tuesday, election day starting at 8:00 a.m. eastern. watch c-span's live election coverage to see which party will regain control of congress. watch races from around the country, victory and concession speech is on c-span, the c-span mobile app and at c-span.org/campaign 2022. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including comcast. >> do you think this is a community center, no, it's way more. comcast is partnering with community centers so that children can be rey for anything. comcast support c-span along with these television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. tweets.

"washington journal" starts now. ♪ host: good morning. it is saturday, november 5. midterm elections are in three days and there are nearly 200 military vets running for congress. this morning, we would like to know from you, does a candidates military service matter for your vote? let us know your thoughts. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we have a line dedicated for active duty or retired military. that line is (202) 748-8003. we are also on social media, facebook.com/c-span. twitter and instagram @cspanwj. welcome to washington journal and thank you for joining us

this morning. i want to show you this article from the military times. it says more vets are running for congress now than any election since 2012. that is senator mark kelly, navy vet. the article says nearly 200 veterans one party primaries this year and will vie for receiving congress, making this the largest field of candidates with military experience in a decade. experts warn that the larger pool will not necessarily lead to an increase in veterans in office since many of the hopefuls are in districts that significantly favor their opponents party. look at the numbers on the screen. the total is 196, a 7% increase from 2020 elections, the highest total since 2012. 126 are running as republicans.

66 as democrats. 4 as independents. pew research center did a survey last month about this. here's what they found. of 49% ofcans, 53% of registered voters sayhey like political leaders who served in the military, including a quarter in both groups who say they like it a lot. military service is a nonfactor for sizable sha 43% of all respondents and 41% of registered voters say they neither like noike it when political leaders erved in the armed f just 7% of u.s. adults, 5% of registered voters, dislike leaders with military experience. that is from the pew research poll. we will like to what you think. do it make a difference to your vote? whato u think of that? we have the numbers on your screen and we have with us the

deputy editor at military times. it is nice to see you. what do these numbers indicate to you? guest: it shows that the younger generation of veterans, folks who served in iraq and afghanistan, are starting to come into the arena of politics more. we saw the very first iraq war veteran elected in 2006 with pat murphy out of pennsylvania. since then we have seen the slow evolution of folks getting involved in state office and local politics getting on the congressional level. the lessons of the last 20 years of war will be arriving in congress more and more with each cycle and they are replacing some of the older generation of veterans. the vietnam era and the peace era after that, folks who are aging out or getting older at this time.

host: are the major parties actively recruiting vets to run? guest: they are pretty attractive for both parties. when republicans talk about national security, they love having a veteran, someone who has actually served, who can talk about what it is like to be serving overseas, where the equipment is like. on the democratic side it is the same idea. democrats have traditionally been seen as a little weaker on national security. whether that is true is up for debate, but it helps flavor the perception of this is not just someone who is looking at military issues on the democratic side. this is someone who has lived it. when they say the cost of war or we need to invest in other things, they can for from the experience of as someone in the military i can say that this is important. host: the numbers that i read from the pew research poll, 53% of registered voters say that

they like political leaders who have served in the military. about 25% say that they like it a lot. what do you make of that? guest: we have heard that consistently. folks view veterans as people who are trustworthy. who have signed up for patriotic -- decided to dedicate a portion of their lives to service, to the defense of the country. it is not an issue that is necessarily win on its own. very few voters will say, veteran, i'm definitely voting for that person, but another pretty strong resume line as they go talk to voters. this is someone you can trust. this is someone who is dedicated to apure version of public service. i will have to go back and see where it was before, because we have seen more political fights pulled into the military and i think that has eroded some of that brand.

this is a perception of whether or not these veterans are more bipartisan. whether they are more cooperative when they get in congress is still up for debate. we have seen some individuals who have reached across the aisle amid some of the partisan turmoil on capitol hill, but there's not a lot of evidence that shows veterans will act differently than any other candidate. host: any advantages or disadvantages when they run for congress? guest: the main advantage is the extra resume line. the little bit more voter confidence, especially as we get away from the draft in in the 1970's when it moved to an all-volunteer army. there is a smaller number of people who volunteer to serve in the army. there is a perception that there is a lot of goodwill. the number that you said is only 7% say that this is a negative. even for folks who are neutral,

it is either neutral or positive. that is a great thing to have on the campaign trail. then they speak from personal experience when you speak about foreign policy, government spending, government waste. these people have spent x number of years in the military and they saw money being used this way or that way. it gives that little bit of extra experience. host: i want to ask you about an article that you wrote for the military times with the headline "half of gop vets running for congress have challenged biden's 2020 win." it says republicans running for congress are less likely than other gop candidates to reject the results of the 2020 election but slightly more of that on the ballot this cycle have questions about president joe biden's victory? guest: less likely, but still likely to have issues with the

2020 election results. this is one of the counterpoints to if we elect veterans. they will be able to work with folks better and reach across the aisle. we are seeing the veteran candidates are susceptible to the same political conspiracy theories out there. 55% have challenged the election in some way, either voting against the certification of the election if they were in congress, comments on the campaign trail, despite the abundance of evidence that the elections were fair and conducted properly. it shows that even being a veteran, even having some of that experience, it doesn't insulate you from the politics of the day. if you're running as a gop candidate this cycle, one of the things you're likely to do, one of the things you may need to do on the campaign trail is cast doubt on whether or not joe biden was elected fairly. host: once vets get elected to

congress, do they stick with national security issues, defense issues? guest: there are variety of things. there are quite a few veterans on the armed service committee, born -- foreign service committee, but a few go into what are their district's focus? it is not that these folks are only national security or only veterans issues. it is more of a case of this is something that helps them show they have some experience, but once they get in they have to carve out their own path forward. host: leo shane, deputy editor of the military times, thank you for joining us. we are asking you this morning, does a candidates military service matter to your vote? is it going to impact your vot for the midterm elections in ree days?

we will start with william from jacksonville, florida on the independent line. good morning, william. caller: good morning. good morning, america. you do a great job on the weekends. that said, my opinion on military folks getting into politics, i think it is very important from the standpoint that they have experienced the horrors of war. i have no problem with people in the military signing up and doing their job and learning what is wrong with these policies which have gotten us into wars. i've been listening to tulsa gabbert -- tulsi gabbord. she makes a lot of sense. i would have no problem voting for her. my problem is the treasure and blood, it has to stop in my opinion. i'm in favor of folks who are x military -- ex-military running

for congress for certain. host: paul on the republican line. caller: thank you for letting me voice my opinion. i enjoy your show every saturday morning. in my congressional district i have a veteran running and i also have an active servicemember running. i am proud that i'm going to support someone who has been in the military who has served our country and has done something more than i can do for my country. host: let's hear from an independent in panama city, florida. caller: yes. i do support service members, or military service who like to support their country in a different manner. the exposure that they get --

can you hear me? host: yes, i can hear you. caller: i was saying that the exposure they get by virtue of being assigned to various different countries gives them an opportunity to view -- in regards to the function of their government. like in the area of process versus other areas of governmental standings. we have a tendency to do a comparison. however, since i've returned here i've noticed that a lot of the military members or retired military members predominantly are leaning towards the republican side of our parties, and it makes me wonder why they would do that when a

lot of the projection that the republican party leans towards the rich rather than the needy, in a sense. host: i want to show our viewers political ads. the first is from newark's 18th district. this is democrat representative pat ryan, an army vet who served two combat tours in iraq as an army intelligence officer. he won a seat this year and is being challenged by republican colin schmidt, a sergeant and automated logistical specialist in the army national guard. here are the ads that touch on both of their military services. [video clip] >> yes, no, no excuse. i am pat ryan and at west point those are the only answers for a new recruit. yes, i'm fighting to ease our economic burden.

no, i will never let politicians take away a woman's right to choose. there is no excuse for our kids being killed by the same weapons i carried in combat. i approve this message because in combat or congress, i fight for you. >> i'm colin schmidt and this is my wife nikki. i am a state assemblyman, sergeant in the army national guard, husband, and dog lover. i'm running for congress because we need to change the way washington works. trillions of dollars being wasted, astronomically driving up inflation, and costing your family thousands of dollars. the hudson valley needs someone ready to fight for us and our values. i'm colin schmidt and i approve this message, because that's exactly what i'm going to do. host: does a candidates military service make a difference for you in your vote? the midterm elections are coming up on tuesday. interested to see given the nearly 200 vets running for congress this year, if it's

going to make a difference to you. mary in richmond, virginia, republican line. caller: i don't think it makes a difference. they don't have any more experience with the economy and with the abortion and with all that. i really respect them and am grateful for their service, but as far as serving as a congressman? no, i don't really think it helps. either way, so -- host: bartholomew is in olympia, washington. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing today? host: good. you are up early. caller: yes, i am. i watch this channel from time to time when i have time. i have my coffee ready and i got my opinion. host: i am ready to hear it. caller: a candidates military

service matters to my vote? absolutely. in my lifetime, historically, i've seen a lot of past presidents in the early 1960's to 1950's, and i don't like how they intervene into government politics. the policy they should stick to is military, be the kings man, and that is all. when they get involved with politics, they should stay as an individual, nonbiased person military. never intervene after military into politics, whether it be congress, senate, higher-ups such as vice president, or president of the united states. i believe they have a history when they are in the military too long, they get involved in government, they shouldn't do that. then their whole past military

history was a lie. they were never nonbiased. they always had an issue, whether it be conservative or democrat -- republican or democrat or independent. host: you want a straight line between politics and the military? caller: absolutely. aside from that opinion, these men who have been in wars, they come back with these psychological problems, mental health problems, and they don't need to be making decisions for a nation that is barely getting by at the social and political level. host: glenn in corpus christi, texas, republican line. caller: good morning, greta. host: it is actually mimi. it is not greta today. caller: well, i am a vietnam

veteran and i have seen a lot of destruction in the military, especially around december every year. the supply chain dumps all of their equipment away so they can requisition new in january. there is of dollars wasted there. when we go into a foreign country for military activity, none of the equipment we take over comes back to the usa. it stays there. in vietnam we had millions of dollars of trucks, all kinds of military armament stayed in vietnam. that is why i want to see that's in government, so they know -- vets and government, so they know what wasteful spending is being done by our government and military activity. host: let's look at more political ads. this from the virginia second district. it is navy vet versus navy vet.

a nuclear-train surface warfare officer who served in the navy for 20 years being challenged by a republican who is in that she was a navy helicopter pilot who was deployed twice to the persian gulf. here are their ads. [video clip] i do solemnly swear that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic. i said the oath the first time when i was 17-year-old and i went to the naval academy. >> a handful of democrats chosen to investigate the attack on democracy on january 6. >> it is not about our democracy, maintaining the majority in the house, a potential reelection. >> this is something i have never seen on my time covering capitol hill. >> supporters of then-president donald trump assaulting police officers. >> people might say, why would

you do that? you might not be reelected? i don't care, because i did the right thing. i do. i approve this message. >> this is governor glenn youngkin. last year we did something historic. we started a movement to empower parents, make life more affordable, and keep our community safe. we can keep that going by sending my friend to fight for us in congress. a nurse practitioner and navy helicopter pilot, jen knows how to get things done for hampton roads. i am with jen. >> i approve this ad. host: we are asking you this morning, does a candidates military service matter to your vote? we would like to hear what you think on that. we will check in with twitter and our social media accounts.

