on her life, activism, and the beginnings of the movement. at 9:00 eastern, a washington post pulitzer prize-winning book critic offers his thoughts on the volume of books written about donald trump and his presidency in, what were we thinking, and intellectual history of the trump air. he is interviewed by a book review editor. weekend ontv this c-span two. ♪ joining us hugo gordon of the , "washington examiner." he serves as editor in chief. what do you think about yesterday's news? guest: the president-elect is probably biden. have the shall not only does he have 4 million votes more than, the incumbent

he also seems to have those ises in key states which necessary for president trump to win if he was to hold on to that. look, he is the apparent winner and there will be a legal process played out. president trump is obviously planning to challenge in various ways, in various courts, starting tomorrow. it has already started. that will have to play out. that is his right, but i don't they give a make any difference. i think we will see joe biden inaugurated in january. host: if that is the case, what do you think that means for mr. biden, not so much for his supporters but for those who supported president trump in this process? guest: it means they will have took get used to to having a democrat in the white house. i hope joe biden will try and unite the country. it suddenly seems to be what he says he will do. he campaigned as a uniter, at

least to some extent, and very much emphasized that yesterday in what was rather a good speech. we'll have to see whether he out, when its that comes to policy and also the structure of his administration, but he actually lives by that. one of the things we would be at the "washington examiner" saying, i will be writing the morning, ismorrow that if he wants to take the historical opportunity to heal what has been an extremely divided country and divisive presidency under president trump , he needs to make sure he realizes what this election really showed. was this election showed was that voters wanted to reject president trump, they were fed up for tired of him, but there was no blue wave. it looked pretty clear that the republicans will hold the senate, and they have increased their seats in the house. that means -- it almost

certainly means the voters said they don't want president trump to continue in office, but it also means they don't want all the left-wing policies and the constitutional vandalism that the left of the democratic party were promising. if joe biden really wants to unite the country, he will make sure he constructs his government, his administration along the lines of that move the country back towards the center. it is bound to be center-left, but if it, is extreme left he will not be a uniter. host: as we are watching the president-elect, your thoughts on the vice president-elect and what we should be watching for imminent few years. guest: joe biden is on the seasonality guy, considerably older than any president has been even after they have terms, so there has always been a question about whether joe biden has the mental capacity to be president. he certainly looked on good form last night, but he has looked on

less good form in other occasions. aboutestions have arisen whether or not his vice president would be a more important -- in a more important than most last president's have been. in the past vice presidents have been a most marginal. kamala harris is not only in the position of being vice president to a president who will be much older than any president has been before, she is also much more left wing that he is, one of the most left-wing senators in the senate, and people will be watching to see a she has a strong influence on joe biden, or whether or not she continues to be in the background they were that most of us for this does the way most vice president's have been. host: our previous guest talked about like tug-of-war that might

happen between moderates and progressives, who clearly supported him this time around. what do you think about back-and-forth? guest: that is bound to be the case. some of your callers and also some of the more permanent people in the last few days on the left have said there needs to be some radical change. chuck schumer talked about having 100 days like the first 100 days under fdr, of radical change. the message oft the selection. there will be a tussle, it'd better be one that joe biden is prepared to be aggressive in and to make sure that he does not get pulled to the left. he ran in the primary as a centrist. bernies why he beat sanders and why he beat me others who were to the left of him in the primary. than once he got the nomination, he moved sharply to the left, he brought bernie sanders, a

socialist, into discussions about policy. he accepted a great many of these things that the left wants. he was open to the idea of ending the filibuster in the senate. he embraced something close to the green new deal, which would be absolutely ruinous, then in the final weeks of the election, particularly after he came out of his home in delaware and started to campaign, he campaigned more as a uniter and again more as a centrist. there will be a tussle. the left will try to pull him towards all sorts of policy that they threaten. the end of the electoral college, packing the senate, raising taxes, which is almost certainly something that the president-elect will do. so there is going to be a fight over how left-wing this presidency, this new administration is, and how much

it is prepared to reach out and try and bring trump supporters, who clearly there are 70 million or more, into the fold and unite the country again. 202-748-8000 if you support president-elect 2-748-8003 if you would like to text this morning. why do you think the president lost? guest: i think the president lost largely through his own fortune because of his demeanor. i think a lot of people found him profoundly unpresidential. even though the "washington examiner" endorsed him for

reelection, we have never failed to acknowledge the fact that he can be -- he has been almost he oftenmetimes and does not behave in a way that we would like a president to behave. on the other hand, he has adopted policies which i think were widely popular. i think he has been successful for example in relations with middle east. i think a lot of people approved of the way that he dropped president obama's kind of anding deal with iran actually supported or real ally in the middle east, which is israel, and all the arab nations back ted that. the people supported the tax cut and deregulation. one of the things that showed in this election was people realized that the policies of the current president were in many ways successful, they just

