridiculous. we want president trump to do his job in do what we elected

him to do. host: thank you. host:thank you. has a similarster point, if you think democrats would not be doing the same thing, you are out of touch with reality. dennis is joining us from pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. you stole a lot of my thunder with the mother jones article. to the lady that was just on from new jersey, we the people did not elect donald trump. he got in on the electoral college. he got 3 million less votes than hillary clinton. if the republicans can get the through thise nomination, absolutely if we win the presidency and take control of the senate, we should expand the supreme court by at least two justices. peoplenia has 40 million

and two senators. wyoming has less than a million people and two senators. many more people vote for democrats than they do for republicans. thank you. host: another viewer, just when you thought the 2020 election could not get any stranger, ruth bader ginsburg's death as another level of high anxiety took. anxietya tweet -- high to it. send us a tweet. christian is on the phone from arizona. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am happy to be talking to you since you will be at one of the presidential debates. proceedd absolutely with appointing, president trump appointing or making his choice for the nomination. .itch mcconnell proceeding

there should absolutely be a vote that happens in the united istes senate whether it within the next 44 days or after the election. is theted states senate most important part of our government because they appoint judicial nominations. the people of the united states in 2018 expanded the senate and gave the republicans a larger majority. until this point did not really care about that. elections have consequences. the people of the united states made the choice that they wanted , innservative supreme court 2016 and in 2018. come, we willhas appoint a conservative justice, and we will get that

conservative justice confirmed in the united states senate. mitch mcconnell is the majority leader of the united states senate. at the time of his choosing, does have the right to start the nomination procedure, and it to the judiciary committee, and the judiciary committee will make their decision. it will go to the senate. there will be a simple majority vote. it does not require 51. only a simple majority vote to confirm this nominee. host: it does require 51. that is a majority. caller: no. remember, we just had cap not -- j judge kavanaugh. murkowski because she was so smug, and she could not vote for the man because of her planned parenthood roots, she did not

want to cast the ballot voting nay because she is a republican. high political price for voting down the conservative justice as a republican. -48.as 50 that was the final tally. host: there are 100 senators. it does require 51 votes. if there is a tie, that tie-breaking vote would come from mike pence. let them wait. loses, the people have spoken. if he wins, he still gets to do it. pointing out that she was the most well-known member of the u.s. supreme court. on the question of whether they

should hold a hearing, among those surveyed before the death of justice ginsburg, 67% saying there should be a hearing. 32% saying no. and the issue of merrick garland , 25% said it was the right thing to do, while 73% said it was wrong. doug from north carolina. caller: thank you for taking my call. i will try to make this as quick as possible. host: we are glad to hear from you. go ahead. caller: i like these notes coming up from mitch mcconnell and lindsey graham. when it happened four years ago, we have got to let the people decide. we have an election coming up. now mitch comes up with this new excuse. senate, no senate ever that had opposite parties of the president ever chose a

candidate. i have not even look back to see if that is true. wait a minute. i don't remember him ever saying that. just, i will let the people decide. lindsey graham said the same thing. now lindsey graham saying i have changed my point of view biggest look at the way the democrats handled brett kavanaugh during his hearing. that is why i changed my mind. my god. they are going to be hypocrites. i don't care what type of excuse you make goo. i have a few facebook friends saying, we cannot have a 4-4 split. have you guys forgotten how many split sinced a 4-4 you would not allow obama to choose?

the american people voted for obama twice for eight years. no, you cannot have that last year. you cannot have that one. think before you actually say it. thank you for your time. god bless america. host: appreciate you weighing in. this is from teresa saying, they should wait. mitch mcconnell would not allow a vote in 2016, so they should wait until 2021. eugene scalia is the labor secretary and the son of justice antonin scalia a, my father's friendship with justice ginsburg. caller: thank you for taking the call. first, this could not be more simple to me. president.p is the the republicans hold the senate. they should confirm this nominee. ipp rang all this talk about how

the democrats will pack the hearing all this talk about how the democrats will pack the court. what happens when the republicans get back? it will go from 11 to 15 to 17. this has to stop. the politics of it are simple. the republicans control the white house. the republicans control the senate. they should confirm a nominee. namesfrom fox news, two to keep an eye on. barrett or barbara lagoa. she served on the florida state supreme court. wasconey barrett interviewed back in 2018. marcus is joining us from

minnesota. welcome to the program. caller: good morning. i believe that in 2016 as certain percentage of the voters for trump voted for him because they wanted a republican to appoint the next supreme court justice. me included. i think this could work to trump's benefit to get people aboute on the fence voting for him to hold their noses and vote for him because he would have the opportunity to appoint the next supreme court justice. i think they should hold the vote. i do have a suggestion if they were to appoint someone now. someonewere to appoint or nominate someone now, i would say he should nominate merrick garland. why not?

back in 2016, president obama nominated him because he felt he was more conservative and would be more likely to be approved by the republican senate. by nominating merrick garland, you have got someone who is a little more conservative than joe biden would nominate. and -- put towo end this argument that merrick garland got the short end of the stick in 2016. host: the nation mourns ruth bader ginsburg, trump bowing a nomination. should votet, they this year. when the parties are the same in the white house and senate, there is no reason not to. good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am all for president trump going ahead and putting another

justice in. i believe this needs to be done. like the lady said, he is president until january. we need to do that, take care of that, get it over with. pleaseto tell everybody, go out and vote. we don't need paper ballots in the mail and this nonsense. go out and vote. that way we will not have all this confusion. when it is over with, we will know that night who the winner is. know that night who the winner is, and that is so important. host: this is from another viewer, saying the nomination to the supreme court is for life, and this opportunity right now, democrats, believe you and me, the swamp that you love that is first.od filth will go

the book is called "on the road in trump's america: a journey into the heart of a divided nation." be joiningest will us, daniel allott, and the next hour, and then michael smerconish for campaign 2020. he is also a contributor to cnn and the host of his own saturday morning program. you are watching and listening to c-span's "washington journal" on this sunday morning. of september, and we are back in a moment. book tv on c-span two has top nonfiction authors every weekend. tonight at 9:00 eastern on "after words," chris murphy looks at the origins of violence and firearms in society and the role that they play.

he is interviewed by an author and council on criminal justice. watch book tv this weekend on c-span2. and be sure to watch the ball drop 2020 festival on book tv. >> monday night on "the communicators," federal trade commission commissioner noah phillips. : all of a sudden, there are a lot of people who seem to put a lot into the antitrust. there are people who say oh, if we had more competition or maybe moreetition, firms in the market, we would see all of them, and "new york times -- nad, you know, --

know, neighbors would get more from the gross in the economy. those are important issues, important policy questions. it is not clear at all that antitrust would be affected. federal trade commission commissioner noah phillips monday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining a seer in washington is daniel a lot, and opinion editor for the hill hill.com, and the his new book, "on the road in trump's america: a journey into the heart of a divided nation," and that journey included stops in pennsylvania, ohio, michigan. what did you see, what did you hear? would i found, you

not be surprised, a divided country. talking to many people, and many people over those three years, very few people have changed their mines about president trump. those who supported him for years ago support him today. those who opposed him in 2016 still oppose him. it is not that people's views of the president have not changed, but where they have, people have a more extreme and, i say, deeply entrenched view of the president, so if they voted for him, started liking him now, they love him. if they sort of opposed him in 2016, now they hate him. i was say that is a product of our tribal nature of our politics. people use words like we are divided, polarized, but i think " is a better word to use, where people are loyal to their own group, their own tribe, above all else.

those outside the tribes are going to be attacked and shunned. id when it comes to trunk, had a regular set of questions i would run through, and one question, the answers i got was very, very revealing. if i were talking to a trump supporter, i would say ok, you like the president, tell me about something you do not like, one of the policies you oppose. if i was talking to a trump critic, i was a-ok, fine, you don't like him, is there anything you admire or one of the policies you like coming very often, we would be having a very free-flowing conversation, and it would stop for about 20 seconds as my interview subject would try to think of anything that contradicted their overall impression of the president, and again, that have been reinforced time and time again, how tribal we have become. host: to take that one step further, to complicate all of this, of course, is the vacancy on the supreme court, the looming battle in the supreme

court and senate, and the looming battle of the election. guest: yeah, i think on the vacancy, this is the single most important reason trump was elected. he won 81% of white even delco voters. hisas not because of character. it was not because he goes to church every week. it was because he made very clear promises about what he wanted to do, and he made a promise about appointing pro-life justices to the courts. and he has done that. those voters that are part of his base, white and growing christians, are behind him, because they feel he has done a good job on dominating these pro-life judges. now,nk if he does so before the election, it would only reaffirm their support and kinda validate and vindicate their support for him. host: in the book "on the road in trump's america," you write the following, quote, "african americans might have groveled about some of obama's policies

or actions, but generally, there was no chance that they would not show up for him on election day, much less vote for a different candidate. the bond of solidarity was too strong. similar dynamic is at play with donald trump and when he received from many rural, working-class voters. question ofen the whether and under what circumstances these voters would abandon him." base, yes, and among his white working-class voters and white churchgoing christians, the way i define it, he has a rocksolid support because of that bond of trust and credibility that he formed with those groups, in 2016, that has only grown stronger. , think there is a feeling that among those voters, "trump has our backs." i talked to a lot of farmers in rural wisconsin, iowa, north carolina, and a lot of them

said, you know what? cannlikely as it sounds, i see a lot of myself in trump, because he came from a business background. farm is like a business, who sets a very clear agenda, goes about getting it done, and people identify a lot with him. the word i heard over and over again from farmers and people in agriculture and rural areas is "he listens to us," and "he continues to listen to us. he seems to understand our work. he values our work, our values as well," so things like pro-life and the gun culture and other issues. so they don't feel like he is talking down to them, whereas with other politicians, they have always felt that way. rule and with cards to america, you write this --

host: so elaborate on those points, if you would. guest: in talking to people, i would ask -- how would you describe racism in your area? people would give me, in places that were more white, a quizzical look or a bland assurance that things were fine. one woman put it really well. she said -- what race relations? iowa, it is rural 99% white. you are surrounded by counties that are the same way, and you don't travel much outside these areas, you may not have a deep understanding of a lot of a lot of the racial issues that we are dealing with. there may not be a very deep understanding of black lives matter, so i think the idea that people who are racially isolated are, as a consequence of their