"military service could be considered a pro when deciding on a candidate. their willingness to serve their country has already been demonstrated." "the americans who served our nation are one of our greatest assets. even if i disagree with their political beliefs, i respect them. if i like their policy equally, their service would be the experience that tips my vote in their favor." "i want a politician with real life experiences, whether that is military or a businessman or they were a doctor. i don't want a career politician who has never held a real job." "not necessarily, but their views are usually more like mine and they have had the courage to believe and fight for this country and are not only a career politician." let's hear from richard in canton, ohio. caller: good morning.

the only problem i have with the military being elected into the government and stuff, they tend to have this thing, that they tend to fall in line with whatever mcconnell -- you look at the republican party, the majority of them are ex-military. even when they know things are wrong they know how to keep quiet and they don't speak up for the people. that's one of the things i disagree with. i disagree with giving corporations so many tax breaks, because it seems when they are getting tax breaks, right after the tax breaks to corporations the love on all their products. now they are coming to the poor and taxing us more to get more money.

if we stop giving them tax breaks, how much money would be going into our coffers? host: military members of congress do that, richard? caller: yeah, once they get elected they fall in line. whatever mitch mcconnell wants them to vote for, they vote for. those who want to speak out in the corners of the white house won't come out in the open and speak up. host: susan in austin, texas come the independent line. caller: hi. sorry -- host: are you there, susan? caller: yes. host: go ahead. caller: anyway, my only comment is that the military is no different than any other person except for one thing. they went and served in a

horrible, horrible place. it does not serve them to have those nightmares. they can serve the country, and i would vote for a military guy. i have never served in the military, because i can't. i was a woman. host: let's hear from david in st. petersburg, florida. good morning, david. caller: good morning. as a u.s. navy vet i cannot believe what i'm hearing. i don't listen often because of the division. the division that we hear here is very distressing. also, there's many military people i can think of -- many

military people -- i can think of two that are prominent, with stolen valor. serving in the military doesn't make you a good person, but i would prefer someone who volunteered and served their country over some politician who has never had a job, who has been in politics in washington for 50 years, such as our current president. thank you for being there. host: nicholas in madison, wisconsin. independent line. caller: yes, i think it is all right to vote for someone in the military. some say that division in this country is disturbing, this is america. they're supposed to be division in this country. another thing, you are supposed to -- the difference -- like,

donald trump, he pretty much ruined the military in this country. he promised that there wouldn't be new dealers -- would it be nuclears in north korea. do you remember all the military people we lost in the korean war? now we might have another war going on in korea. all that blood is going to be on donald trump's hands. thank you. host: let's look at more political ads from members who served in the military. this time from maryland -- sorry, this is for jenny's 10th district, jennifer wexton challenged by hunker dow -- hung cao. [video clip] >> i was four years old, we

escaped communism. one of the last families out of vietnam. america literally saved my life. i studied at the naval academy, harvard, and m.i.t.. i saw combat in iraq, afghanistan, and some aliyah. serving america is the greatest honor of my life but we don't do it for republicans or democrats, we do it for all americans and that is what i will do in congress. i approve this message. host: is a candidates military service going to matter to your vote, will that affect your vote in the next three days when the nation goes to vote? republican line, good morning. caller: i think general eisenhower would probably be surprised to think that people would think it is not important. he created our entire interstate system as the president.

i don't think people understand that all the leadership training these people go through as a military person. when you have two or three strikes you have 12 weeks of leadership training. your seventh and eighth strike, 12 weeks of leadership training. near ninth one, even more. as an officer, it is intense training every step of the way. it also gives you -- you have blacks, whites, everyone in this service. it is not like we're used to be when it was segregated. host: did you serve in the military? caller: 21 years in the marine corps. host: did you ever think of running for office? caller: no. host: why not? caller: well, i just -- life took me a different way. i worked for the railroad after i got out of the service for three years.

then i went into construction and i worked for seven years. i went to four years of college, played football, worked on the farm for 12 years. host: there still time to change your mind, jeff. washington, d.c., independent line, good morning, john. caller: good morning, c-s listeners. i don't think that it matters one way or another. it is justikthe old saying, it is the congress, stupid. it is politics, stupid. we need to put all of these additives into our politics was that military experience is good. it can discipline. but you have regular citizens who also have the same qualities, or even more.so , i think we need to just look at people's policies, not necessarily all that. of course, education, your

experience, your background are all applicable to the position, but it is not that important when you look at what is in each individual's policy decisions? how will they make it better for the common person? what are they thinking as it relates to the financial aspects of our lives? yeah, it matters in the term of them, you know, having certain levels of discipline, but you have people who have never been in the military who display the same character and ability to govern. it matters in a sense, but not really in my book. that's my take on it. host: let's look at a text that we got -- anyway, the u.s. air force vet says "of course it does. they choose to defend our

nation, our national tradition of individual freedom." on twitter, "veterans ought to be represented in government because they are an important segment of the u.s.. however, i won't vote for one just because they served. some are a danger to america." "yes, many current candidates in the military are unwilling to send men and women to war, and that is a good thing. they are not reflective of adam kinzinger." let's talk next to johnny and port orange, florida. democrat line. good morning, johnny. caller: how are you doing? i would rather have military over a businessman. host: why? caller: they understand the chain of command, they take an oath to defend against foreign and domestic. a businessman will only come in for wealth.

he won't do anything other than get everyone big money. i would rather have a guy from the military, even though you have some exceptions. i would rather have the military than a businessman. host: barbara in atlanta, georgia, republican line. caller: good morning. how are you, dear? i am very much military, by the way. i have a son who was in the marine corps for 20 years. been overseas, in action. i was a chaplain for 15 years with our troops. there may he sum in the military that are -- there may be some in the military that are not so-so to be president or whatever else, but our military has defended our country in many wars. vietnam, korea, many things that have gone on in the middle east.

they are very disciplined, especially the marine corps. they are an entity in their own. if i vote for someone, i vote for someone based on what they believe. i believe this country is the greatest country we've ever had. unfortunately, i don't feel that way today. and it's very, very sad. i think this election we are going to have an extremely important, extremely important. i am a chaplain, by the way. the bible and history have a lot of correlation in what has happened to our time. we need to get back to the basics. host: william is in lebanon, virginia, independent line. caller: good morning. i served in the military, and i don't feel that it matters who you put in politics unless we

control the funding they receive from the different organizations. we have to expose -- we have to pass a law where this money gets exposed. when they receive it it is shown to where people can see what they are getting. two, we must have honesty with everything they say when they say it on tv, and the news. that would solve a lot of our problems today. on the news they say things that are not true, and then people believe it. host: william, we are going to be having at 8:00 a representative from politico fax -- politifact talk about that issue. caller: good morning, c-span.

yes, may be years ago i would have voted favorable towards military. not this time, considering people like michael flynn and -- host: and? caller: and -- i'm sorry -- people, there were a lot of military and the insurrection on january 6. it makes me wonder how much our military really love our country, because it was a lot of people who served our country who was against. host: ron is in deltona, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a simple message. number one is veterans to me

have preference. but i would like to enlighten some of the people that are nonmilitary. everywhere in the world, in the morning, when the flag goes up, everybody stops and salutes the flag. in the evening when the flag comes down, everybody stops and salutes the flag. every day. everywhere in the world. that should be noted to all the people who are nonmilitary. go america and go trump. thank you. host: let's like an ad from a democrat from maryland governor. he is a combat veteran, and he is running against the republican delegate for the

first-term state lawmakers. this ad features more as an army vet. [video clip] >> i served with wes moore in afghanistan. when you are in a combat zone with someone you get to see what they are made of. this is a man who was a rhodes scholar. he could have been doing anything, but he volunteered to put his life on the line for our country. for me, that says all you need to know. wes is a natural leader. that is how we all felt about him. i know he will make a great governor. host: we are asking this morning, does a candidates military service matter to your votes? let's talk to nelson on the independent line from san diego, california. good morning. caller: good morning. united states marine corps corporal. yeah, the people calling in, like the chaplain lady, she says

-- and i hear this over and over again -- they don't like the military when there is a democratic president. i heard that when clinton went into bosnia for peacekeeping. all of a sudden this conservative caller did not like the military anymore. my drill instructor said the marine corps -- i am proud of marine corps generals like general kelly and general john allen, i believe, who were all against trump even though they served in the administration. they saw the light. i have heard people in the marine corps, officers, enlisted men talking, downgrading this

black staff sergeant, biracial staff sergeant. how can a staff sergeant have a biracial son named jamaal? you have racist people in the marine corps. you have good people in the marine corps. that marine corps officer opened the door for the insurrectionists. it is a mixed bag. host: nelson, let's talk to tj in vero beach, florida on the republican line. caller: i am a republican and i would like to say, yes, i do think it's important. i think they get well prepared by being in the service. also, i would like to say something else. i am a republican and i feel about the election deniers and everything, i feel that is very wrong. host: all right. let's go to -- it looks like our military line is working.

former military in dallas, texas? caller: how do you do? what is going on with perjury in the state of texas? why aren't republicans willing to overpower perjury? republicans are so conservative, how come they are not speaking out about james madison's law, the first article in the constitution? host: what do you think, jesse? caller: republicans are so conservative, i don't understand why they don't put an end to perjury in the state of texas. it is very overwhelming and concerning for my family and other registered voters in the state of texas. it grinds my teeth. host: do want to comment on whether a candidates military service matters to your vote? caller: it doesn't matter a lot. republicans say they are for democracy and many of them say they are military, how come they

don't collapse perjury in the state of texas? it is ridiculous how republicans don't put order in the state of texas. host: list look at an associated press article. the headline, gop eyes indiana upset. it says lunchtime roundtable with the indiana senator and representative owens. not my peers, she quickly emphasized. i miss folk. she suggested that she appreciated serving alongside. a republican hoping to unseat maggie hassan. he served in the army for 36 years. it included 10 tours in

afghanistan and earned him to purple hearts. >> he served 10 tours in afghanistan hunting terrorists on horseback. now it is a new mission. >> this is about granite stators. >> five bronze stars and 10 combat tours. to fight washington's runaway inflation. >> we don't need career politicians who operate off of money, special interests, and lobbyists. we need people with a heart. i approve this message. host: we are asking you this morning your opinion on does a candidate's military service matter to your vote? you can give us a call and let us know. you can send us a tweet or text. here is the military times article that will list for you a full list of the 196 vets running for congress this year.