did not want four more years of the division. why did he lose? he could have won if he had been more presidential. one of the things that was remarkable about the late stages of the selection or the contrast between the first debate and the second. in the first debate, president trump was repellent. he was constantly interrupting. he was rude. he looked his worst. he of his figure advice to drop that and behaved a great deal better in the second debate. i think if he had debated in the first debate the way he did in the second, where he looked assured and confident and strong, he might well now be celebrating victory rather than trying to prevent defeat. host: we have calls lined up for you. our first call is from mary in chattanooga, tennessee, supporter of the president-elect. you are on with hugo gordon of the "washington examiner." he is their editor-in-chief. go ahead. caller: each person has their

own opinion, and the fact that he can come on tv and state that president trump would have won again if it was not for his attitude, is not true. a lot of people did not like his policies. during his debate, they asked deregulation, and they asked him about all the poor people that live in these communities that have these for water systems that need factories, and i don't think he they were making money he did not care about them dying sick.ting deregulation and a good for the poor or the working-class people. so there were a lot of things wrong with president trump. we will live with their and let our guest respond to that. guest: the caller is right, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

one of the things i would point out, the caller suggested somehow president trump was bad for poor people. for the first time in many years, the wages of people at the bottom of the scale were rising faster than the incomes of the people at the top of the scale. minority unemployment fell to record lows. there were be that parts of president trump's policies that were unattractive to people at the bottom of the economic pile, but it is certainly in the case that they were attracted in some ways, and i think it was largely his economic policies, with rising black employment, rising an latino employment, record levels of those which helps to increase his proportion and latino votes above

what previous republicans have managed. the last several weeks of the campaign were extremely telling in that it was perfectly clear that president trump was fighting for, black votes fighting for hispanic votes, and the biden campaign tried very hard to try and limit that success, because, obviously, democratic candidates are not elected unless they have an anonymous advantage in minority votes, and that was why there was such a fight. the president's performance overall nationally, i think it was 18% of black men voting for of, and doubled proportion from 4% up to 8% of black women, and higher proportions among thatos, i think suggests contrary to what the caller suggested, the president's policies were recognizes actually benefiting people who

were in the lower income groups, and that would include a lot of minorities. host: a supporter of president trump from kentucky. hi. caller: first of all, i just want to tell you that i am 73 years old, and i have voted in every presidential election since i was 21, which you had to be 21 when i got to vote. and i am brokenhearted. i feel like that we have a corrupt congress, we have a corrupt fbi, we have a corrupt .a . , the most important day of anybody in this country, our election day, has been corrupted, and i want to know how you think joe biden can bring unity to this country when the democrats have done nothing for the last four years except "deplorable"ike me

"racist" and any other file name that can come out of nancy pelosi or chuck schumer's mouth. guest: the point the caller makes is an extremely good one. when one talks about divisiveness, one has to recognize that divisions are required to sides. you don't divide just on one side -- divisions or require two sides. you don't divide just on one side. the president has been divisive. but he has been called and his supporters have been called vile things by people on the left. "deplorables" was used by hillary clinton in the campaign in 2016. and, indeed snobbery which is directed by people at the left against president trump's supporters, and that will make it considerably harder

for joe biden, assuming he is sworn in as president, to unite the country. there is a lot of resentment about the way things have gone in the last four years. it is also, in my opinion, true that even though there were plenty of valid criticisms of president trump, there were ones. of invalid the caller talked about the corrupt fbi and the corrupt ci subjectedesident was to a concocted conspiracy theory or narrative about collusion , that was an investigation that found that to be untrue. i think this hobbled his administration. the failures of the administration such as they were were partly president trump's, and a very much partly the opposition. so it is going to be hard to

unite the country which is why i say it is extremely important if president biden actually means it that he wants to unite the country, that he resists pressure from his left and governs from the center, because that is clearly the message of the election that we have just been through. host: mr. gordon, much is being made about the upcoming runoff elections in georgia. what does history tell us about runoff elections, and does that apply this time around? guest: you are right that the generate five runoffs in georgia where there are two seats up for grabs -- january 5 runoff's in georgia where there are two seats up for grabs, running against strong challenges, i suspect and is certainly hope that two republican senators are reelected there. looks as though

the senators in alaska and north carolina, republicans will be returned, so at the very worst, if the georgia races are lost by the republicans, it will be a 50/50 split and vice president kamala harris, assuming she is vice president, will be the deciding vote the re. but i suspect that at least one of the republicans, david perdue, will be returned. 50%, but washan several points ahead of his challenger. i think we are going to end up with a republican senate led by majority leader mitch mcconnell, and that is just something which joe biden is going to have to work with, which is a very good thing. it's a very good thing that he is going to have to work with republicans, who are stronger on capitol hill, probably after all

this process goes through tht han they were before the election. host: supporter of pres. biden, stephen, good morning. caller: yes, my name is david. host: go ahead, you are on. caller: i have a different take on the use of the word left and right and radical. i think there is a false screening of progressive and populist issues as being radical. if you look back at our history, when fdr wanted to have social the peopleedicare, on the right saying, it is communist, it is socialist. -- social security and medicare are the most successful government programs we have. the administration was very successful. it is big money interests that are a of progressive change because it means more of them

paying their fair share of taxes. the same thing is happening now, the issues they are calling radical, from the radical left are like climate change is real. a majority of americans believe climate change is real. a majority of americans want all.h care for a majority of americans believe billionaires should pay their fair share of taxes. in majority of americans want clean air and water. a majority of americans want big money out of politics. this so-called radical agenda of the left is actually mainstream according to the polls. delivered framing is designed behind-the-scenes by big-money interests to scare the american voter. thank you.