, called racists, is wrong, and people resent that. the idea that they are racist just for living in a countryside or voting for donald trump is incorrect, and people are really sensitive about that. but when they are told they are racist, that actually makes them embrace trump even more. host: our guest is daniel i'll let. allott.el his book is "on the road in trump's america: a journey into the heart of a divided nation." let's get to your phone calls. larry from mississippi. withr: my problem christians supporting trump is you can catch him lying, you can plan for them, and they will still call themselves christian. it reminds me of back in the 1960's when they were hanging black people, they would go to church, hang a black people

before they go to church, get out of church, and hang more black people. it is just ridiculous. have a nice day. host: than larry, thank you for the call. we will get a response. guest: i think, and the issue of lying, a lot of people think he has come through on policy, and truck, the irony of the president is we have a president has lied, by one count, 20,000 times. seems like every day is something else. but on the issues that matter most, which are the campaign promises he has made, his supporters feel like he has kept his promises and follow through on them, and that is not something they are used to getting from a president, from a politician. most politicians will say one thing to get elected and then do something completely different when in office. with trump, he set a very clear agenda, and he achieved or tried to achieve almost all of it, and people really respect that, and they appreciate that.

host: next is peter from new york. good morning from valley cottage, new york. good morning, guys, mr. allott. regarding the supreme court, there is no doubt in my mind that if chuck schumer was the majority leader in 2016, mary garland would be on the court right now, so there is no disputing that. number two, i thought you would find this interesting, you know, the conservatives have been playing a clip of joe biden saying that "we believe in truth and not facts," and they are saying it is a gaffe. gaffe, believe it was a i believe it was a freudian slip. you know, take for instance "hands up, don't shoot." we know that was factually incorrect, yet a lot of african americans believe that it actually happened, so i think it is actually true that people, a

lot of people, tribalism is a very accurate description, that people believe what they want to believe on the left. conservatives seem to associate truth with fact, but there are a lot of people who believe a certain truth, and it does not necessarily have to be factual. above that would be interesting for you to comment on. thank you very much. host: thank you, peter. guest: well, i found a very deep distrust of the media in a lot of places i traveled to. one of the advantages of my approach to this book is i was traveling for three years and returning again and again, and i think, over time, i was able to build up quite a bit of credibility and trust in places i visited, places where normally an out-of-town reporter coming in, people would be very wary of, but after the cap seeing me showing upow, i kept at events, they would see me in the home of their friend or

something like that, their guard started coming down, and i think i got to a deeper level of understanding, but i did get a really deep distrust of the media. a lot of people feel like they are misrepresented in the media. and was trump, a lot of his supporters, i feel like there is a sort of boy who cried wolf scenario going on, you know, everything trump does is terrible and potentially impeachable, then perhaps when he does something that is terrible and impeachable, nobody will know, because the media has lost so much credibility to be the neutral arbiters of what is truth and what is newsworthy that nobody will even know. and i think that is the point we are at right now, unfortunately. host: on that point, doesn't the president bear some responsibility, because he has been the first to claim it as "fake news," of the media, when it is cripple of him? guest: oh, yeah. i don't think he helped to the matter at all. but you have to understand the context in which trump arose. this resentment and lack of trust in the media existed on

the right for decades, and middle america, rural america, they felt like the media has talked down to them, not really represented who they are, and for a long time, they felt like republicans, standardbearers, whether it was a president like george w. bush or mccain or romney just never fought back with the media. beatingt took whatever was coming at them. george w. bush was attacked pretty mercilessly, and he never did anything. he wanted to ingratiate himself with the media. in that history, trump comes along, and he is really combative. el that hers do fe goes too far sometimes, but they get a feel that he is willing to fight back, finally. you get the sense that he is taking the blows for the people behind him, for his supporters. he is standing up for their values and for them. host: as you mentioned, you travel to a number of states. in north carolina, macomb

county, michigan, in erie county, pennsylvania. when you talked to people there, what struck you the most? what stood out? guest: in erie or generally speaking? host: generally speaking. guest: one thing i was really bowled over by was the immigrant story, and i really sought out people who were different in any community, and i talked to a lot of immigrants and refugees throughout the country, hispanic immigrants in leroux wisconsin, middle eastern immigrants in erie and macomb county, african immigrants in west virginia and north carolina. felt veryn, they all welcome in their communities. they felt they had great opportunities. they felt very much sort of embraced by their communities, and that is not often the story you here. i feel a lot of times it is, oh, if you are living in middle america, if you are living in the countryside, if you are living in a place that voted for president trump, these places are violently inhospitable to you, and you should be aware you are not going to be welcome.

almost to ason, person, they felt like they were embraced. ever member in erie, as you know, there are a lot of immigrants and refugees from the middle east in erie comeuppance pensive and it and talking to women there, muslim and the grants from iraq, they were bowled over at how much they were embraced at their jobs and in the broader community, and one of them kidded that she was treated better whenever she wore her hehijab out in public then when she didn't wear it. that shows how welcoming communities are out in america, and that is unfortunately not the story that is often told about middle america. host: all of this chronicled by the author, daniel allott. the book is called "on the road in trump's america: a journey into the heart of a divided nation." back to your phone calls. palmetto, florida, good morning. uh, i would like to begin with the evangelicals,

to understand that pro-life is more than an unborn child. also all the 200,000 people that have died from the plus the people that died black lives the matter, ok, and i would like to a greeting to virgin, new york. thank you. host: thank you, mc. guest: i think a lot of pro-life people would agree with the caller on that, that all lives matter, and a lot of the issues that we see, those issues are important to them, but when it comes to tens of millions of pro-life americans and trump and some of his policies and character issues, i remember meeting with david and maxine.

ivid and maxine or a couple met at the howard county fair in iowa. howard county is an interesting place. the only county in america that voted for barack obama by more than 20 points in 2012 and then to trump by more than 20 points, so it flipped. a lot of farming, agriculture, two stop lights a lot of places. and i was there at the howard ai they had a lot of and i went top, the pro-life booth, and i talked to david and maxine peered they were trump supporters, of course them and i tried to get them acknowledge that trump had some character flaws and not sort of thing. at one point, david stood up and pointed to a model of a late term abortion, and that was his way of saying, look, we are trying to save one million

babies a year. we are not concerned about the president's manners. i understand that approach -- policy matters much more than personality. host: how did they view impeachment? this has been such a year, we forget that it began with the impeachment of president trump. guest: i was able to predict how anyone would come down on almost any issue, whether it be impeachment, the kavanaugh hearings, the coronavirus, based on their answer to one question. it was the only question i really needed to ask people was -- where do you stand on trump? and based on that, whether they supported him in 2016 or not, i could predict, ok, so you do not think there is anything to this impeachment stuff. and so it really came down along tribal lines, along party lines. host: let's get back to your phone call. carrie is joining us, lafayette, indiana. good morning. supporter of the president. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. yes, the economy is so

good, i made $4000 interest on the money i had in an annuity, and that makes me very happy. i kind of lean libertarian, but i'm going to vote for president trump, and i just really like him. he stands up to china. they were taking, like, half $1 trillion away from us every year, and he stood up to them. that is why they released the us, so the, to hurt economy will get worse, so the democrats would have a better chance of winning, and biden, half the time, he don't even know where he's at. he states the wrong state or the wrong town. i can't believe anybody would vote for biden. or harris. so many people, and biden, he is the one that made the drug laws tougher, longer sentences and everything, and before they passed the drug