it says more than one third of all congressional races on the ballot this november will feature a veteran. several could help which party wins control of the house and senate next year. the 196 veterans who have won major party primaries represent the largest group of candidates with military experience in a decade. it includes 130 nonincumbents trying to increase the total number of vets in congress next year. here are some numbers for you. 17 women vets running for office. 58 vets who enlisted after january 1, 2000, so relatively young. 95 with combat deployment. 90 veterans who served in the army, the most of any service host of 18 races, featurig two

vets running against each other. if you would like to see the full list, it is at military times.com. you can look at all of the candidates and where they are running. let's talk to david in florida. you are former military? caller: that is correct. host: what do you think? caller: i noticed when i got out of the military, the first job i had, the best workers were former military. they were -- they had a greater sense of duty, of obligation. they were just the best workers. host: all right. let's take a look at another ad,

this time from the iowa senate race. michael franken is a retired three-star admiral running for u.s. senate against chuck grassley. this will highlight his military career and his stance on the issues. [video clip] >> admiral michael franken served for almost four decades to protect our freedoms from enemies abroad. now he is running to protect our rights from dangerous attacks at home, our democracy, voting rights, civil rights, and with a woman's right to choose in marriage equality under threat, we need a senator on our side more than ever. michael franken will be a tougher challenger for chuck grassley. democrat michael franken for senate. >> i approve this message. host: what do you think? does a candidates military service matter to your vote? the midterm elections are coming up in three days. there are nearly 200 vets who are running for congress this

year. and this is next in union, new hampshire, republican line stop good morning, dennis. caller: it matters. in the granite state we feel mukdic has our back where senator hassan has walked away from us. host: what if it was the democrat that was the military vet? caller: it is not the case, so it is irrelevant. we feel that maggie, she has left our state for big corporate interests. not really doing anything for us. so, first time caller.

host: welcome, dennis. odell is in washington, d.c., democrats line. good morning. what do you think? caller: good morning. what do i think about the ad you showed for the general in new hampshire? they could have been balanced. you see he changes opinions about things. if i was in new hampshire i would vote for hassan, and i am a veteran. host: the other news that i wanted to make sure that i brought up was the jobs data. that has come out yesterday. yesterday was the first friday of the month so the department of labor releases those numbers. you can see the new york times front page, jobs data remains

strong. wages and prices are being pushed up. with less than a week before election day, a new economic report shows the strength of the job market, despite policymakers' efforts to constrain it in their fight against inflation. the employment figures immediately made their way into both party's closing pitches, with president biden claiming that our jobs recovery remains strong, even after republicans say the numbers were disappointing. but the story is far more complex than any political statement would make it seem. here is a graph you can see on the new york times of the jobs added. here is october, the latest ones. here is the wall street journal. robust hiring shows signs of cooling-off.

the u.s. labor market remains strong, but it is showing more signs of cooling following the federal reserve's aggressive interest rat increases -- interest rate increases aimed at combating high inflation. i robust number come but the fewest since december 2020. the unemployment rate rose to 3.7%. you can see the rate of the unemployment rate. it says that that number is still far more, the jobs added number, then before the pandemic. in 2019, job gains added 164,000 per month. we are asking you about the midterm elections comiin three days. as a candidate's military servtter to you? does it affect your vote? ick in carnegie,

pennsylvania. democrats line. er: good morning. my father was in the air force and my brother was ar master chief in the u.s. navy seals for 30 years. the answer is no. yes no. ability and wonderful nature of our brothers and sisters who served in the military. no, because of the massive abu military-industrial complex, which has been warned repeatedly, particularly by eisenhower. look where we are now will stop the ameriople are being massively manipulated. ntagon just admitted that we are putting some boots on the ground in ukraine. we are being lied to about the legitimacy of these wars. trillions of our tax dollars are being stolen and handed out to billionaires to line their

pockets. so, you have to look at it from a perspective of where is this going? i would like to see much less military in politics. not because of the fact that i don't adore our people in uniform, but because they become part of the economic machinery of the system which is completely out of control. the american people need to wake up. host: let's look from twitter. "no, it is never a factor for who i vote for. it doesn't guarantee loyalty for democracy these days. i have respect for those who show loyalty to our constitution." let's talk to albert. augusta, georgia, democrats line. good morning, albert. caller: i was just listening to your program.

i am an army veteran, a vietnam era veteran. three tours. i am calling to remind everyone, i am old enough to remember when -- good morning. i am old enough to remember when -- eisenhower -- host: albert, you have to mute your tv and just talk on the phone. caller: ok, thank you. host: you are old enough to remember --? caller: i am old enough to remember when hitler, when i was born at the beginning of world war ii. hitler, he mentioned something that i remember. if you tell a lie long enough, people will believe it is the truth.

i see that going around now. people talking about the election deniers and so forth. and talking about the military, i am retired military. i have been retired for a few years now, but most people really don't care about the military. they don't want to serve. they think we are overpaid. it is almost like we are on welfare. they don't want to give us anything at they don't think we deserve anything that we get. i think about when i returned from vietnam. i think my mistake was i came back home and it seemed everyone was upset about that. i was working on a job and they used to call us -- because we get a pension. but we earned that pension. we deserve it, we earned it, we

put our lives on the line for. no one will do that now. they want a position, a job, and the financial benefits, but no one wants to sacrifice anything. thank you. host: let's talk to peter, who is also former military in new york. good morning. caller: i am a resident of a community for seniors, independent community for seniors. we have a dining room we all go to. a young girl who works in the kitchen and dining room, we talk and every day we see each other. she is 16. she will finish high school and going to the air force. she will stay, i guess, for her

career. otherwise college. beautiful girl, though. beautiful girl. host: how does this relate to the question of your vote? how does it affect your vote? if a candidate has military service? caller: well, my dad, big pete, he didn't want his son in world war ii. he was a united states marine, i was a united states marine. my dad told me, no matter who they put up vote democrat. host: ok. robert, waldorf, maryland, independent line. caller: good morning. the one thing everyone in the military, when the military goes into battle, they go into battle singing the battle hymn of the republic. they don't seeing the battle hymn of the democracy.

i don't understand where the media has come up with that this country is a democracy? we are a representative republic. the media lies, the politicians lie to say democracy, democracy -- we are not a democracy. host: how does that impact your vote? caller: you think about the way that the military, when they go to battle it is called the battle hymn of the republic. that is military. it is not democracy. if you want democracy, go to england and bow to the queen. but this is a republican this country. host: john in south dakota. caller: that last guy was quite confused. apparently he listens to fox news a lot and that shows in that type of people. my father served in lexington -- on the lexington. they lost over 200 men.

he survived that. he went on to another ship in world war ii. that ship was subject to a surprise attack and a bombing. one of my father's friends was injured very badly. he was down, he was dying. there was a fire that broke out in the ammunition depot. the whole ship was in jeopardy of blowing up if the fire was not put out. my father had to make a choice, to put out the fire and save them in on that ship or be with his dying friend. he had to save the ship. he regretted that for the rest of his life, but he did save the

ship. my father was a proud democrat, and i belong to the democratic party, not the democrat party. anyone you here call it the democrat party is lying to you, it is the democratic party. that is part of the wordsmithing . now the biggest problem we have is the climate. it is coming at us hard. host: we are getting off the subject. that is all the time we've got for this segment. coming up next is katie sanders to discuss efforts to combat misinformation and the importance and process of fact checking. later the economist's idrees kahloon and john prideaux discuss their podcast "checks and balance." we will be right back. ♪

>> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington. live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings of u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips. also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio, plus a variety of podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. downloaded for free today. your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. >>shop.org is c-span's online store. there is something for every

c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. ♪ >> this election day, november 8, the control of power in congress is at stake. will republicans retake doubts? can democrats retain control of the senate? follow c-span's coverage of key house and senate races with our coverage of debates, rallies and candidate events. as they happen on tv and the c-span now up, on demand on our website, and find our data rich election page at c-span.org/campaign2022. >> sunday on q&a, a data journalist shares his book which examines the history of public opinion polling going back to

the 19th century and the accuracy of polls today. >> predicting that donald trump has a 30% chance of victory in the 2016 election. not because national polls are going to be wrong but because the race is close in key states. i do wonder if every person in the media had sort of understood that 30% of, a 30% as meaning these polls, if you have three elections, three, they are going to be wrong one time. if your sample sizes 18 elections, you have a pretty good chance that the polls are going to miss enough that the losing presidential candidate could end up winning. i wonder how the tone of the campaign would have been different and what the people thought would have happened. >> elliott mars with his book "strength in numbers" on c-span's "q&a."

>> washington journal continues. >> welcome back to "washington journal." i am joined by katie sanders, managing editor at politico fact -- epaulet effect -- politifa ct. reminder viewers about politifact. >> we have been around since 2007. we are in nonpartisan, nonprofit fact checking organization that fact-check politicians, candidates for office and we do a lot of fact checking on social media platforms, debunking information people are seeing on facebook, tiktok, twitter and instagram, what have you. we have been doing this work for 15 years. at our core, it is providing

voters and readers with the facts they need to govern themselves in our democracy, helping them separate fact from fiction. we are owing to by the nonprofit poynter institute for media studies, which helps to educate journalists. >> what about the funding? i would assume this is really important who finds politifact. >> we go into detail on our website but it comes from a few different places. we get a few one-off grants. we work directly with social media platforms and we are paid for that work. we are reader supported as well. we have a truth squad where members can support and contribute directly to our work. we get a little bit from online advertising but those are the main once. >> when you say you work with facebook and tiktok, spell that out for us. what do you actually do for them? >> i will start with facebook

because that's been around longer. after the 2016 election, fact checking organizations like ours at politifact told facebook that they clearly had a misinformation platform. misinformation problem on their platform. there were all kinds of things that were fooling people. crazy things about the pope endorsing donald trump, for instance, that's kind of the go to. there were blogs that were being shared without question. facebook did not have really the tools or the know-how or the initiative to halt that stuff from going viral. we said you should work with fact checking organizations to help call out misinformation on the platform. that has really evolved into fact checkers, several organizations and then dozens and dozens around the world during the same work in their own country that are fact

checking content on facebook's videos, text posts, manipulated images, highlighting false claims and then tagging them with our work. so, not taking them down but tagging them so that people know they have seen or shared false information or partly false information. >> just to remind viewers that if you would like to call in and if you have a question for our guests, you can do that on our lines by political affiliation. republicans, 202-704-8001. who are the fact checkers? how big is the team? what kind of background do you have to have to become a fact checker? >> we are independent journalists, nerds. we have grown a bit but we are

still, as far as our full-time staff goes, fewer than 20 people in our newsroom. that is kind of big by politifact standards but we are up against a lot of daunting information. and it kinda feels like we don't have enough hands to pursue this work. the tilde picoult political -- the typical politifact journalist is -- researching for data, interviewing experts, looking for primary documents, people who here thinks, kind of process news and speeches differently when a politician says something interesting, you done accepted at face value or repeated without questioning. is that really true? what evidence supports it? our journalists are trained to ask for supporting evidence for claims that are not of your switcher and sounder little -- obviously true and sound a little dubious. we go into each fact-check with

an open mind. we talked to relevant experts, whether it's health care, immigration, anything. . we have some people on our team who specialize in certain topics like immigration. but for the most part, everybody is willing to jump into anything. and so, i think the typical fact checker is really just a curious and skilled investigative journalist. >> i want to show you the ethics policy for politifact journalists and ask fo comments on it. it says politifact journalists the public expression political opinion and public involvement in the political process. we do not make political contributions or wor campaigns. we do not sign o petitions, yard signs or participating political marches. views on social media.litical

we do share news stories and other journalism but we take care not to be seen asndorng or opposing a political fi or position. we avoid snarky commentary. we may participate in the political process as voters, because we also have a responsibility as individual citizens ounited states, but we keep our votes to ourselves as a matter of principle. our goal is to be open-minded in all of our work. what do you think? >> absolutely. thank you for reading that. it is important because we are in such a polarized environment. it is snarky. it can be easily held up as evidence of bias. are reporters and editors know that they have to be exceptionally careful and mindful about what we are not only publishing, but what they put out on their own personal social media sites. that ethics policy is far-reaching expectation and are journalists do not struggle with it at all, which is typical for

most are journalists. >> i want to ask you about one thing that came out on politicfact and this is from citizens for sanity. is in october 7 ad and you rated it mostly false and it says this. every single senate democrats voted against. hiring more border agents. they voted against deporting felons and they voted against ending catch and release. >> we find that a lot of claims about immigration, that they are pointing to one specific vote and ignoring the bigger picture. in this case, this is senate democrats voting against republican measure but the ad is cleverly crafted in that it's leaving out other votes democrats did make that were aiming to or either did increase the number of border agents and border security. that is a multi-parts claim.