thank you. guest:

which has been heading towards us or we have been heading towards it for decades now. the fact that we have not yet head-on doeslem not mean to say that it isn't debtmply financing the that is accumulated and paying for these programs that are regarded as nondiscretionary.

there needs to be reform of those programs. otherwise, there will be no money for the things the voters actually want. it will be spent funding those programs. us.: hugo gurdon joining i just cannot believe that biden said unity. love. for the previous caller about social security, there is no social security. people have to wake up. the money is gone. the government is taking

money out of your paycheck. if i were retired after 10 years, i would never find one penny back. we have to be realistic, thank .ou guest: the caller has a good point particularly about social security. people talk about the lockbox, but if you look in the lockbox to finance social security, it iou's.t filled with if the system isn't reformed, it will run out of money. there have been proposals to , for example, to make the retirement age somewhat later in people's lives. when social security was introduced, i believe the average american left to the age of 63 or 64, and social security began at 65. it was not for the vast numbers of people who now lives beyond

65. i think the average age of americans, they live up to the age of 83, 84 men and 86 for women. men, and 86 for women. to financeer meant every american for 20 years after they finished work. and it is unaffordable in the situation that it is now. i think there was a lot of unpleasant rhetoric in the election. calleden repeatedly president trump a racist, which is one of the most unpleasant epithets one can throw, one of the most unpleasant accusations that you can throw at somebody. some people would say that is deserved, some would say it is not, but i don't think it will

make it easier, and it is going to make it harder for joe biden is he is president to unify the country. the sorts of accusations and insults make it a lot more difficult. host: charles is next, in oklahoma city a line for those who supported other candidates. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. i just wanted to call in and say that i am really sad that biden was elected, because it is just so obvious how weak he is and how he will not be able to stand up to other people because, you can just see it in him. he would not have been elected if it hadn't been -- he didn't pick the best person for the job. he said, i am going to pick a woman of color, which shows how weak he is. it would have never won the election without that. host: let me ask, who did you

support in this election? caller: i choose not to say, i believe that is a private thing. host: did you support a third-party candidate or one of the two major candidates? caller: i chose one of the major candidates on the ticket. host: ok. mr. garden, you can respond. what has he brought to the table? guest: joe biden certainly did say he was going to choose a woman, and he was going to choose a black woman, a woman of kamala harris is one of the least successful of the candidates in the primary. i actually thought when the whole thing started that she had one of the best chances of any of the candidates partly because of these identity categories that she fed. i thought she would be -- categories that she fit. ti thought she would be very successful. but she campaigned actively poorly even though she got a big launch. -- she wased

picked not for her political acumen but because she checked all the boxes. she is a left winger, and i think that she and other left-wingers may well pull joe biden to the left. that will be probably his principal challenge once he is inaugurated. even before he is inaugurated. he has to set up his cabinet. he has to appoint people to very senior positions, and i think if he wants to take the historic opportunity which will make him somebody who is remembered with , inction by the country that he has unify the country to some extent by the end of his presidency, he will push back against all of those extremists on the left. he will resist the far-left policies. he will install people who are centrist in his cabinet.

and he will govern in the way the voters of the united states made plain that they want in this past election. host: from hamburg, pennsylvania, supporter of the president-elect. caller: good morning. --joejust calling to biden has a lot of time spent with other lawmakers. he knows how to make deals. he knows what he is talking about when he is talking about whole trumpke the thing has been a public relations thing. the real danger right now is people once the american the credibility of our entire democratic system. that is built on this information. the potential for anybody

tampering with an election, 120 million people went out and voted, it would make any difference in this election is preposterous. the united states election system is very safe. there are several steps and processes to go through. i looked at the newspaper, my local county republican, they were asked how they responded. never have i seen an article that attacked an incoming president like that. there andill leave it let our guest respond. guest: respond first to the suggestion, which i agree with, that joe biden knows how to make

deals. he has had in a normatively long -- in -- 40 years or more washington. he knows the senate. he knows about dealmaking. that is a very good thing congress, is time for and i think voters have indicated this, it is time for people in congress not to treat legislative disagreement for an opportunity for chest thumping and making political points for the next election, but to try to legislate, compromise, and give ground on each side. perhaps there is an opportunity there. as for election fraud, which i think the caller was also referring to and dismissing, what i would say about it is this -- there is election fraud, there are plenty of documented cases of it, but it is not

sufficient to tip the entire country. hass a small thing and it had an effect historically, in particular races that were very close. it is not something that is moved hundreds of thousands of votes. extremethat people make and mutually exclusive claims about it. it is not true that election fraud is nothing and has been debunked. it has made a difference in particular races. but also it is not something that is so sweeping that it will put a president in office when he has not won the election. i think president trump is entitled to make legal challenges, those legal challenges will be hurt, they will be adjudicated. i think in