laws, there were no drug gangs. before they passed the alcohol laws, there were no gangs. they repealed the alcohol law, and the murder and the crime rate went up -- after they repealed the law, the murder and the crime rate went down. host: we will leave it there and get a response. daniel allott, what are you hearing from this viewer in indiana? guest: well, i think the idea that it is sort of a conspiracy to create the coronavirus and spread it in america to damage the economy into her trump's prospects is very common. a lot of on the right feel like the democrats, the media, the elites, and even china is involved in it, it is sort of a conspiracy to her trump ahead of the election. reinforces how tribal we have become, that we cannot trust the media, we cannot trust our essential

solutions to tell the truth, and we believe these pretty wild conspiracy theories. host: here's what i viewer says, the president's treatment by the media is trump's doing, the lies, the corruption, the divisiveness, they take a toll on everybody's patients, except votingporters, who are for something other than governance." guest: that is a sentiment i have heard quite a bit. if people are thinking about trump closing personality, character when they vote, i think he will end up losing. i talked to a few voters who voted for trump who planned to vote for biden or not goat it all, and that is the thing that came up again and again, the andnt of trump fatigue exhaustion with the chaos surrounding trump. i remember talking to a woman in orange county, california named lacey who, she is mid 30's, half white, half hispanic, and she voted for trump mainly out of an

aversion for hillary. she liked a lot of his policies, but she knew she only wanted trump for one term, because she knew that things would get chaotic, and the metaphor she used for trump was ok, you have had four years of a hurricane. now perhaps it is time for a light drizzle. and that is what she sees in joe biden. maybe we need a return to normalcy and all of the drama that surrounds the president. host: in a de facto america, there is no "united we stand. the notion of citizenship rather than an ethnic nationalism. he is doomed. youre go back to thi book and this point regarding geography peered you said geography, more than race or class, has become the dividing line more so today, living lives

that are wholly removed from one another. i think i found a lot of resentment for cities, you know, i would ask people, and the countryside, do you resent cities, and they would do," becauses i they feel like they are paying taxes, living under regulations and edex coming from the power and they are paying their taxes and everything, but they do not see the resources getting to them. are in terrible condition, the roads are under funded, they ar their kids are

going to state college, and they are being inculcated with values, and they are not coming back, so there countryside is dying, and they are resentful about it. host: let's go to peggy. good morning. caller: good morning. i think my big concern is if trump gets reelected in an another conservative supreme court judge, trouble try to get rid of the 22nd amendment to run for more than two terms or make himself president for life. thank you. host: thank you, peggy. we will get a response. guest: i have not heard a lot about. things are pretty tribal right now, but i do not think there will be much support among his voters, supporters, supporting him, you know, going for a third term. that is a bit out there. i guess anything is possible in today's environment, but i have not heard a lot about that. host: michael with his sweet and very simple question to you,

"what is normalcy today." guest: what is normal? hmm. that is a very good question peered with any president that would be less tribal, less divided, we would return to a time in the past where everybody came together, i think that is wrong. oh, it iseople say trump who is making us soak tribal. i do not think he helped, but the real reasons are much deeper than one politician and one president. you look at the media, we have a broken media model right now that really rewards expressions of outrage, controversy much more than, you know, a really nuanced, thoughtful debate, and, you know, you look at trusted institutions them if you want to go even deeper. that institutions that are the bedrock of our democracy, things like churches,

the court, and the media, have plummeted in recent years, and i think in a society where trust is lacking, that is where tribalism can flourish. host: carol, tulsa, oklahoma. good morning. i'm really from palm beach county, florida, and when i pass away, of course, i will go back there to be buried in the national cemetery. raton originally, but i moved here to be near my art historian daughter and my family. i will vote for trump. i think he is far better than biden. i just could not go for biden, and i think the more we hear -- the morell come out -- it will probably be trump voters. ,nd i think that is about all unless he wants to ask me a question. guest: do you think there are

people who are reluctant to acknowledge or admit or broadcast their support for the president, among the people you know? caller: well, since, you know, i don't know too many here in tulsa. i knew so many, you know, back i doin boca raton, but think that there are probably -- i am certainly well educated. i taught school, you know, in broward county, even though i they in palm beach, and had the most beautiful campus anywhere -- it looked like a college campus, and i liked the school, and i liked the different buildings it had, like a college campus. had sot english, and i many students, and they liked me, and i was white.

sayi did not, you know, much about for whom i voted, but when obama was elected, of course, i was teaching there, but i don't really discuss politics very much, because i do not think it is a good idea. [laughs] host: well, carol, thank you for the call. thanks for telling us a little but about your background peered we appreciate it. guest: well, i think the idea that she doesn't talk politics much with people, i find that happening more and more, again, with the tribalism, people feel like they do not feel comfortable bringing a political issues with their friends and families and coworkers. what i found more and more, probably the most interesting finding in terms of the tribalism is several people that i followed over the years ended up moving away from places because they did not feel comfortable in that tribe.

so these are three cases where people were in obama counties that swung to trump, and these were progressive people who one day woke up and looked around and thought, "i don't recognize my neighbors anymore. what has happened to this place?" and they all ended up moving away to more progressive, you know, cities in another part of the state, so i think that is really a shame when we are making decisions about who we are going to be living -- which communities we are going to live in based on the politics. what we need, of course, if we are going to be overcome in the tribalism and division, is more engagement. we should be able to talk about the issues. we should be able to have a thoughtful discussion with somebody about president trump, about the supreme court, whatever, and still remain friends and on good terms with them. but what i found, and a lot of stories in the book, people falling out over, you know, arguments over trump or something political, and it is really a shame when it has gotten to that point. host: so what would you say to lisa with this tweet, and i am sure you have seen and heard

this in your travel, saying "i do not agree with everything trump says and does, i do not agree with everything my husband says or does, but i will keep him." guest: yeah. i think that is a very common sentiment, and i do not know where she stands on his lessees, but i would -- his policies, but i would think it comes down to a general agreement on what he has achieved, and also the fact, as i mentioned before, he was very clear about what he wanted to do, and then he set about doing it. that think people find very refreshing and appreciate that he really kept his promises. so they are willing to put up with a heck of a lot in terms of the character flaws because of his honesty on policy and the fact that he came through on a lot of the policy issues. host: and this is from scott, who is in massachusetts, sending "howtext question -- did the level of education play into all of this?" guest: not that much, to be

honest. i guess one of the key dividing lines i found is the places that were vibrant economically and in terms of culture and diversity tended to become more progressive. so two of the counties that i visited -- orange county, florida and salt lake county, utah -- or actually historically quite republican, but they are trending democratic in the trump era and will continue after he leaves office because they are becoming quite diverse and vibrant economically. they are doing very well economically. places that are less diverse and, you know, less vibrant economically are becoming more republican, and that is a big divide. host: let's go to ernest, who is joining us this morning from georgia. good morning. a supporter of the biden-harris ticket. go ahead. caller: good morning. host: good morning. inler: i am so interested what do the evangelicals see in

donald trump that makes them want to support him so much? ,lso, the pro-life people again, that's their position, you know, that's their position. but what kind of programs do whenhave for these women to helpe these babies, them during their pregnancy, to help them, what have you? could you please, you know, enlighten me on what are they doing in those areas. what --last thing, host: what was the last part? we missed the last part of the question. caller: what church does donald trump attend? host: thank you. we will get a response. guest: i'm not sure that he does attend a church, and will say that for most of his churchgoing

followers, they don't really care that much, because, again, he has come through on policy. look, it is not just policy tomatoes also rhetoric, and he shows up at events. he was out the march for life, barely covered in the media. people to send on washington, , and it is rarely covered. he showed up and gave a speech tonight i've heard that over and over again, traveling across the country, "wow, he was out the march for life." he speaks at the values voters summit, hundreds of christian conservative activists. he has spoken every year at that event. bush never spoke, and eight years, trump shows up. that counts for a lot. and the supreme court nominations he has made, done

better than any other president for these people, for the pro-life issue. and so that is going to be his legacy when he leaves office. it is not going to become "which church did he attend?" yes, these evangelicals would want him to go to church, but like david and maxine and howard county, it is "we want to save one million lives every year." host: this is a tweet from about an hour ago from @real donaldtrump -- host: linda is joining us from warwick, rhode island. good morning. caller: hi. i would like to say i think your guest is right on target with donald trump and his supporters. one of the reasons why i support im from the beginning is

voted for ross perot and supported him, and i think i did a lot of damage to the country, and i think donald trump is doing the best he can to turn that around. host: thank you, linda. appreciate the call. a storyeah, let me tell i mentioned before there is a lot of feeling, especially in rural areas, and if you go to robinson county, north carolina, eight is a very interesting county, the most racially diverse rural county, and they have a large native american tribe command a voted for trump in large numbers, after voting for obama. the biggest issue for them was nafta and free-trade. they were devastated by that free-trade agreement. they lost an estimated 10,000 jobs. they are now the poorest county in north carolina. so when he came along and said, i don't care what other political parties have done in the past -- and he railed against nafta and other free-trade agreements, promised

to renegotiate them -- that resonated with people there, "he is listening to us. he is not from washington. he is not listening to the consultants. he is going his own way." what i also found, particularly in robinson county, for instance, is how much social issues matter for people. yes, trade is important, but at the end of the day, we are voting on abortion. there are a lot of people throughout the country who still don't accept same-sex marriage. so it is a very conservative area, even though that county voted for obama in the past, it was an easy pick for them to choose trump in 2016. and it is places like that better going to stick with trump this year. host: a text message from john from chillicothe, ohio, a question on the media -- "do you believe the media has been fair or biased against president trump?" guest: wow.