but i think that what we want to tell people is that these ads a re simple and they are really designed to be memorable but they are leaving out a big part of the story. that's why it for our definition of mostly false. there's an element of truth because technically, you can point to certain votes. but on the broader scale, is ignoring other votes and painting a picture. >> let's start talking to some of our viewers. the first up is everett, who is in grand junction, colorado, republican line. good morning. >> good morning. i appreciate what you do. i will be so glad when the political season, it seems like it has been going on forever, is over. but i do appreciate facts. in this process over the last six, eight years, i've read the constitution word for word looking for some facts.

and in the constitution, there is no word for democrat, that is no word democrat in there and there is only one place where there is a republican in there, it is in article iv, section 4 i believe. anyway, i appreciate what you do. and i would challenge everybody out there to take the time to read the constitution word for word and look at some unique things in there as well as the declaration of independence and the federalist papers. they are kind of boring, but get the facts straight. thank you so much. >> all right, everett. do you have a comment on that? it is important to read those documents. >> sure, yeah. i appreciate the point. >> darrell is in tallahassee, florida, democrat line. good morning. >> darrell robertson calling.

i have 4 questions. i am a truth bearer, whether it's right, wrong, or indifferent. i want to know politifact, who are your competitors? two, when did you decide or how did you decide who to fact-check? who do you decide to fact-check? three, -- >> let's take those two. those are some good questions. go ahead. >> the first one was who are our editors? >> your competitors. >> competitors. we are very congenial with our competitors, right. i think the two that have been

with us all along the way are factchecko.org, which actually started before us and the washington post fact checker. fact checking has really expanded. we often overlap. we often come to similar conclusions and it's a rare day when we disagree on our ratings. each reaching kind of varies from publication to publication. the associated press is also doing this work. the new york times for a time had a fact checking spot on its website and it still incorporates fact checking. there are reuters, isp, lead stories, check your fact. i think we all have very similar reporting processes, which is to research, see what's out there, searching keywords and then calling out sources and trying to get the full story.

i am so glad you asked about the decisions of who to fact-check. it's more about the claims itself. i am happy to go into more detail but it really does start with making a good call on what to fact-check, what claims. there are any number of claims out there in politics on a given day and we have a lot of options. we are trying to prioritize what's in the news and what sounds wrong. and it cannot be an opinion and it cannot be a prediction because we cannot fact-check addictions -- predictions. we can fact-check whether certain analyses have certain estimates that square with the way politicians are characterizing it. if politicians are citing a report as evidence for their claim that this bill happens, the debt will go up this much, we will go find that report itself and and write it and talk to other people who wrote it, people who

may disagree with it and other independent experts to get a full picture. we talk every day about what the best things to fact-check are. we do not want to gang up on one side. we are giving equal looks at everything out there to make sure we are being fair. host: can you talk about the ratings themselves? you have pants on fire, mostly true. explain those. guest: it is not a scientific instrument but it gives people a good feel for how right or wrong a claim is. you go to mostly true and that means it is accurate but needs additional information or clarification. have true for a statement that

is partially accurate. mostly false has a little element of truth but is leaving a false impression. false is an inaccurate claim. pants on fire come across every. not only wrong claims but nicholas ones. -- but ridiculous ones. host: let's go to the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. do you think there should be more regulation over freedom of speech? should someone be able to say whatever they want even if they know what is in true? i see it causing controversy whether it accusing republicans of being qanon or just a lot of diversity where it seems like someone accuses somebody.

do you think there should be more regulation where someone should not knowingly be able to do that? host: what do you think? guest: thanks for the question. i do not take policy positions and i do not want to tell -- i believe in the first amendment but i do not necessarily want to advocate for certain limits. ideally people would research what they are about to say before they say it. it is not always possible but i understand that it is frustrating that you can get away with lying in politics and there is the consequence of shame when people call it out but there is not a lot more. i will not call for more regulation either way but i understand where they might be coming from. host: i want to show one of your

recent ones. this was from joe biden. it was rated pants on fire and this was november 1. he said, "for the first time in 10 years seniors are getting an increase in their social security check." the article mentioned that social security recipients have received increases in their checks in the form of inflation adjustments from nine of the passing years and the adjustments are based on a key inflation measure as mandated by 1972 law. guest: the reality was the opposite of what he was saying. it was not just wrong, it was ridiculously wrong which was why we rated it pants on fire. we came to that conclusion would be vetted among three editors who wanted to talk about why that was the best rating.

we put that effort into every fact-check we do. there is a lot of internal setting -- vetting that goes on. that is notable because we have been fact-check in joe biden since he was running for president back in 2007. he had our first pants on fire which if you look up the report, it is a quick read about whether george w. bush was brain-dead. this was his first pants on fire as president. it is not me we have held off on fact checking him. we have rated several of his recent claims false just month -- this month. democrats invoke social security all the time but this was taking credit for something he did not touch and was going to happen regardless if he was president and ignoring that there were increases along the way. host: let's talk to jim in

georgia on the democrats line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to ask about the availability of your service. i called c-span1's and the subject -- i called c-span once and the subject was the local government citing people for having too many trash and on their driveway. someone needed to fact-check that. my question is when someone says something needs to be fact-checked, it is not something that is available immediately.

the demand is exceeding the supply greatly. how do you make your platform more ubiquitous to the general public? that is my question. host: go ahead, katie. guest: that is a great question. it is about us hyper local -- it is about as hyper local as a question as you can get. we have a network of partners in different states, roughly 10 to 12 different states right now. they take different forms. there are some newspapers we work with in certain states. there are some reporters who work for tv stations, public radio stations. those are mainly covering politics at the state level and statewide elected representatives as well.

we do dream about having fact-checking reporters from politifact in every state. that would be an amazing opportunity for us. this work is hard because it takes time to research these claims. maybe a day and a half sometimes. some are debunked in a couple of hours. others are more complex. to this point, we do a dive into really local issues, especially around voting and elections where there are certain things that are happening at a very local level with drop boxes or valid errors -- or ballot errors that are being held up as evidence of voter fraud. we do make very local calls to

county officials to clarify or give context or verify that something has happened for our report. we do take reader requests. i don't know if we will be able to send someone on the ground to look at drive rate -- driveway crashes. but yes, i would love to see more fact-checking and i would love for that process to be more immediate but we are a human enterprise and we have to live with that for now. host: let's go to new jersey, independent line, good morning mike. caller: good morning. i appreciate this dialogue. i guess it turns to finding -- it turns to biden. do you have a cumulative rating

of how persistent his misstatements are? secondly, is there a second category for biden where he is missing facts but some of his statements are delusional which is outside the scope of your, essentially, the parameters that you put up of whether something is true or false. it seems like it is something from a moon someplace where he is making the statements. thank you. guest: overall i would not say, i would not give him an overall grade. but we have checked him alive. he is one of our most fact-checked politicians. each interest group has their own page on politifact. you can see the volume of statements that they have said,

that we decided to check out and how they rated. it is like a graph. you can see how it shakes out for biden. it is not a review of everything he said for a perfect picture of how accurate it is. i think politicians do repeat themselves a lot. in president biden's case, there are examples where he has said things more accurately and not said it correctly in the moment. when we do our reports on those inaccurate statements, that is the reaction we expect from the white house is to point out the other times he has correctly said a talking point. this is not just for biden. this is for a look -- for other politicians as well. i do not have it in front of me, but if you want, you can compare his report card to other

politicians that we have checked and you can compare his statements to other presidents too. it can only tell you so much that it gets to what you are wondering about. host: elections are coming up and i wanted to show you a tweet from the race that is happening for arizona republican governor. she tweeted this about her opponent. she said that katie hobbs wants to prevent students from learning the pledge of allegiance. your organization rated that false and said katie hobbs did not vote to pull the pledge of allegiance or the u.s. constitution some school. do you remember that one? guest: it was posted on our website recently and it was researched at arizona state university.

we teach a class there. this was researched and written by a student and guided along by one of our senior correspondent. this claim rates false. katie hobbs did not attracted purge the pledge, the national anthem from school. if you dig into the details, you will find out that there was a senate bill that would have amended certain statutes but it would not have kept teachers from discussing these u.s. documents. i think kari lake in this video was really painting a false impression of what the vote against this amendment did. if something sounds outrageous, people should take a look and see what actually is being talked about. we rated that one falls. host: let's go to the republican

line in st. petersburg, florida. al is all alike -- is on the line. caller: i was just wondering if politifact had any connection with the st. pete times. guest: i'm coming to you from my home in st. petersburg, florida. yes, it does. politifact started added -- started as a product of the newspaper. the newspaper started this project as an election-year experiment for covering the florida primary. and they found that this new form of journalism that was not just repeating he said she said would really resonate with readers. they love being pulled to what was missing from classic

rhetoric. it was bold at the time. the newsroom kept going. for several years politifact was not bringing in money but they kept it going anyway dedicating a small and nice afternoon of the president. we are proud of our connection to the tampa bay times. we are still partners with the tampa bay times even though we have since moved over. we were acquired by the pointe institute. we are still in the family but there is a connection to the paper formally known as st. pete times. that is where i got my first job in journalism. host: sam is next in georgia, democrats line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i have a question and i hope you can hear me. i am a little slow. give me a minute. hello? host: we can hear you. caller: ok. i would like to ask one question. i am a little confused and i need some clarity. most of the election has been about saving democracy, which i think is fine. i have no problem with that. except i don't understand, this country is based on democracy. the whole constitution is based on democracy. if democracy goes, then america goes. but they do not say save

america. they say save democracy. is there something going on that i cannot figure out? if i ask what is democracy, most people do not know what democracy is. they know what america is. they will fight for america. they will not fight for democracy because they do not know what it is. host: let's get a response. guest: the way i interpret that his efforts to undermine free and fair elections. we have seen this happen after the 2020 election where the loser of that race, former president trump insisted that it was not fairly done and that it was rigged against him serve fraudulent means -- rigged against him through fraudulent means. saving democracy has been

shorthanded to mean that we need to safeguard election results regardless of who is the winner. if there is no evidence of fraud , the spirit of democracy has been fulfilled. it is a big question. the way we see it is just focusing on what israel and what are the facts -- just focusing on what is real and what are the facts. when people talk about threats to democracy, they are talking about efforts to undermine the voice of the public. you are seeing a lot of people who are vying for elected office , who are denying those accurate results from 2020 that show that joe biden was the winner. i think a lot of the discussion has been around what happens if people who do not believe that the election was decided fairly, take office whether it is the

governor's office or secretary of state overseeing the election. i think that is what people are talking about. host: next is nevin in florida on the independent line. good morning. caller: the former presidents claimed that the election was stolen, -- the former president's claim that the election was stolen, is that an outright lie and can you call it an all right -- an outright lie ? guest: yes. it is safe to call that a lie. there is no evidence to support it. it has become so entrenched in our society, it is important to call it what it is. host: north carolina, republican

line. good morning. caller: good morning. bless you for the important work you are doing. there is a special place in heaven. please do not fact-check that, whether there is a heaven or not. have you ever considered approaching some network tv show where they would give you half an hour to share these facts on tv that a lot of people could watch? if it is a political type of thing, show one segment on republicans, one segment on democrats, one segment on independence or something of that nature. i can see you having a whole segment or part of the half-hour just on climate change, on whether it is happening or not. your thoughts on that. a lot of cable channels out there might want to pick you up. host: you will be a tv star,

katie. guest: [laughter] thank you, bob. we have to get you on our marketing team. we would love that. we have tv partnerships to help us right our work to tv audiences. not with any major networks at this time although we occasionally are guests on those. we do a weekly segment where we go over three fact-checks on national races and national figures. that gets carried across their broad network of stations. it is a segment. it is not a 30 minute show. it is not on a national network. it does have an impact and reaches people at the local level, which we believe has better hope of being trusted. that is what people are watching to get there weather and their local news. it is a good approach. host: al in michigan on the

democrats line. hello, al. caller: good morning. katie, i think you are sitting on the cure to the woes of this country. let me explain. fact-checking. we listen to all the different fact-checking on all the stations and we do not know if that is true. how about we start the? how about as we watched the senate hearings, they make them take an oath and raise their hand that they are telling the truth and if they don't, they can go to jail for perjury. we need to turn that around to include that but also make sure we asked the people who are asking the questions to take an oath that what they are asking is the honest truth. simple.

not a law that sends them to prison but a law that says if you lie, that they do not go to jail, that they lose their pension and they are five. host: let's get eight response -- let's get a response. guest: interesting question. it made me think about how important it is for journalists to share their work as they are doing their accountability journalism. at politifact, we show our work. we list our sources so people can retrace our steps and understand why we came to the conclusion that we did. there are consequences for journalists who are not telling the truth, especially that result in published reports. pretty high standards. i can speak for politifact. we are very careful.

i encourage everybody to look at our sources for each and every fact-check. host: calvin in alabama, independent line. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. i wanted to ask, many of our stories. i watch on world news and cable channels and so forth, i really am starting to watch fox news more than i used to and it is because i have the ability to record and watch the different programs and i find that some like msnbc or cnn or abc, they seem to be very neglectful of anything that is

sort of a promotion of any type of republican type of views and very negative toward anything that they are doing that is correct or right. stories regarding democratic candidates, i have noticed, that fox news will report everything that is happening and then the other channels, they don't. they may not even be -- there may not even be a mention of it. if there is a mention of it, it is always a pollyanna type story , something that does not seem believable. it is like pelosi and her husband and the horrible thing that has happened to him. fox is saying they are not getting certain materials from the police department there. the video.

things that would shut this up really quick. if it was released, that would stop fox from being able to make these allegations and it would be very nice if all of the other channels would do the same thing. host: let's get a response. guest: i have a few different responses in mind. we have seen a rise of pundits appearing on network news. to give context and analysis of news, not just repeating it factually. i encourage you not to go all the way to one network for all of your news. it is important to consume a variety of news sources so that you can get different views of the same topic. if you are going only to fox news, you will notice different programs. there is more opinion

programming. that is only giving you one side of the picture. there is really reputable work at fox but there is more opinion programming. i think you have to be careful there and make sure that you are not totally getting one side. i think you have to be a discerning viewer. if people are giving you their case, are they reporters? are they partisan analysts? open a google tab and do your research. that can confirm any biases you are hearing. i think the network news reports and those broadcasts at the end of the day are really carefully done, really carefully vetted. make sure you are consuming news.

not opinion programming. host: eva is calling us from mississippi, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. do you check religious affiliations? are there some listed as not religious, having no affiliation? some as atheist? how does it follow along party lines? if you do not exercise your right to vote, thank you. guest: i can say we have a variety of religious beliefs on our team. it does not factor into our report. host: she did say make sure you vote on tuesday, which is true. gary in florida, democrats line. good morning. caller: i was wondering was

donald trump under investigation on january 6 after the taking of the documents? how was someone like that able to possibly run again? it is -- are there any provisions that would prevent that? if not, there should be. thank you. guest: we have seen instances where people were able to remain on the ballot even if they were incarcerated. the threat of the investigations around donald trump does not prevent him from seeking high office once again. host: new jersey, independent line, katrina -- trina. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a first time caller. i am excited and nervous. did politifact do coverage on

trump's in the capital attack -- trump's involvement in the capital attack? has politifact considered fact-checking political debates and speeches real-time? thirdly, i just wanted to ask does politifact have a database of information where you can create an algorithm and a person can put in the statement and amelia get an answer of whether it is true or false -- can put in a statement and immediately get an answer of whether it is true or false? . thank you. guest: the first one about whether we have covered trump's in direct involvement. we covered the speech on january 6 and we have been dedicated to covering fallout from that day. i would say we do not have special knowledge beyond what the committee has aired out in hearings.

we have done the work of examining the public record. last summer we did a report on different court cases and what various defendants from january 6 believe and the misinformation they believe led to that date. you can google january 6 and you will get our coverage of hearings and those special reports. i should also mention we have named downplay and denial our lie of the year. do we cover speeches and debates live? yes, routinely. covering candidates going head-to-head in states like florida, georgia, ohio has their debates that we covered live. we love that. it gives us the opportunity to get our work out because

candidates tend to repeat things that we have already fact-checked on the debate stage. if you log onto our website, you can see our reports from those high-profile debates. we are getting ready for presidential primary debates. it is a really fun part of what we do. finally, yes. our website is data-driven. beyond that we also have this ability, i will keep it short. if you hear something that you are wondering if it is true, you can search google and type in the keywords. if it has been fact-checked by us, it might be higher in the search results allowing you to see the specific claim and how the fact-checker rated it. we are always pushing for innovation so we can get answers to people fast.

like i said, these reports take time. politicians tend to repeat themselves. if you hear something, we have rated more than 20,000 claims. there is a high chance we have looked into it already. host: republican line. caller: i heard you guys talking about there was no election -- host: jim? ok. let's go to keith in virginia, democrats line. caller: good morning. good morning, america. katie, i wanted to ask you a question that might help us as we go into the midterms about the big lie that you have had

about two years to do fact-checking on it. most americans really want to know about this big lie and whether it was false or not. can you give us something that would help educate us as we go into the midterms as to who is denying the truth and who is following the truth before we make our election decision at this time? thank you very much. guest: sure. i will not tell anybody who they should vote for and we do not use the phrase the big lie but we have been covering the 2020 election, whether it was rigged, various claims about that for multiple years. we started covering it even before the election happened because donald trump was saying without evidence that it was going to be rigged or that rigging was already taking place and there is no evidence of that.

to rig an election, it is on possible -- it is impossible given the way that elections are conducted on the local level. . it is just not feasible. a lot of journalists have taken lessons from people promoting and continuing to believe this lie without evidence, that we need to be better at explaining to people how elections work. that is something that we really prioritized over the last several years. we have fact-checked it so many times. it is false in some fire, it is not true -- it is false, pants on fire, it is not true. she is incredibly skilled at

calling up officials and getting them to explain the process of voting so that people can have more faith that their vote will be counted. whether they drop it in the dropbox, send it by the mail. we are trying to be transparent with voters about the steps that are taken between casting your ballot and the election officials tabulating it. we have been saying that this has been false for a very long time and it has not changed donald trump from insisting that it is so but there continues to be no evidence. i cannot say that enough. if you are curious, you can do that google search and we have conducted multiple reports explaining how we know that the election was done fairly in 2020. host: katie sanders, politifact managing editor, thanks for joining us. guest: thanks for having me. host: up next, more calls and

comments on open forum. the numbers are on your screen by political officiating -- political affiliation. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, and independents (202) 748-8002. it is idrees kahloon and john prideaux who will discuss american politics. stay with us. >> there are a lot of places to get political information but only at c-span do you get a trade from the source. the matter where you are from, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> american history tv exploring

the people and events that tell the american story on lectures in history, a look at when polls go bad with american university professor joseph campbell to talk about public opinion, election forecasting and the siletz ticket -- and the significant polling myths. and look at president nixon's record on nuclear weapons with presidential scholars including the co-author of "a burning doomsday." exploring the eran story. watch american history tv every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org /history. >> this election date, november 8, the control of power in congress is at stake.

will democrats regain control of the senate? follow c-span's coverage of house and senate races with our coverage of debates, rallies and events as they happen on tv and our website and find ouremand on election page at c-span.org /campaign2022. >> middle and high school students, it is your time to shine. you are invited to participate in c-span's studentcam documentary competition. feature yourself as a newly elected member of congress. we asked competitors what is your top priority and why. make a five to six minute video that shows the importance of your issue from opposing and supporting perspectives. do not be afraid to take risks. be bold. among a $100,000 cash prize is a

$5,000 cash prize. visit our website at studentcam.org for partition -- competition rules resources and a step-by-step guide. >> sunday on q&a, a data journalist shares his book that examines the history of public opinion polling going back to the 19th century and the accuracy of polls today. >> predicting that donald trump has a 30% chance of victory and the 2016 election, not because national polls will be wrong but because the race is close. i do wonder if every person in the media has understood that 30% as meaning these polls, if you have three elections, they

will be wrong one time. if your sample size is 18 elections, you have a good chance that the polls will miss enough that the losing candidate could end up winning. i wonder how the tone of the campaign would have been different and what the people would have thought would happen. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span q&a. listen to q&a and our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. it is open forum. i will be interested to hear what you think about politics, the midterm elections coming up, anything on public policy. i wanted to show you a couple of things first before i start taking calls. that is the hill newspaper and

the headline, "biden-obama in pennsylvania." "president biden and former president obama are going head-to-head with former president trump in pennsylvania this weekend underscoring the significance of the battleground states ahead of the midterm election." biden and obama will hold a rally for lieutenant governor john fetterman, a democrat and state attorney general josh shapiro. trump will host a rally for amendment because -- mehemet oz. by the way, we will have all of that for you on c-span. that coverage starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern.