i think there is a lot of bias, to be honest. there is a lot of scrutiny, and he should be under the microscope, but i think the problem is a lot of newsrooms are not very ideologically diverse, so you have most newsrooms of major newspapers, magazines, and news outlets where there are very few donald trump supporters. they are not really representative of the entire country. there are publications that claim to speak for the entire country -- they want to be national publications -- but how many people do they have maybe grew up on a farm or grew up in the midwest and support donald trump? very few. that is a problem. we need more ideological and geographic diversity is in our newsrooms to better represent the country. host: in the book, you write the following, "the 2020 primaries may have provided a preview of the type of turnout we can expect from trump voters in november. as the media august on the democratic primary race, trump was piling up unprecedented

victories. in the early primary space, transi trump surpassing the obamaotals that barack and others had received in the reelection bids. betty, good morning. caller: good morning. years old, born and raised in greenville, south carolina, so you know what i experienced growing up. but if you've ever seen the movie -- that is what trump reminds me of. artist, and he is good at what he is doing. he is saying the things that he knows people really want to hear. and as far as abortion goes, abortion,n invented because back in the day, black women could not even get a birth control pill. i know that for a fact, because i am 81 years old.

and they talk about black women the black- the reason alley doctors were invented was because black women could not therd to pay the price that white women could afford to pay. and donald trump is onto the queue on people, so talk a little bit about what they represent. can thank you so much for listening to me. a country divided cannot stand. thank you. host: betty, thank you for the call. guest: well, i think the idea that trump is a con artist, and, again, this gets back to his character and whether or not people think they can trust the president, i think if he does lose the election, it will be on the issue of trust and character. one man i talked to many, many times, maybe my most fascinating interview, a man named mark in

indiana. he is a registered democrat, a member of the native american tribe, voted for barack obama twice, and still has good feelings for the former president. but he liked a lot of what trump said. in our initial meeting in 2017, he said "has trump earned my trust? not yet. but i am willing to give them a chance." every time i talked to him, it was that issue of trust, "can i trust him," and it was like being on a pendulum, swinging back from negativity and positivity with every tweet and policy. the last time i talked to him was during the pandemic over the phone, and he was still questioning, "can i trust my president?" saying,point, trump was "if you want to get a coronavirus test, you can get one," and mark's wife had exhibited, shown some symptoms of the virus, and she could not obtain a test. and, again, that just reinforced

, "can i trust with president is saying to me?" and he said, "i am getting the president from now until election day to pull me over to his side," and i think he is not alone. host: we are talking with daniel allott. his book is "on the road in trump's america: a journey into the heart of a divided nation." mike is joining us from houston, texas. good morning. caller: good morning. , c-span. ah, one thing about donald trump is, you know, when you have 3000 counties across the united states, over 3000, 5 of the top seven wealthiest of than just magically surround washington, d.c. now, no wonder career politicians enjoy that. they love that lifestyle, because it enriches them, their families, and living there is a wonderful thing. they have great security and all the rest. trump does not need that. he does not need that. he did not need this. i agree that he is not the most

polished ceo around -- i know that -- but we have to live with ideas and the consequences of their policy, and i -- clearly, trump is focused on confronting china and building the wall. and i would like to know what media member is finally going to ask jill biden something other than a nerf ball question. does he want to keep the wall? what about the new green deal? does anybody care about the consequences of the new green deal? but i tell you, all these things come back to the five of the top seven counties surrounding washington, d.c., and there is a reason that this has happened, and that is one of the reasons that donald trump ran, just the consequence of what he is running. and it just bothers me that people don't see all that wealth around washington, d.c. do they not connect the dots between the wealth in the country and half of it being located in washington? kate used to be located in the cities, in the private sector.

poorest counties are in the inner-city. the biggest dichotomy of wealth is the two income societies in the big democrat-run cities, where you have the very wealthy and the very poor. host: mike, we will leave it there. thank you for the call from houston, texas. we will get a response. guest: i think it reinforces that trump has convinced a lot of people in the countryside and middle america that he is the one standing for them. non-politician who became president, but he is standing for middle american values. he recognizes the work that they do and the importance of what they do for a living, whereas, you know, a lot of democratic politicians don't. -- i think he started that bond. i call it a bond of trust and goodwill with middle america, with rural america in 2016, and it has only grown stronger since then. host: next is kenneth from florida.

good morning. caller: good morning, steve. congratulations on your selection for the debate. my question is -- and steve, i hope that when you do the debate, one question i would like for you to ask both explain inis that their own words what do they think black people mean when they say "black lives matter"? but to daniel, i just want to know why does it seem like trump -- some of the things he has done is ok, but why does it seem like he has to go to the races thanking just to get elected or just to do his policies? at his rally,ays it seems like everyone that is there seems to come off in a

racist type attitude towards everyone else, other than trump supporters. that is my question. thank you. host: thank you, kenneth, from florida. aest: well, i think there is view that i found is very common with the caller, that, you know, people support a lot of trump's policies, but some of the things he said -- a man named eddie lopez that i talked to many times in orange county, and he is a hispanic immigrant that has done very well for himself, and ronald reagan is is neighbor resident he likes a lot of what trump has done on policy, on the economy, before this pandemic, but he was really disturbed by what trump said when he lost his campaign in -- launched his campaign in 2015 about mexicans being rapists and drug dealers, and he just can't get over that. again, he is not a democrat, but he is going to vote for biden because of what he feels is the hatred and maybe the racism of trump, that he just cannot vote

for him, even though he likes a lot of the policies. rallies, i the trump think it is a matter of opinion about, you know, whether there is racism going on. i would say that the enthusiasm that you see there, trump rallies are basically conservative safe spaces. they are places where trump supporters can go and feel like they can wear all their trump gear and know that the person to the right, the person to their left, is a trump supporter, and they can celebrate together, because when they are on the outside, they do not want to talk about it with anyone, because they do not want to get fired from their job or get into an argument, so that is why there is so much energy at those rallies. host: marie is calling from panama city, florida. thank you for waiting period good morning. hello? caller: yes, i am here. host: good morning. caller: good morning.

the guest keeps saying that president trump remains true to his policies. where is the health care plan? oh, yeah, he said that our disabled vets are suckers. how has life improved over the last four years? host: bringing up the point that was in that "atlantic magazine" article. on that specific point, daniel allott, how do you respond? guest: on which point? host: on the point that the president called people buried there suckers and losers. guest: i think there's a lot of distrust, and among his supporters, i do not think it will make much of a difference, "oh, itthey will say is the deep state, it is the media, so i do not think he will support even from the military

who voted for him. battle lines are so entrenched, that there is not much that can move them. there is no trust there. same thing happened in 2016, where very little could hurt, sort of like a teflon president, nothing can really hurt him among his supporters. host: we will go to virginia next, in new york city, supporter of the president. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call, and thank you, c-span. i would just like to ask the author, in his survey of the american public, how many media people has he interviewed? the hugeto me that majority of reporting on the president has been negative, with no attempt at balance. thank you. i will hang up, and you can answer my question. host: thank you. guest: well, not a lot of media people. toould try to speak out

local publications, local outlets, to talk to the writers, editors, to find out what is happening locally, the local news and local media tends to be much less partisan, right? they are talking local issues. the whole point of my project in the book and all the reporting was i wanted to talk to more everyday people, and i did talk to politicians. i did talk to people in the media, but i wanted to talk to the prospects themselves, so i ended up talking to a lot of people who have normal jobs. is -- we next caller will go to satavia, i hope i am pronouncing that correctly, and pennsylvania, supporter of the biden-harris ticket. caller: hi. good morning. host: good morning. caller: may i ask my question now? host: you are on the air. go ahead, sir. from the want to know author when he plans to talk to the producers, because for the last three years, they say you

should try to talk to the working class people, and i am working class. i work for a living, and nobody talks to me. for the last three years, the pendulum has swung to how many people have voted. host: thank you for the call. he is calling from clark summit, pennsylvania. and, of course, as you know, pens of any is one of the battleground states in this election. guest: i talked to anyone i could. ofalked to plenty progressives, really anyone who would sit down with me or have a chat with me. if you read the book, i think you'll will be hard-pressed to say oh, i am talking to just trump supporters or i am sympathetic to trump. i really tried to go -- and also the premise of the book is, to really understand a place, you need to spend a lot of time there, you need to talk to a lot of people, get diverse views, and you need to listen. and that is what i tried to do.

leave my own biases aside -- i know i have my own, my own prejudices and pods about what is going on in a place -- but i tried to leave them outside, into the county, and observe for a while, and i tried to talk to the same people most full times, but there are several chapters in there where i am really focused on progressives and progressive issues. host: if you look at american politics, really fdr through reagan, every president through that time period, a variation of the policies of either roosevelt or reagan, and donald trump changed all that. has he realigned american politics? has he realigned the republican party? guest: well, possibly. i think it will be interesting to see who takes up the trunk mantle after trump is out of office, whether it is mike pence or nikki haley or don jr.. i think republicans will be in for a little bit of a wake-up call. and i would compare trump and

what would happen with the republican party with what happened to the democratic party under obama, and i compare obama and trump quite a bit. i think it is 2008 when obama won, there was a feeling that ok, he is ushering this new democratic dominance that is going to, you know, last regeneration, and that did not happen, right? i mean, democrats lost the congress, both midterm elections, at the lower level, houses, and really be only when they won again was obama in 2012, and that is because obama was charismatic, unique president who could draw people to the polls that nobody else could. trump is the same way. the people you see at the rallies, they did not vote come i them, and 2018. they will be back this year. but maybe a mike pence or nikki haley and bracing -- embracing

his policies, but without their that charisma, and thinking they can draw those voters -- i think they will be mistaken. host: let's go to doug. good morning. caller: good morning. that toon is i feel much of this selection is focused on personality. i am more concerned about the future than i am about the virus and about the economy. ofike to use the analogy taking a trip when i fly, which i have had to do often. i don't expect or i do not feel it is necessary for the pilot or the copilot to come out and shake my hand and greeting me, nor do i feel it is necessary for him to go through the same practice when i departed the plane. i am more concerned about somebody that can get me there safely and get me back, and that

is why i am focusing on the future, and i don't feel that cann and his backup copilot fulfill that need. thank you very much. host: doug, thank you. guest: yeah, i think that just reinforces my finding that if people are voting on election day thinking about trump rosie policies, what he can do for the economy, then he will win. his policies are, generally, popular. if they are thinking about his personality and his character, i think he will lose. host: you don't have to answer this, but if the election were held today, from your standpoint, who would win? guest: after seeing the nine counties that i spent so much time -- and here is the thing -- six of those counties were obama-trump counties, i think five of those counties will stick with the president. i am less sure about erie county, pennsylvania, what you know about. i think it could go either way.

i think the entire rationale, or much of it, for joe biden being the democratic nominee is that he can win over some independents and some of these sort of alienated republicans, and maybe some obama-trump voters. and i followed 16 obama-trump voters over three years and had in-depth discussions with some of them, became friends with some of them, and among the 16, 14 are committed to voting for donald trump again, and the two who are not come are committed not to vote for joe biden. the idea for the biden campaign that they can win back some of these former obama voters can i think they are mistaken there. host: all chronicled in the book, "on the road in trump's america: a journey into the heart of a divided nation." the byline of our guest has been seen in the "new york times," politico, "investors business daily," and "the washington examiner." more with daniel allott.

hi. hi, and hello to the author. i am a democrat and have been since the 1980's, and a lot of my friends are republican, pro-abortion, anti-gun, a bunch of union workers, and yet they still support trump. let me tell you something about the republican party. since i have been a kid -- and we were a democratic family -- you know, they would call us n, n-something, we were the n- people, we were the n-party, and i do not have to tell you what that word means. and that is the way it is with a lot of trump supporters. they will not come out and say it. his policies, his economic policies have not worked. oil jobs are lost, being dumped, manufacturing has not come back, farmers are hurt, so can i mean, no matter what

they tell you, most people still think of a democrat as people who support, you know, the stuff that has gone on in cities, and it is the n-party, period. host: we will leave it there and get a response. thank you. guest: well, i think the idea is true that the democrats have moved quite far to the left in recent years is a very strong one, i think that is part of the reason why biden will have a tough time winning over a lot of moderates. and if you look at the positions that the democratic party has taken up relations obama has been elected, they have embraced some really extreme policies, including the green new deal, you know, taxpayer funding for abortion, open borders, these sorts of things, and that has alienated a lot of people in the suburbs, people in rural america, who would be open -- i talked to plenty of farmers who, you know, would be open to an alternative to trump, but they do not see it in biden, because

he has moved so far to the left with the party. you? what is next for will there be a second addition of this book with updates following the election? guest: i would love it. in fact, i am about to hit the road again here i will be an area in about a week. i cannot stay away from their. then i will be in wisconsin. i have been on the road for quite some time. the road beckons. i need to get back out there. host: "a journey into the heart of a divided nation," our guest is daniel ally, also an opinion editor for thehill.com. thank you. guest: thank you, steve. ist: michael smerconish joining us next from his philadelphia home. you are watching and listening to c-span's "washington journal ." we are back in a moment.

♪ >> tonight on q&a, author and historian on his book, the president versus the press. he talks about presidents from fdr to donald trump. >> when president trump tweets early in the morning, as he does almost daily, the news cycle immediately bends to his latest issue, idea, rent, complaint. attack. isf of the day's news cycle devoted to rehashing his tweet and analyzing it and pushing back against it on some networks. i think this is nothing short of genius on the part of trump. obama may have been the first twitter president, but trump is a president of such mastery of with fdrhat he ranks

in radio and jfk in a television. , tonight atlzer 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. night on the communicators, federal trade commission commissioner noah phillips. >> one of the interesting things about the antitrust debate, certainly in washington, is there are a lot of people who seem to put a lot into the vessel of antitrust. they are looking at the world and saying, if we had more competition or better would be morehere firms in the market. we would see these effects. i see everything from democracy would be restored to racial justice, the environment would be better, labor would get more of the take from growth in the economy. issues,e important

important policy questions. it is not clear at all to me that antitrust was designed to or would be effective at solving those problems. >> federal trade commission commissioner noah phillips monday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the communicators on c-span2. "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from philadelphia is michael smerconish, a columnist for the philadelphia inquirer, an author of six books, host of his own xm --m on cnn on serious sirius xm. he works six days a week, so thank you for joining us on the seventh day. guest: thanks for having me back. i am already to go. i even have my c-span swag. there is the coffee mug for my last appearance. host: we will send you the new mug for campaign 2020.

about the death of justice ruth bader ginsburg and the political stakes for democrats, republicans, the campaign, and the u.s. senate. i have so many thoughts. i do not know where to begin, so i will follow your lead. i fear a very ugly campaign is about to become much more so. the one thought that i have, since the passing was announced, something i am not hearing said, i am not so sure that the president's interests and the interests of mitch mcconnell are always going to be on the same track. i know they share an objective of wanting to fill that seat with a conservative, but in the end, each man wants to preserve his current position. if you were to say to senator mcconnell and get an honest answer, here are your choices. you can maintain your position

as a senate majority leader because you maintain the majority, or you can have the president reelected. you will probably still be in the united states senate. it is all about self-preservation. this could be such an ugly battle that there might be blowback wherein republicans risk not only not getting the confirmation they seek but losing control of both the white house and the senate. host: and a battle some have written about, that if this nominee is put forward in this term of the u.s. senate, that we potentially could see democrats, if they gain control of the senate, make washington, d.c. a state cannot maybe puerto rico, and add more members to the supreme court. guest: true. i am a traditionalist. i know the constitution does not say their need to be nine in the supreme court of the united states. i would hate to see us go that way in terms of expanding the court or doing something else with a long-term view. where does that end?

it can become a slippery slope. you set up a situation where there is a changing of the guard four years later and now that administration with the support of congress wants to do likewise. i hope it can be resolved within the current framework we have. host: in preparing for this program, i was thinking, what would michael smerconish put on the table? sun of theia is the late associate justice antonin scalia month the labor secretary and he writes, my father's friendship with justice ginsburg. let me read part of what he wrote. what can be learned from this celebrated friendship between justices? in many ways, it was quite simple. some of the best friendships are they worked at the same place. they liked a lot of the same things, the law, teaching, travel, music, and a meal with family and friends. in --roke -- both grew up

as outsiders. she was a jew and a woman. he was a catholic and italian american. the justices had central roles in addressing some of the most divisive issues of the day in a including who would be president. not for a moment and one think the other should be condemned or ostracized. they believed what they were doing, arriving at their own opinions thoughtfully and advancing them vigorously, was good,ial to the national including by saying with less debate their friendship would have been diminished and so would our democracy. piece.i read to the i loved the piece. it was reminiscent to me of thinking about the relationship between ronald reagan and tip o'neill. i hope i do not screw this up on c-span, but famously reagan birthday forl at a the white house and propose an old irish toast. he said, if i had a ticket to heaven and you did not, i would

throw mine away and go to help hell with you. such was the nature. those days are gone. it is sad. program, in my cnn was eager to have her because ,he had written this obituary very detailed come about ruth bader ginsburg. it was full of substantive information and also give you a portrait of the individual. do your points, the final paragraph of the -- to your point, the final paragraph of the obituary about justice ginsburg spoke of how she was last seen on the court on march 4. when the business of the justices was concluded and it was now time for them to leave, as apparently had recently become the custom, she was the last to leave.