you can watch both campaign events on our free mobile video app c-span now or online at c-span.org. i want to show you this as well. speaking of the former president, this is from usa today. it says donald trump appeases iowa crowd. "i will very probably run for president. get ready." thursday, he hinted once again at a presidential run in 2024. also in the news, tornadoes. this is cnn.com. in case you are not aware, at least one person is dead and multiple people missing in oklahoma after more than one dozen tornadoes hit three states. that has just happened in the

news. i will be interested to hear what you have to say. but before i do, i want to show you the jobs numbers. they came out yesterday, the first friday of the month for october. here is the wall street journal. jobs report shows payrolls group to -- grew to 251,000 eight in october -- 261,000 jobs in october. [video clip] sen. hirono: -- pres. biden: i came here because this is one of the bright spots we are seeing across the country where america is asserting

itself. 10 million new jobs in 20 months. this morning i learned that we added another 261,000 jobs this month. by the way, media reports have called it the goldilocks report. i have my shotgun waiting for the wolf. unemployment went up 0.2%. unemployment among veterans is historically low. putin's invasion of ukraine has said gas prices soaring. our economy continues to grow and add we have a lot more to do. we also know folks are

struggling with inflation. it's her number one priority. that is why, with help, i signed the inflation reduction act. it will bring down the cost of everyday things. those we talk about around the kitchen table. >> the president is talking about yesterday's job report. here is a republican leader. he is the top republican on the housways and means committee. he said this. the workis sinking. owth is slowing and unemployment is risi these are all signs of a biden induced recession. ecomy with three and 4 --he three r americans saying thre going badly, while democrats promising the same inflationary policies, the republicans are promising to make an economy that is strong so they can achieve the american dream. what do you think? we will take your calls now.

jim is in texas. democrat. caller: mi on? host: yes i -- you are. caller: i want to talk about real home inflation. food is so expensive that some people have actually told me they live on an every other day economy. do know that is? they take their medicine every other day and they take their food every other day. that is how they are keeping alive. this is america. i fought for america. i got wounded for america. i almost died for america. that is not the america i did all that for. somebody is starving to death and dying from lack of medicine. somebody take up the flag off

the floor. say, we are going to help people with food and medicine. thank you. host: tim is in collin, michigan. republican. caller: good morning. i would just like to talk about illegals in the country. just down the road from me. a person from out of the country ran into a young girl and her son and he was drunk and they killed a little boy. i think that we need to get a handle on what is going on because i see it quite a bit around my area. that is not very good. thank you. host: all right.

robert chin petersburg, virginia, independent line. caller: i would like to address the same with these people that have spread lies. like this woman in arizona. the constitution, the 14th amendment of the constitution, article three says that nobody that participates in a resurrection can -- insurrection, can run for office and hold office. they can never take the oh again like the one that have been in office, those who have been owed, but people have to understand something. these people that are spreading lies, they taken this subject to an extreme. they just know that they will believe it if they say it over and over again. the justice department, i want to take these people and charge them and go on and do what they

can. otherwise, these people like this woman, if they get elected, on the premise of telling lies, they are subject to being locked up. if they don't follow through, they will move in the justice system, and i hope people wake up because the republicans are going to make the economy worse. they're going to put rich people back into the shop again, and the lies they are telling now, they keep taking a minute believing them. and they go over in this country. host: i want to share a text we got in our last segment with political facts. i wasn't able to get to it, but he says the most diabolical aspect of fighting this information is the massive amount of money promoting this information. the motive is to confuse the electorate about which candidates are best for the working class, and which canada gets support the oligarchy who are getting rich while the rest of us get poorer.

the other big news is what is happening in twitter. here is the washington post under the full -- it says at twitter, advertisers bolts, and a staff despairs. the company cuts workforce as moderation practices generate calls for boycotts. the article says one week after elon musk acquired twitter, the company was in turmoil on friday. half of its workers were handed pink slips, and advertisers were fleeing amid calls from civil rights groups to boycott a social media site accused of feeling hate speech's and conspiracy theories. as racism and anti-semitic control temps to test the boundaries of twitter, it could hobble the sites ability to police misinformation ahead of next week's election, as well as around other elections abroad.

meanwhile, some workers who cap their jobs warned that the twitter they knew question mosques direction. projects with timelines now have 24 hours. it is open for them. janice is next. she calls from louisiana. >> hello. i think, maybe we need another party. social capitalist. i think, if we want to be a country of and buy in for the people, all of the people, then we must respect and care for all. all major religions since the beginning of civilization teach this. jesus of nazareth did too. human beings are exceptional. greater species of animal

because we have an exceptional brain function of adding and subtracting and talking different languages. we can determine right from wrong. but we also can be selfish and evil. i like liz cheney. hutchinson, bernie sanders, i'm almost finished. i think we need to get out of ukraine, and education should be free. we should all have good water. everyone should work and be taught and trained. thank you for your show. host: janice mentioned ukraine, and here's axios. they say the headline, the u.s. announces $400 million in new military aid or ukraine. sharon is next. in pennsylvania. republican. host: thank you for having me. i have a few questions. i was listening to katie

earlier, and i was just wondering, how are we to believe that the elections are not rigged and the reason for me asking that is my husband and i both received multiple ballots in the mail. we didn't ask for them. we went in person. but we each received two ballots. what would be wrong with finishing the wall? it would save trillions of money and cut back on the cost of needing border patrol, and that would cut back on people coming here in our country illegally taking our jobs, killing our people, with their fentanyl, drug trafficking, and so on? and one more thing.

are the new jobs that they say they've created going to illegal immigrants? thank you. host: all right. scott -- i guess we lost scott. willie is next in dallas texas. democrat line. you've got to meet your tv. talk to the phone. caller: i just want --. host: we lost him. sorry about that, willie. rick and carlisle, pennsylvania. independent line. caller: all that does not sound good. let's try william. something is going on. paul, democrat line. caller: good morning.

a simple thing. if you could just read out the definition of democracy and a republic for the people that call in and say that we are one or the other, because actually, they mean the same thing. dean knows that democracy comes from people, and cracked toasts is power. people power. republic means controlled by the people. we are a democratic republic. i wish these people would stop saying were not. they are actually the same thing. thank you. gustav in marathon florida. independent. >> good morning. thank you for having me. i was -- i want to applaud c-span for bringing put a fact today. i have been an avid consumer of

c-span, and i love it. i think in these days of political turmoil, and polarization, and misinformation, is striving a lot of political violence, and we need you. one thing one statement, and a quick question. it was very encouraged to come in and see that, and i'm also a consumer of political effect, and i always try to check my facts before i give an opinion, and i think not many people do, and then we have networks that don't do it either. my question -- in order to bring what a fact or something likely to fact, more to the c-span program, the business plan, would be possible to have either somebody from political fact or somebody from c-span have a section after open forum, to do

fact checking on some of the things that are said. i know you cannot stop the speakers. it is wonderful that they can exercise their opinions on the first amendment right, and i'm all for that, but a lot of things are said that are to quote put a fact, pants on fire, and i think people who are c-span, they don't have the inclination to go online and check the fax. would it be possible to have that on the screen, maybe the main facts, and i've heard things like january 6, the people storm the capital, and black lives matter people or nt for, things like that which are actually very toxic. having to conclude do have a small section? >> i hear you. i think it would be a great idea. we hear you. you said you had a comment? >> that's it. that was a suggestion. thank you so much and keep doing

what you do. goodbye. host: david is in french lick indiana. >> morning. i just want to make a quick comment regarding election deniers, and let's go back to 2016. donald trump one, and hillary clinton denied it. she said that somebody was wrong about it, and then we went to conclusion and hearings, and they came back with nothing. so all these individuals are looking at election deniers, but the first big lie was the clinton big lie. i don't support the election deniers, as i've said here today, but in french lick indiana, i don't support the violence that occurred at the capital, and i support the people who vote and the vote

should be counted, and that is where the issue is. the trust as a vote being counted properly. there was a recall of 100 -- one million mail out votes forums in pennsylvania, that had the wrong date on them, and they recalled them. do you see where skepticism might come into place with things like this happening. one million votes. host: were running short on time. we got your point. forrest, democrat line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: my opinion is that donald trump should start trying to be president again with his record being awful. people are under the impression

that this man is qualified to be president with all of the trouble and turmoil that he has brought to this country. my opinion is he should be facing charges for all of the requisites and things that he has done. host: thank you. host:carol, independent line. caller: first time caller. i'd like to say that i think america has three major problems considering a lot of other ones. one is mental illness. the other is lack of education and the drug situation. inflation, we talked about. we talk about gas and the price of food. that is a worldwide situation. i spent two weeks in australia and that is all i have heard. england has the same problem. people in america wake up and vote for the person you think is going to do best and quit playing all of this political game. it is really sad. i will never vote again for

anyone who has anything to do with donald trump because he has the most dishonest politician ever had in america, and i've been voting since the days of jfk. thank you and have a great day. host: sylvia in virginia. republican line. good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. i think that she is real sweet, even though i am a republican, and i would vote for her if she didn't agree with abortion, but then she misspoke about rape and abortion so i am very confused as to which one to vote for, but i think we need to all think twice before we do vote this tuesday. thank you so much. >> thank you. speaking about the midterm election, president biden spoke to reporters. he was in air force one for

illinois, and he is confident that the democrats will keep the house. >> were going to win this time around. i have a good feeling about our chances. i haven't been in all the house races, but will keep the seat. we need to keep the chance to keep the house. i don't think we will not win. i am optimistic. i really am. i find that most of these debates occur in places i visited. i know you don't think it, but i do. you don't write it that way, but they are. i find there is confidence about the fact that the policies are cared about, and people want more. i don't know anyone who is really opposed to prescription drugs and all those other things. i feel optimistic. you can smile. host: that is the president

boarding air force one. ernest is calling us from philadelphia pennsylvania. at democrat line. hello. caller: my concern is when corona came out, president trump misled everyone. he said things that were not true. they caused a lot of people to die. nobody held them to account for that. the president of the united states was saying that they use this and that, and when we had corona, the first thing he did was lighten his asked off, so i don't think people can support somebody that is consciously misleading people to death. thank you. host: ethan's next in littleton, colorado. good morning.

caller:. host: are you there? caller: can you hear me? thank you. good morning. i am so glad this election season is coming to an end. watching c-span and listening to these callers is very frustrating. there was a lady from pennsylvania talking about border security. there are about 12 states that separate pennsylvania from the mexican border. complete nonsense. you hear them talking about jill biden not doing anything about prices. if your problem with prices, talk to kroger. talk to your gas station. talk to the people who are controlling the prices. this is a free market economy. what is happening is that producers and merchants are owing to drive the prices as they see fit. they've done that. if you're talking about we believe in free trade and

markets, we believe in free institutions, we don't want these people from mexico competing for jobs, and only individuals from mexico are going to get them logically, that is complete nonsense. then there's another issue coming up which is crime. were tired of crime. democrats are soft on crime. they don't say this when kyle rittenhouse goes across the border to shoot somebody and then republicans turn around to support the legal defense, we have the president of the united states violating the law and taking secure documents to his personal residence, and he is clogging up the legal system with frivolous arguments. it is unfortunate. i think people need to take a look at what this election means, and what the next four or five elections are going to be. it will be of nightmare >> jean will be our last call. new york, republican line.