one of the other justices lingered behind. it was clarence thomas. he lingered behind so as to lend her a hand, given her frailty, to ease her passage from the bench. i thought that is really a poignant moment. she, the best-known of the progressives on the court, and he cannot likewise, for the conservatives. people might have been shocked to read there could be that kind between them. it is missing. i guess that is your point. host: you had jeffrey rosen from the constitution center. he was also on c-span yesterday morning. he got emotional. it was a very personal relationship between those two. guest: my entire cnn program for saturday morning, for yesterday morning, was put to bed as i was about to go to bed at about 8:30 friday night when the news broke.

within 60 seconds of hearing of the passing of justice ginsburg, the first email that i sent was to jeffrey rosen, both expressing condolences for the passing of his friend and cajoling -- him cajoling him to come on with me. they had a decade-long relationship that began when he was a clerk and she was on the appellate court in washington, d.c. they bonded over a like of opera. he published a book which transcriptsl of the and re-creations of his conversations over the years with rbg. it is a tremendous insight. she also performed two of his marriage ceremonies. hopefully two and done.

he shared wonderful stories that humanized her. as it isportant to me, important to you cannot to not only talk about what is to come with this senate battle, but also to human ties -- humanize the individual we lost. thathought that i had is she was such a diminutive figure and yet such a legal giant. what a remarkable career, to overcome a trifecta of being .ewish, female, mom no new york form -- firm was willing to hire her, which is why she went into academia. i am a reader. you are a listener of mine, and i'm privileged that you sometimes listen to me on sirius xm. i often read obituaries aloud. they need not be from the famous or rich.

we learn so much about people and life when you read obituaries. hers is remarkable. what is also remarkable is, when bill clinton was looking to fill the seat in 1993, she was not top on the list. couple of interesting things. president clinton took pride in the fact that he was putting forth an individual who was not known as a liberal, certainly not known as a conservative, but was regarded as a centrist. chair of the the senate judiciary committee at that time? it was senator joe biden. biden took pleasure in the fact that, upon the announcement by president clinton that it would be ruth bader ginsburg, then judge ginsburg, that it was a page eight or nine story in the new york times.

he was relishing that this was going to be a quiet time and not supremehose contentious court battles. host: let's turn to presidential politics. ,n your program on sirius xm you spend a lot of time talking about pennsylvania. i know you're going to focus on other states. what do you most want to say about pennsylvania? what stands out 45 days before the election? guest: i am looking at notes because i want to get this right. to 47.85%. that was the margin in the commonwealth of pennsylvania four years ago. it upset a trend that had existed since 1988. state, we were part of that big blue wall. donald trump was over to

overturn that. the reflection that i have on pennsylvania looking back, and i did not see it coming in your c-span viewers should know and probably do that i was not among the very few who said that trump could pull it off in pennsylvania. i did not think that he could. did whatlinton typically a democratic presidential candidate needs to do to win the state. such were her margins in philadelphia and the southeast, those suburbs, allegheny county and portions of the southwest, that you would have expected she would have won the race, but the rural rebellion, the turnout in areas that historically had not generated those kinds of numbers for a republican presidential candidate, is what provided president trump with his margin. where does it stand now? i do not know. there are so many intangibles in this race and now the largest

intangible of all emerges, which is a supreme court nomination in the 11th hour of the presidential contest. i do not regard it as a persuasion election. for as much time as i have spent on radio talking about those voters who have gone from r to d in the past, in the end, i do not think that is where this risk is determined. i think people are locked in. it is a turnout election. what does that mean? it is all about passion. there is a lot of passion for the president's side of the ledger. i do not know there is so much passion for the men. i would say the same thing about the democratic side of the aisle. i do not know that there is great passion for joe biden. i know there is passion against donald trump. i know there is passion against the perception of what the democratic party has become.

about joeince animus biden. i do not meet people who dislike joe biden. they just do not exist. that is different than a situation four years ago. you have passion in terms of opposing what they think the other side is. who comes out to vote? it remains to be seen. one other thing about our home state of pennsylvania that i think is important underscore is this. we had a significant supreme court decision in pennsylvania this past week which opens the door for the counting of ballots for three days after the election. already we are coming to terms with voting by mail in pennsylvania in a way that has not been permitted previously. this will be the first presidential cycle. whether the machinery is ready to go to tabulate those ballots is an open question. i hope so, but now the prospect of counting those ballots three

days after the election, so long as they are postmarked by 8:00 p.m. tuesday night, means that perhaps we do not know who wins beyondmonwealth until november 3. therefore, we may not know who wins the white house until after november 3, and not because of fraud but some leave because it will take a wild to count those mail-in ballots. pennsylvania, renda -- brenda. caller: good morning. am i the only one that has been reading the fine print on donald trump's campaign ads? -- fine print says donald to donald j. trump for president inc.. turned hisme he has campaign into a business. being a business, he does not have to follow campaign finance laws.

he does not have to do a campaign finance disclosure statements. whooes not have to report gave him money. as a business, you are not donating. he does not have to report who gave him money or how much. he does not have to tell anybody what he used the money for. this seems -- i do not believe trump thinks he is going to win, but i do believe he wants to walk away with as much money as how he just as misappropriated all the donations from his iowa rally, the rally for veterans. he admitted he misappropriated those funds. i would appreciate your comment. host: thank you. guest: i have no reason to believe that donald trump is profiting from running for president of the united states. i do not know what commercial the caller is

making reference to. i guess i am in the category of people who did not read whatever the fine print is that she is referencing. it may very well have been dark money, and independent expenditure where we are not going to know the source of those funds come up with those who are donating to the trump campaign are all publicly disclosed. i wish there were not dark money. i wish we could go on and immediately see exactly who spent whatever some, but election laws do not endorse that, do not support that. your show airs every saturday morning. we heard from joe biden his campaign is about scranton versus park avenue. how do you think that is going to play out? guest: i am not sure how well joe biden runs in the northeastern part of the state, which is where he was raised

before the family relocated. on paper, he seems like the ideal candidate to bring back high schoold those educated, white, working-class voters. he is emblematic of them. that is an area where donald .rump did extremely well i do not sense that the people who voted for trump four years ago are ready to abandon him. if you handed me a map of , insylvania's 67 counties could caller shade it right now in terms of who wins where your it will be joe biden for sure in philadelphia, in the inner suburbs. it will be joe biden for sure out west and allegheny county. the rest of that map, including erie, my hunch is it is going to red.sea of

the country at large, you could pretty much color-coded it as well. it will be read except urban areas and other outlying areas that are blue. what is unknown -- we know where the boats are coming from. what is unknown are the margins. that is where passion plays a role. is phil, joining us from california. caller: thank you for taking my call. i years old. the question i have would be a question that you or someone else would ask either of the two candidates in the upcoming debates. that has to do with pro-life and pro-life question. i am undecided. the question i would ask other -- either candidate would be on that issue. is there anything you feel good

your mother chose not to have an abortion? or would you have preferred that she would have had one? thank you for taking my call. host: state on the line. we will let michael smerconish question you. barrett ismy coney the pic from the president to fill the role of justice ruth bader ginsburg, abortion is going to be part of the dialogue of this presidential race. , and i guess anytime you're having a supreme court confirmation hearing abortion is always the lurking issue, i do not think that is where this race is decided. to the callerpect for whom this is a priority, what is going on here is we are beyond issues determining the outcome of the elections. it is not so much about tax

policy. it is not about immigration policy. it is not about pro-life, pro-choice. it has become about identity politics. look at all the trends. so many of these issues have to do with the changing dynamics and demographics of the country. i understand the question and i do not know that i would frame it that way. maybe steve scully will frame it that way when he has an opportunity to moderate a debate. ofess it is the nomination amy coney barrett, where it is because of things she has said in the past, i do not think abortion is a big factor in this election. host: another name that has been mentioned is properly goa -- barbara lagoa. she has an extensive judicial record. think about the politics of this

decision, florida being such a key state, south florida being so critical. it is a trifecta, and i said so yesterday. she was the first candidate whose name i uttered because it is a three for hearing female, florida, hispanic. on friday, michael bloomberg, if we go back two callers, the caller about pennsylvania -- from pennsylvania was wondering who is behind this commercial cannot michael bloomberg spending $100 million on behalf .f joe biden solely in florida such is the importance. can donald trump win without florida? he canically, practically, he probably cannot. dumping everything in the sunshine state. florida, notd that

only for the reasons i have mayor but apparently bloomberg thinks it is important to the nation avoids chaos that could ensue from a race that is not clearly decided. that worries me a great deal. host: for those who listen to your program on sirius xm, a direct question hoping for a direct answer. who drives the program, you or tc? guest: that is not really fair. she is an extraordinary producer. the best. the best anyone could hope for. cajolingpert at someone like steve scully to come on my program. my expertise is to come up with the map of what i want to do. she has to execute it. tohout her being able perform that function, i would not be able to deliver the program that i seek to do on a day-to-day basis.

she is great and it is a relationship that has worked well for many years. she has launched a podcast, tc after dark. host: how can they get the podcast? guest: wherever podcasts are heard. i'm obligated to say please check out pandora. host: we will go to evelyn in chicago. i was a teacher. i am retired now. the lack of civics education has as itaged blind voting relates to the living constitution. the founding fathers were wise and they were always looking into the future. they were looking at what was going to happen to the country, how can we make this constitution a living constitution so it would help beple in america

economically and socially progressive. had a good civics lesson with donald trump. he has taught civics. that is my opinion. i'm not voting for donald trump. i do not want you to get that impression. but i do think he has promoted civics. host: we will get a response. guest: evelyn, i'm old enough to have had civics as part of my public school education. i think a big mistake has been made in the country where we have gotten away in the classroom setting from teaching that subject. my own view, i cannot point to data to justify this, it is just a got reaction as a former student and father of four having watched their educational experiences, there has been such demand placed on standardized testing and meeting the criteria

so funding can be allocated and so forth, that certain subjects have gone out the window. civics has been one of them. that has been a great detriment to the country. one of the things i am most proud of, i have many faults, one thing i am proud of about my life is that i have never missed an election for which i have been eligible to vote. 18 in the spring of 1980, and i had these unique about toes where become president ronald reagan and george herbert walker bush were still competing for the pennsylvania primary. i match them both within a week and a week later, i was a republican, cast my first ballot and never looked back. that has been an important part of the way in which my wife and i have raised our four children as well. many households of gotten away from that, and that is a sad thing. host: you mentioned the podcast.

your call because own website as well -- colleague has her own website as well. caller: i wanted to respond to the caller that was pointing out the campaign website donald j. trump for president inc. it is interesting that trump shows that information on the front of his webpage. campaigngo to biden's website, you have to find it buried in the terms and conditions. bfinc.paign website is the democrats and biden, you have to find it buried in the terms and conditions. biden for president inc. i wanted to share those comments. host: let me go back to the

other issue we began talking about with justice ginsburg's passing. that clearly changes the narrative for the president and for the moment put coronavirus inside the newspapers as we approach 200,000 deaths in this country. guest: it has. i expect that very quickly he will put forth the name of a nominee, even perhaps casting aside whatever protocol might demand for the passing of a justice and allowing opportunity that is a, though curious subject in the midst of a pandemic, and grieving. in other words, i think you are going to hear this announcement in the early part of this week. the reason i think that is the case is that the discussion then , thes away from process fairness of republicans acting in a hypocritical fashion to the

way in which they acted four years ago. i think there is no question that the way they are about to conduct this process is at odds with merrick garland. i am conversant in what mitch mcconnell says about the senate being from one party and the white house being from another four years ago. to me, that is inconsequential hypocrisy. here is my bigger point. when he nominates someone, now very much the conversation is going to be about the relative merit of that individual. that is something the white house recognizes and wants to bring about. they want us talking about judge merrick. .- barrett they want us talking about each of their remarkable stories. they want hispanics in florida to know the president wants lag

oa. i think that will happen rapidly. host: look at this chart from the washington post. go back to 1975, when john paul stevens was nominated by president ford. 19 days from his announcement until he was confirmed by the senate. brett kavanaugh was 88 days. wasorgeous -- neil gorsuch 65 days. guest: where did it change? robertt changed with the bork nomination. it is far different. advise and consent is the senate role. every four years on radio, as a lawyer, i feel this strongly and i try to impart it to my audience, i maintained the most important responsibility of a president beyond being

commander-in-chief and wartime responsibilities, is the power to appoint individuals for life to the federal bench. it is the supreme court that gets all of the attention. the supreme court, although they set precedent and the things they do are vitally important, there is a lot more law that gets established along the way in cases that never reach the supreme court by individuals who are not household names. the power to appoint the district court, the power to appoint those appellate court federal judges -- donald trump has been a machine with mitch mcconnell in this regard, relying on groups like the federalist society. therein lies the appeal he has to evangelical christians. why are they willing to turn away from so much on the personal side with regard to this president? it is because come on this issue, they get what they want.

he has put 20 names out in 20 individuals he has said he will closely pay attention to in the event of a vacancy that has occurred, trying to put pressure on joe biden to do likewise. bait,en were to take that you know the trump campaign stands ready to now very closely analyze each one of those individuals to try and find an aberrant case, a case that can be put on television to say, if joe biden is elected, this is what you might get in the supreme court of the united states. it is arguably the most important issue to a very key group that has supported him and now fate has brought it to light. his eightld reagan in years appointed three justices to the supreme court. if donald trump's nominee is supported by the senate, he will have three and has first four years.

guest: barack obama had two. barack obama in eight years had two. he should have had a third arguably, but now we are talking about trump having in four years more than what obama had in eight. . host: former president bill clinton appearing on cnn's state of the union with jake tapper, saying justice ginsburg was a highly respected individual because she bent over backwards to work with other judges when she could and stood up and was counted when she could not. call -- yourhone phone calls. morning steve, mr. smerconish. i want to thank everyone behind the scenes that put you and all of us on the air every day. thank you very much. steve, last time we spoke was

with newt gingrich on. here is another effective covid. my dog and i were ready to go to rome on the 11th of june. on the 18th of june. on the 11th, we were turned away at the gate because we were informed originally that americans could travel with a passport without the visa. livesnot only killing here in this country but those of us who would travel elsewhere to keep life going in every way ie being -- mr. smerconish, love your program. i do not often get to see it. i love the reference to reagan and tip o'neill. you remind me of dan rostenkowski, who would go to the irish times doing the tax bill back then. i want to bring up the fact that, in 1992, there was a

convicted that they -- predicted by 2020 the country will be federated. you would have california acting as its own country. you would have oregon and washington. you would have new jersey, new york, and connecticut working as one. think between the way that now everyone is talking about blue states and red states is very harmful. citizens united is harmful. in 2015dollar, i bought would i think is the most important book the people discarded because it did not get good reviews. it is trump surviving at the top. host: thank you for your call. i am not sure where to begin. i will offer this. the train has been heading off the tracks for a long time in this country.

the issues that confront us, there is a tendency to focus on one individual, donald trump, and to think that if trump were to lose this election were to leave office in four years that the country will get back to some semblance of so-called normalcy. that is not how i see it. donald trump and the forces that elected him, the frustrations that elected him -- i am not speaking disparagingly of the people who cast ballots for him. quite the contrary. they are feeling aggrieved and we can have a good conversation as to why. when trump is gone, the passion will still be there that enable his election -- enabled his election. we have to address what brings this division about. from remarks i made in pennsylvania within the last year, there are a litany of reasons as to why the polarization exists in this

country at an unprecedented level, at least in the modern era. at the top of my list, i put the media. as a result of the polarized media, we are all in these different silos and bunkers being reinforced in our beliefs according to where we get our news and information, which is one of the reasons i love what you do here on c-span. acknowledgmentn of the way in which you approach onr job that the commission presidential debates said steve scully is the guy we want to moderate the town hall with the presidential candidates. what you do and what i try to do on radio for five days a week and for one hour on cnn is in short supply. would generate headlines and those passionate viewers, even if they are smaller in number, is to play the ideological card. somehow we need to get people to

start changing the channel. get information from the left, the right, and the middle and then make your judgment. do not think you are informed because you read on facebook that you are consuming. -- you read on facebook and the stories you are consuming. will they do that? will they get out of their bubble? will democrats listen to what sean hannity is saying and republicans listen to what rachel maddow may be saying? guest: i do not know. it may have to get worse before it gets better. i think too many -- when i speak and through my platforms that are afforded to me, when i do live public speaking or platforms afforded to me, this is what i talk about, trying to educate how we have kinda fallen into this trap where we conflate news and entertainment. we think we are getting our news when really the aim of a

particular show is to entertain, to give you enough salacious backmation that you come for more because you want another tablet as a reward. people have to mix it up. one of the great ironies is we have never had as much choice for where we go for our information, and yet so few among us are exercising it. they are going to end -- msnbc and slate and salon or they are going to fox news and the drudge report, maybe breitbart. they think, look at all the time i am spending consuming this information. it is only information from the same type of source. host: this is a tweet saying, let's go back to the fairness doctrine. that would put you out of business. ,uest: when i came on air

fairness doctrine would not put me out of business. i do not like it. when i came on air, i began my i just celebrated a 30 year anniversary and talk radio. i came on air at the end of the reagan years. there was no longer a fairness doctrine. know, thewho do not fairness doctrine would obligate the presentation of both sides. candidated to invite x on my program, i had to extend the invitation to candidate y. even though it was not the law when i was cutting my teeth, my radio station still honored it. still treated it like it was in effect. then radio stations got away from that in the ensuing years.

i am not comfortable with the government saying here is the obligation. i really do believe, and maybe i'm being proven wrong, but i do believe the market can sort this out. so long as there is an awareness among people of the devastating impact of the polarized media. from back to susan florida. you are on the air with michael smerconish. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to see the supreme court mom -- more diversified. we have six catholics and two jewish people. i would like to see a woman who is not catholic or jewish to make the country look like the rest of us. there are other religions that should be appointed rather than catholics and jews all the time. host: thank you, susan. guest: i am not for setting up a framework where we say -- you

remember, steve, and i will soft in the lines. when james white was the secretary of the interior, he bragged about a commission or blue-ribbon panel of some kind that you put together because he said, i have people who are black, people who are jewish, and people who are crippled. what a great committee. i am not for a paint by numbers system where we say we have met this quota and this quota. i would like to versed he, but i do not want it prescribed. -- diversity, but i do not want it prescribed. that is a prescription for disaster. he became the former interior secretary after the commission. guest: remember the beach boys controversy? how can there be controversy about the beach boys? host: let's go to tom from illinois.