caller: i have a question in a statement. why is biden allowing china to buy all of the land in florida. they plan to build a lab and study monkeys, and also land in north dakota. my statement is, i believe china is in biden's pocket. he has been caught between a rock and a hard place. he is very likely the antichrist. host: that was our last call for open forum. thank you to everyone who called in. up next is the economist. we also have john prato who will discuss the podcast checks and balance. it is a weekly spotlight on podcasts. stay with us. ♪ c-spanshop.org is our online store prayed we have products,

apparel, books, and home decor and necessities. there is something for every fan and every purchase helps to support our nonprofit operation. shop now, or any time at c-spanshop.org. >> listen to program on c-span radio. it just got easier. tell your spark speaker to play c-span rito and listen to washington journal at 7 p.m. eastern with congressional hearings and other public affairs event throughout the day. weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m., visit washington today for a fast-paced report of the day. listen to c-span anytime. just tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> live sunday on in-depth, from the texas book festival in austin, an author and historian, president and ceo of the lbj

foundation will be our guest. talking about presidential history. the books include the last republican and incomparable greats. join in the conversation with your pho calls, commes, texts and suites. li, this sunday at noon on in-depth on book tv, from c-span2. >> middle and high school students, each time to shine. you are invited to participate in this c-span documentary competition. in lig of the upcoming mutant -- election, feature yourself as a newly elected member of congress. we asked competitors to tell us about the top priorities, and why. make a five to six minute video that shows the importance of the issue from opposing and supporting perspectives. don't be afraid to take risks with your documentary. be pulled. among the $100,000 in cash

prizes, there is a $5,000 grand prize. videos must be submitted by january 20, 2023. visit our website at studentcam.org or competition rus with resources and the step up guide. >> sunday on q and a, journalists -- journalist elliot marsh with strength in numbers, public opinion polling going back to the 19th century and the accuracy of polls today. donald trump has a 30% chance in the 2006 election. not because national polls will be wrong because the race is close and key states. i do wonder if every person in the media understands the 30% as meaning these polls, if you have three elections, three of them,

they're going to be wrong one time. if your sample size is 18 elections, the of a pretty good chance that the polls are going to miss enough of the losing presidential candidate will end up winning. i wonder how the tone of the campaign would have been different and what the people would have thought happened. strength in numbers, sunday night at east eastern on c-span q and a. you can listen to q and a and all of our podcasts on our free app. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. this is our weekly spotlight on podcasts. today, we are talking about a podcast called checks and balances. it is from the economist, and we have injuries. he is the economist at washington bureau chief, and john trudeau. he is the u.s. editor.

welcome to the program. >> think you for having us. our viewers can call in, and talk to our guest on our line by party affiliation. democrats and republicans. independence, 8002. i want to start with you. tell us about checks and balances and what the focus is, and tell us about the format of the podcast. guest: it focuses on american politics. we started in 2020 at the beginning of that election. then, it went pretty well. we decided to carry on and each episode is about 40 minutes long, and we focus on one subject. from economist reports, all over the u.s., in the podcast. there is a bit of history, and often political history.

there is a long discussion with charlotte howard and with me. we try to keep things focused on policy, and elections as well. we've been busy looking for the midterm elections. host: i'm sure you have been busy. how do you pick that one topic to focus on? there's often a lot going on with american politics did --. caller: there is every week. we try to see where we've been reporting that will help decide what is going on, but we know, for example, in the midterms, we should do a good hard look at the economy, and we should do immigration, and some are more state specific, so with georgia, around the week, we have reporting. it is based on that. next week, we will just be

pouring through results, so that topic is decided for us. host: the economist is a london based magazine, covers global politics, but hoosier target audience. is there an interest in american politics globally? guest: as you know, there is a huge interest in american politics around the world. [indiscernible] something we do on the podcast is asked people to send photographs of whether they are listening to polygraphs -- podcasts, and as far as australia and new zealand and all over the u.s., the target audience is really one who cares but politics, and anyone who doesn't like american politics in the sense that we are probably not doing this interview podcast, and anyone

who likes politics with a context of historical or international. it has reporters all over the world. we try not to look at [indiscernible] which means often in the topics, like immigration, it is playing elsewhere in the world. we try to fix that. host: we are a few days away from the midterm elections. what are you watching, and what is the surprise if anything to you? guest: in some ways, the midterm election is shaping up to be incredibly normal. first-term presidents almost always lose a certain number of seats in congress, and that seems to be what is happening here. republicans look like they are in good position to take back the house. democrats have some hope in the senate, but that appears to be minimizing as well. what is extraordinary, i think about the midterms is the fact

that the republican party is still largely led by donald trump. you see it is possibly planning to announce another run for president, and a lot of people felt that after january, that would force a reckoning with the republican party, a sort of central question, and that has not happened. voters don't seem to be inclined to punish them for it. normal pocketbook issues like inflation, concerns about crime, those are dominant in the election cycle. in the way that democrats hoped they wouldn't be. but as far as races, i think the rematch between stacey abrams and brian kemp is one that has been particularly interesting because it epitomizes so much of the voting rights and it puts a suppression issue that people have discussed, and chief refused to concede her election, and georgia is probably on the cusp of record turnout.

i wonder she recants any of her claims or tries to make a similar one in this election cycle. and brian kemp, it he is obviously shifting from trump he and 2018 to being something of an antagonist because he refuses to overturn the election results. so i think that is an interesting microcosm for what is going on in america. i want to ask you about arizona because you are in arizona, and i understand reporting it is a very tight race for senate and governor. what are you seeing? guest: arizona is so interesting because at a state level, you see a clue been notorious -- a gubernatorial nominee from the last election, and the fact that she thinks it was stolen for the center of her campaign. it has continued in the election all the way through the general. but what is also interesting is that the nominees have put up for attorney general, and the secretary of state, in that

state, they were all elected, and they all believe the 2020 election was stolen, and they are in a position where donald trump is running at the top of the ticket, and there will be another tiebreak race again, and if the result goes in the opposite direction of what they want, where there is used to certify? that is what trump wants us to do, and 2020. no state actually did it, and what is interesting is folks here are openly campaigning on this attempt they have, and is basically being treated like normal republicans in a tight election year. it is a very good chance of winning governor given the public has been running around on the campaign, and arizona, i think it is going to be a state to watch. over the next fears, it has been coming back. host: you know the election is a

long cycle, and i wonder what the trend you have seen since early in the year, early in the summer, and going into the last week, what have you been seeing as far as trends go? >> i think there are interesting trends we are thinking about. one is an election issue we've been talking about. the other is the right of movement for americans, we sold in 2016 and 2020. hispanic shifted toward style trump and the republican party by a percentage points. in places like miami, they move even further. maybe 20 points. republicans had a reasonable chance in the run right now as well. they actually could win the county outright. they have a chance to split with a few house districts at the southern border, which are 70 or 80% hispanic. that is a long run movement. it should be concerning for the

democratic party. the other trend that i think we have seen that we talk a lot about on podcasts is the increase in an education and polarization in america. we are seeing it come a party of the college-educated, and republicans are increasingly attracting voters who don't have college degrees. that is a problem for the democrats who like to think of themselves as the working class party. it is a numerical problem for them because roughly one third of americans have college degrees, secant win elections on that alone. host: before we take calls, polls showed the economy as a top issue for voters. the federal reserve has announced an interest rate hike to try and tame inflation. what are voters telling you, and what are you hearing about their assessment for the biden administration and the fight against inflation? i think biden has borne a lot of

the inflation. if you are sympathetic, you could say that a lot of the spending began under donald trump. the supply-side issues caused by the russia and ukraine were have affected those economies so, if you look at across the pond, inflation is also fairly high. america is in some ways the victim of a global phenomenon. that doesn't matter as much to voters. voters give him the blame for inflation they are experiencing, which is eating into the paycheck and causing real wages to decline. it is the sort of psychological phenomenon that is really destructive to democrat chances, and it really hurts them in terms of their ability to stand out on economic management, which is probably above all of the midterm elections, shaping up to be decided, and it is really not a good outing for democrats. host: let's check in with one of

our callers. james and them -- james is in west point, mississippi. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on the air. caller: i wonder if journalists agreed that they've already touched on the hispanic shift of donald trump, and i know from the various reading i've done that donald trump bears some of the responsibility for the inflation that we are experiencing in america. it is not just something that biden is responsible for. based on statements made by donald trump, the former president, i should say. his attitude towards the border and hispanics in general, how do you explain the shift to donald trump in spite of his attitude

towards hispanic people. there shift in support in this potential race from 2024? i will hang up, but that is a fun almond on that somehow false information has been broadcast over the hispanic radio network and may be influences some shift towards donald trump. thank you, and i will hang up and listen to your response >> thank you. i don't think it is necessarily misinformation. i think there is a chance that an explanation like that can appear patronizing. hispanic voters are able to think for themselves. that is information for themselves. the answers are complicated. i think they have to do with an educational polarization. working-class americans are moving towards the republican party that includes hispanics.

i think there is also a perception among hispanics of tone deafness among democrats. even though they definitely don't like republican rhetoric. if you look at the polling that has been conducted. the majority say they are very socialist, they see the democratic party is aligned with that. they really hate the term latin act's. it took off two years ago among fringe circles, roughly 2% are self identified and prefer the term, and subdue it 40% say it is offensive. it's very easily -- easy, basically, to tarnish a brand with things like that, and i think there is also a sense among democrats that the primary issue for hispanic voters is illegal immigration. there is a chance that it pigeonholes voters too much, who have been complicate people and for the economy, and mattering a lot, i think there are those things that the democrats have

worked up against, not to mention hiring with the community, which i think tends to compel them a little bit more towards the republican side. >> case you're wondering about our second guest, he lost his connection. we are trying to get him back. in the meantime, we will continue with our guests from the economist. we have a tweet that came in for you about arizona. it is asking, how many mail-in ballots have been written arrested in arizona? do they still have drop boxes. are they monitored? guest: i don't know the exact number of early ballots that have been requested in arizona. i know they do have drop boxes read i know that there is a dispute about the exact monitoring regime that is being done to the point that they are

groups of people that have taken it upon themselves to watch that. a judge issued a restraining order saying they cannot do that for voter intimidation. what i think we've seen as a consequence of the last two years and the fears the republicans have for a massive scheme to steal elections as you see a things like this, which are edging the country closer to political violence. things like the election administration, and ballots. these are the things that are usually relatively boring and nonpartisan jobs. people didn't care about state elections, and we were overseeing the actual accounts of these votes, now they are incredibly consequential because republicans are reminded to say that they are stolen and rigged. that is a fairly destructive dynamic and we also think of

america as an exceptional democracy, and we should. but if we look at what is happening now, it is rational -- rather unexceptional. you see this occur in democracies in latin america and in africa as well. it is often a prelude to a deep constitutional crisis, and i would argue that in 2020, we experienced a significant constitutional crisis. what we are seeing, the importance of this midterms, 2022, they are setting the conditions for what could be an even bigger one in 2024. at the micro level, what we are seeing our armored men outside of drop boxes, but i fear it could get worse. host: another question via text in madison wisconsin. we ask you this. have you been able to find sources of money behind a campaign of kari lake and other republicans? any evidence of that?

guest: i cover the country as a whole, and not arizona politics in particular, but i haven't heard evidence of foreign money in elections. that would be illegal. the only contributions that are allowed are of u.s. citizens, but i think there is a risk maybe of implying that a campaign is not in some way organic. i think that whatever you think of her ideas, she is incredibly popular. they've caught on with nearly half of arizona voters. if you see her speak, as i have, she has a unique sort of magnetism among voters. few politicians have that. i think trump has that. i think kari lake has that. i think there's a bill being honed as a tv anchorwoman. but, i think i would be hesitant

to describe her success to some sort of plotting or outside action, and i think she has tapped into something deep, and although you may find a lot of that concerning, and i think it is reasonable to, i do not think that is necessarily illegitimate. host: let's talk to bill in northbrook illinois. independent. caller: good morning. i've a few economic questions i'd like you to work on. i think that there is been over 500,000 real full-time jobs that have gone away since may. my second question is, what, why , with a participation rate so low, i would have thought people would have stress because of inflation and would have gone

out and been working, and the third part of my question is, last month, the numbers were not so good, except for exports. in other words, things look like they are stalling out, but my question is, the drop in full-time jobs, the low participation rate, and were only doing ok because of exports and in other words, things don't look so bad. how come? guest: i am a politics journalist so you have to bear with my answers. as far as why the american economy is resilient, as you pointed out, i think there are few things in the country's favor. unlike a lot of europe, which has to import energy, america produces a lot of energy domestically, so people think gas prices have gone up, but

they are nothing compared to what's going on in europe. people are legitimately worried about how much or how hot their homes are going to be. that is one factor. the second is that the dollar remains a global reserve currency in times of economic stress, and money pours into the dollar. that helps keep the american economy strong. we see the pound, for example, the british pound declined to some of its lowest levels since liz truss was prime minister, and as far as your other question, the labor force persists patient rate has been low for a while. it has been declining. this is a decade-long phenomenon. that was interrupted by covid-19, but particularly, it's been declining among men in their prime years at 54. it has been counterbalanced by the purchase pastry for women, but there has been a secular trend of declined that has

puzzled a lot of economists and sociologists were looking at that. it is important, not working. as a psychological ramification that we haven't fully worked out yet. but i don't think it is a new phenomenon. it is the tail end of a 30 or 40 year cycle. i am going to forget the end, but i think the first one, it was answered particularly well, but the job report i have seen shows the economy continues to add jobs in some ways. a hot labor market is what the fed is currently trying to cool down, with its interest rates. is trying to do that in such a way that doesn't mask on employment, or recession, but right now, it is clear that the objection is to tamp down inflation. it will raise rates until inflation comes down. i think that will have consequences on the job court we are getting every month. host: ed is in houston texas. good morning. caller: i'm a democrat in

houston. i disagree with what you said about miami becoming republican. for a long time, they evacuate cuba and they went to miami. it was a big republican source of energy there. i just don't think it is something new. it is something that is actually as younger people have -- and cubans have become more democratic, in this sermon use of socialist and the republicans use it to label democrats. it's a very foolhardy and naive way of campaigning. i really think intelligent people like me, they have a degree, and so, you know i am a democrat. but that is my parents.

they were poorly educated, and from 36 great, they had a business, they had good profession, and my father was a mechanic welder. host: let's get a response here question. guest: cuban-americans have been more conservative as a subgroup than hispanics. i think that what we have seen is a shift beyond that. at a national level, among all hispanics, the shift in 2016 and 2020 was roughly eight percentage points, and in political terms, that is large. there was a very big shift in miami county, specifically between 2016 and 2020. that's not just cubans being the ordinary level of republican. that is also venezuela, colombian, and what we see in texas is largely a mexican

hispanic voters there. also a swing towards republicans. so, you are definitely right about this historic portion, but what we see is that this is now applying to a much broader set of hispanics, and before that, it was a worrying trend line for democrats. they certainly can say that socialism is a ill-founded factor, but they have to reconcile the fact that they proven to be fairly effective. host: trent in monroe, louisiana, republican. can morning. -- good morning. caller: i didn't go to college to ask a question. ok, listen. there was a guy that i always appreciated. an economist who always wrote another guy in america. and i'm looking at a situation now, and are you guys thinking

about the fact that republicans and democrats seem to be going from liberalism to socialism to marxism to something relatively new on the scene for a lot of mainstream americans which is trans-humanism. is getting into artificial intelligence, and it is moving towards a slightly hyper relativistic pluralistic maybe even touching a pantheism, and you look at the republican party, and i think maybe 15 to 20% of bush or mccain or romney, and then you have a 10% of from people who don't really care about religion, and then you have 30% of the republican party that is not idolatry or trump, but he is a transitional figure towards not making america great again, but making america feel

theological again. historically, it was viewed as the queen of the sciences, and i'm looking at the possibility of a world revolution. you look at what is going on in brazil right now. with evangelicals. >> let's get a response. guest: there is a lot in that risk -- question, and the trend are interesting. church attendance has declined. parties have sorted to an incredible degree of religiosity, and they were discussing trans-humanism, and i am less million with that. it is associated with many figures who are republican donors, but i don't fully grasp what it is or to what extent it is taking off. i do think you see religion decline overall.

in terms of american life, that has not had consequences for community availability, which i think is a huge problem in the country, but it also means that in the space of shared belief, that is something that religion has to create, and is also participating. i think in some ways, we are one generation behind the secularization transmute senior. 23 years ago, church attendance look like america today. he followed a similar trajectory, but that is out of scope for what i think about it right now. host: chester, pennsylvania is next. democrat line. leah. good morning. caller: i have a quick comment to make. everyone is blaming joe biden for the economy and inflation, but you see people complain about inflation yet when you look at the tv, you see baseball games and football games, people spend a hundred dollars 2000 dollars to go to a game, so it

couldn't be as bad as they say it is. they could just use that money to pay their food, and stop complain about inflation. thank you. guest: inflation is still a serious problem, even if people are spending money on things, and it is primarily the fed's job to tamp that down. i think it is a plausible case to be made that joe biden is somewhat unlucky and holding the bag for inflation. but that is how voters will see it. they will punish them for that. he really has to own it. his initial reaction to inflation was to say that it was temporary. that it would be a transient and echoed thing, that proved to be incorrect. with stewardship, it's going to decline as a result. >> your last podcast for checks and balance was titled, what is that stake in the midterm election. you asked a question of could the results of the midterm change the country.

what did you come to on that? guest: it is a complicate question. i think the trend of candidates who say the election was stolen, and place with the 2024 election, it is the most consequential outcome ultimately, but obviously we will have to see what happens there. in terms of legislation, we are looking at two very divergent outcomes. two different states of the world. if democrats keep the house and senate, that would be a huge victory for them, but it would also mean the continuation of a possibility of creating legislation, and probably revisiting social spending that biden was not able to. the likelier outcome is a different state in the world. there would be a very different legislative deal on mattern's of great substance, and i think we revert to some of the fights we

had in the obama days with john boehner as speaker and mitch mcconnell as majority leader in the senate. later on, there is a lot of heat around the debt ceiling, and around keeping the budget open, and those are basically the only opportunities for deals to happen, and threaten the full faith and credit of the united states, and we revert to that equilibrium, probably for the next two years. those are very different states of the world. host: let's talk to edward in maryland. hello. guest: good morning. i just want to say that i have been on the board of the southwest border for 45 days with the department, and what i've noticed is not only hispanics coming through, but over 100 different nations of people coming to the southwest border between the ports of entry.

i know everyone is saying it is mostly hispanics, but i saw individuals from cuba, romania, just a host of people coming through. illegally. if we are in a recession right now, why do we need more desperate people? we need to take care of our disabled veterans, and those of a socioeconomic disadvantage in the u.s.. host: all right. guest: if you look at the data that the border patrol collects, folks from all sorts of nations are being apprehended. what we see is that the numbers are really, truly high, compared to previous years. they are something close to the highs we are experiencing in the early 2000's. i think it is a concern. it is something that hasn't been

successfully managed, and i think the democratic reaction has been underwhelming, which is to try and minimize what it is, fairly significantly, but we see a line i hear a lot on the trail. from republicans, every state is a border state. voters in the states, places like wisconsin, places that don't join mexico, certainly, illegal immigration is a problem. there is a concern we are seeing reported. it is a worry that i think democrats have not managed to concoct a coherent response. that is probably a story of you will get other issues in the midterms as well. there is an -- is a coherent response to crime, but i think even inflation, in some cases, and the hope was that anger over

the january 6 attack would carry democrats through. i think what we are seeing in the last two weeks is that it was a miss placed hope. host: caller: good morning how are you guys doing this morning? i have two points to make. republicans always talk about -- you talked about abortion and women's rights, they want the government to take over. then they say they don't want large government. which one do you want? host: real quick response? guest: i often found every contradiction can be reversed. the reverse want government out of your personal life but involved in your economic decisions.

there are complicated ways that are reduced to a single slogan. host: thank you so much for being on the program. guest: thank you so much for letting me. host: a quick programming note, election day is thituesday. two former presidentsre hitting the campaign trail. former president obama will join president biden to campaign for john fetterman. josh shapiro who is running for governor wl have life coverage 4:30 p. right here on c-span. acss the state, donald trump will be in latrobe urging pport for republicans mass triano and member awes live is on c-span and it will

be on our free mobile video app and on c-span.org. that is it for today's washington journal. thank you for everyone who called in and joined us. we will be back again tomorrow. have a great day. ♪ ♪ >> c-span's "washington journal." every day we take your calls on the day's news and discuss policy issues that impact you. coming up sunday morning, which moderator of the swing vote project on his group with recent campaign 2022 swing voters. then inside elections talking

about this week's midterm elections and the key races to watch. plus, a discussion on the federal reserve and the biden administration's efforts to control inflation with npr's robin fears and. watch "washington journal" sunday morning on c-span or c-span now, our free mobile app. join discussion with your facebook comments, text messages, and tweets. >> with election day, two former pridents are hitting the campaign trail. former president barack obama joins president biden in philadelphia to campaign for democratic senate candidate john fetterman. and josh shapiro of a who is running for governor. we will have live coverage here on c-span. across the state former president donald trump will be in latrobe, urgi support for doug mastriano and sate candidate dr. mehmet oz. live coverage starts at seven --

7:00 p.m. eastern. can watcboth a fence on our free mobile video app, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. ♪ 5 tuesday, election day. starting 8:00 p.m., watch c-span's live election night coverage to see which party will control congress. here the results as they happen from around the country. see victory and concession speeches from the candidates on c-span, the c-span now free mobile app, and at c-span.org/campaign2022. ♪ 5 c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that is why charter has invested millions building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small.

charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. ♪ >> sunday on q&a, journalist elliot marrs shares his book " strength in numbers," which examines the history of public opinion polling and the accuracy of polls today. >> nate silver at the times is predicting donald trump has a 30% chance of a victory in the 2016 election, not because national polls are going to be wrong, but because the races close in key states. i wonder if every person in media had understood that 30% as meaning if you have three elections -- three -- they are going to be a wrong one time, right?

if your sample size is 18 elections you have a pretty good chance the polls are going to miss enough that the losing presidential candidate could end up winning. i wonder how the tone of the campaign would have been different and what the people wod have thought would happen. >> elliott mars, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you can -- you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> next, republican senator john thune and two challengers, democrat brian -- ryan beings and libertarian tamara lesnar, take part in the u.s. senate race, hosted by south dakota public broadcasting. this runs an hour. in the united states senate, first we welcome republican incumbent senator john thune. welcome. democratic candidate brian bengs. welcome. and