caller: it is a real pleasure to be on and a privilege. mr. smerconish, i wanted to is not something i think getting enough attention. , but iupport joe biden now support the trump ticket. it comes down to when the protests started in late may, early june, donald trump came out and he was in support of the police and law enforcement. biden and hejoe never came out and really was there for law enforcement. peopleknow, these are who do some of the worst work, the most difficult work that anybody would undertake on a daily basis. i was surprised that joe biden

did not do that. i think a lot of people understand society functions in large part because we have lost and law -- laws and law enforcement to support us to go about our daily activities. people getese evaluated. we need to be mindful of when people are acting outside of the norms of police behaviors, but i just feel like that is an issue that a lot of people may not be .alking about host: thank you for calling. i think he was slow, joe biden, in responding to some of the violence and offering words supportive of police. he did get there. end, he said the right

things. whether you said the right things because there was pressure brought to bear, i do not know. i do not regard joe biden as someone who is anti-law enforcement. i wonder if the civil unrest we saw post george floyd was going to move the needle the way the president was seeking to see. we all saw the commercial of the elderly woman trying to call 911 and she cannot get through and somehow that is tied to biden. i have not seen data that manysts that issue moved voters. what is remarkable is the stability of this race so far. i referenced this on cnn. if you look at a real clear politics average of where a biden-trump matchup stood last october versus today in national

surveys, there has been no movement in the polls. state polls have shifted, but this race has been marked by remarkable consistency. maybe the passing of justice ginsburg is going to change that. i am looking at the civil unrest issue, wondering what will be the impact. i am not seeing much. see, one thing i will of the things that troubles me about these cases is the rush to judgment. videotape and superficially it looks like byeone was really done wrong law enforcement. maybe nine months later, there is a trial and the trial concludes otherwise and people wonder what happened.

to wait for the information to come out. and not immediately rush to judgment for or against law enforcement when you see the tape, whatever the tape is. what i am referring to is the george floyd case. i found the videotape of the police conduct, officer shaaban with his knee on floyd -- chauvin with his knee on floyd's neck to be abhorrent, like the rest of you watching right now. some information has come to light since then pertaining to the cause of death that could provide the police officers with a defense in that case. keep our powder dry when these things happen and let the system play itself out. host: i want to go back to the issue of media. every morning on your website, you post stories across the wall street journal, politico, new york times. what is your approach?

thank you for allowing me to address this. of truly centrist oriented media, i have try to create my own through my sirius xm radio program as well as what i do on cnn. people who listen to me or watch me, they may listen to a segment and conclude that this guy is really a secret trump supporter or he is for joe biden or he is in the tank for one or the other. if you listen to me for any time period overall, you will say you are not sure where i coming from. i do not follow an ideological code. i am not governed by conservative talking points, nor liberal talking points. i look at every issue and make judgments. through my website, i have tried to present information in that

fashion. what it is is my show prep. people think of me as being someone who talks for a living here and i think of me as someone who reads for a living. by the time i get on the air, my job is over. it is preparing that takes all the time. it occurred to me that i should take a portion to might show prep, put them on my website. they come from a variety of sources. you might get something from the new york post, from slate, from salon come from fox news. overall, i'm going to give you a good feel for what the news of the day is. it is getting a tremendous amount of traffic and people are responding to it. posted and wet try to drive people there with a

survey question of the day that many people find engaging. is smerconish.com and i hope people will check it out. host: yesterday, you had close to 50,000 people who voted. guest: this is interesting. the survey question yesterday asked whether -- i do not remember literally how we worded it, but we were asking whether this president and this senate should name the successor to ruth bader ginsburg. tens of thousands of people voted. it was a very lopsided result. something like 93% to 7%. i do not know that i was all that surprised. it was largely driven by the cnn audience in the span of one hour. i hosted for two hours yesterday. in the span of that time. probably people feeling the emotion of justice ginsburg having just passed the night

before. you made reference to this in one of your hours here on c-span today. marquette, the law school, just came forth with a survey of theirs concluded before the passing of justice ginsburg. you fact check me on this, but i think it was 67% said they would want hearings to take place before a change in the ministrations, which seems completely -- in administrations, which seems completely at odds of my survey. if the marquette people went into the fields now, would they get a different result? i do not know. hope ned is joining us, i -- idaho. good, diverse program on there. i think so. whatever you want, we have.

what else could you need? i forgot about that media choice. i agree with you, michael. in my get a little ugly here. -- it might get a little ugly here. honestly, it is a little french revolution-y here. starving andd stormed the bastille and got the weapons and went from there. hopefully, we can figure a few things out. honestly, a lot of states are getting their power back. does not do anything for us out here. we have just been fighting the fires and getting along with each other state wise.

we will see. i will tune in. host: thank you for the call. let's go to richard, joining us from missouri. caller: good morning. this is theto say state of america. we are going to have to drop the united part. we are separated so bad that i do not know if we could raise an army. other countries cs with moms on the street. -- see us with mobs on the street. i am an 82-year-old man, and this abortion thing, i am not a 16-year-old black girl that is pregnant. i could not say will be good for her. thing, this herd mentality on this virus, it did not work out well for the dinosaurs, if you look back.

i will let you go. the issue ofght up abortion. the could be a big part of this debate in the coming weeks. -- let meo not think clarify something i said earlier in the hour. i do not think, as the campaign was heading, abortion was going to be an issue. it would be an issue for those among us for whom it is the paramount issue. it always will be. the passing of justice ginsburg certainly will put it back in play. , the formerrrett notre dame law professor who is apparently on the shortlist , is theth barbara lagoa nominee, if he selects her, who would ensure a large part of the conversation now shifts to that issue. even that will be dwarfed by the propriety of whether any nominee

should be put through at the end of the ministration. -- administration. when justice scalia passed, it was the prior november. now we are in september. it is an apples and oranges in terms of the amount of time that is different, and still come out with all the time that was on the clock four years ago, they would not even give merrick garland a hearing. it is a fundamental -- was it fair? it was constitutional. do i see a fundamental unfairness in seeing -- saying they were going to treat garland one way and now actively today? i do. -- act differently today? i do. we talked a lot about civility into quorum. i am uncomfortable -- and decorum. i am uncomfortable with the hypocrisy. wonder, if youto look at the senate, senator mitt

romney, cory gardner, susan collins saying whoever is president in january next year to make the nomination and the senate should than act, who are you keeping a close eye on? the firsto back to thing i said to you in this hour, which is i am not so sure that the objectives of president trump and senator mcconnell stay aligned. at some point, mitch mcconnell might not have the votes. i am looking not only at those you have identified. toomeyso looking at pat in pennsylvania, one among many who seems to have staked out a territory four years ago that would now be at odds with going forth with a nominee to replace ginsberg this late. it is not only cory gardner ann romney. it is not -- and romney.

it is not the usual suspects. i think we will probably know within the next 24 hours. what other senators in the republican caucus are we not discussing that the local news media is going back and taking a look and what they said four years ago? to a philadelphia inquirer story today about senator toomey in particular. that made me think it is not just the three or four just getting the attention. host: as you prepare for election night, what are you preparing for? what do you think the american people should be prepared for? guest: i am so glad you asked me that question and this is no set up. it is the most important thing i think i could impart to the c-span audience. lack of finality. do not assume, if there is no finality on the night of november 3, that there is fraud. aso not refer to november 3

election day. i try to school myself into saying to people november 3 is the final day of voting. they are already voting in virginia. voting is about to commence and many places. .t will be a long process we might not know who won. me is, if wecerns spill over into wednesday the fourth or the following day, the fifth, and there is still some uncertainty, reflecting on what the president has said before the election that they are stealing the race, people will start to think there is some truth to it. in fact, there will not be appearing if something should untoward, werd -- will need to discuss it. it is possible that we are not going to know.

if it is a landslide, you will know the answer before you go to bed. in my case, it means that john king might not be standing at the magic wall with wolf blitzer proclaiming a victor for the 2020 election. that is ok because of the enormous, financial increase in host: you can follow our guest on twitter. he is joining us from philadelphia. channel 124. author, lecturer, and also a columnist for the philadelphia inquirer. please come back again. guest: thank you. i need a new mug, though. people,ere are a lot of we heard from one of our callers , who make this program work every single day. one of those producers will be

leaving us after spending a decade at c-span. we wish him all the best. a reminder, c-span2 book tv and c-span3's american history tv all weekend long. enjoy the rest of your weekend. we are back tomorrow morning. have a great week ahead. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> monday night the communicators, federal trade commission commissioner. >> one of the interesting things about the antitrust debate in washington is that all of the su t