beat should be talking to do everything you can to help him. so i look forward to herschel winning. i want to look forward to a 50 50 senate. but i want to finish by thanking you again for what you do because you make a difference. if it wasn't for patriots like you, we wouldn't win these elections and we won't change this country. so thank you and have a great day. bye bye, bye bye. [applause] >> c-span's washington journal, every day we take your calls on the air, on the news of the day. also we will discuss policy issues that impact you. coming up, the rand corporation discusses the latest developments in russia's invasion of ukraine. and george mason university civil exchange fellow, andrew jason cohen, gives his tips for civil discourse at thanksgiving and all year long. watch washington journal live, on c-span or on c-span.com or on

c-span now are free live mobile video app. join the conversation with your phone calls, text meages and tweet. >> sunday on q&a, historian douglas wrinkly, author of silent spring revolution talked about the conservationist movement and the legislation approved under the leadership of presidents johnson, kennedy, and nixon. >> how grateful to that generations that we did get that endangered species act, the clean air act, we have the clean water act in 1972. this silent spring generation that i am writing about had a lot of people in it. but the presidents were responsive to the public, and that's what great presidents do.

in this regard, i think kennedy, johnson, and nixon were all of truly good if not gre environmental conservationists. >> the book, silent spring revolution, on q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your view of what's happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with today's debates with live floor proceedings, white house events, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all that your fingers. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for our c-span network and c-span radio. c-span now is now available in

the c-span -- c-span now is now available in the apple store and google play. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime anywhere. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, we are funded by these television companies and more including cox. >> homework can be hard, but sweating in an internet diner for work, it can be harder. that's why we are offering students affordable access to internet, so homework can just be homework. cox connect to compete. >> cox -- cox along with these television providers give you front row seat to democracy. >> the republican slim majority in the house and how that might impact their ability to govern, they also talk about the georgia runoff a -- runoff race, hosted

by the dole institute of politics, this is about one hour and five minutes. [applause] >> thank you, they didn't tell me that was coming so it's probably just as well, it seems more like a threat than a promise. in grateful and i want to thank all of you because i see a lot of familiar faces here. people who have seen every week because i've done this, and i'm grateful for that, i know there are a lot of viewers on youtube as well. and i am grateful for those folks as well. this has been fun for me, it's fun to be back in kansas, and it's fun to be back at ku which is an institution that i love, it's been great to be part of the dole institute. with the dull institute stands

for, is a smart and civil conversation about politics, and there is too little of that in our society today. i'm grateful to you for making that possible and being appreciative of that when it arrives. the midterm elections had big stakes in big consequences. today we will talk about the consequences because we have seen what happens -- olivia and john will give us a fill in on where we stand. but i think we can judge the consequences. what will this election do for the way that washington does or doesn't work. before that she was in the

houston chronicle and as a sign of how close we are, she spent three years in egypt, -- not at the same time. but we have that in common. john, and i wrote a book together in two thousand eight, it's called pennsylvania avenue, profiles and that blood tower. john and i were together for years. john went on to work for the new york times, and most recently covered the white house for cnn, he's agreed to be here today. give around of applause, thanks to all of them for being here. [applause] >> we went through a financial crisis after our book was published. >> we know now, republicans will

control the house, they haven't yet, -- is this a recipe for chaos, gridlock or areas of cooperation, let me start with you, when you think? >> i've got to be on its, i'm in the gridlock camp. i was checking with my colleagues, today that we are looking at maybe a 3-5 vote margin. which is very small. might not be following this very closely but kevin mccarthy had a -- within his caucus, and he was 30 some votes short of what he needs within his own conference. he has a ways to go, to get two to 18, you will need to

negotiate with people who are not yet on board backing you. one of the things that the freedom caucus, a group of 30 conservative members who often band together, and have been the bane of boehner and paul ryan's existence. they have talked about a rule to vacate the chair. maybe you can help me explain this, it would allow the opportunity for them to make a motion to vacate the chair. >> the fire bus rolled. >> it's not always in place, but this is one of the questions we will wait to see resolved by january, will he need to give in. >> he would wake up every day worried about his job security.

>> does he keep the government open our stay speaker? it would take a few people, people who are on the far extremes of his party, or people who were just elected and bidens districts. he has no room to maneuver. he has been on the hill too long and not optimistic about bipartisanship starting in january, but the next two months and the lame duck, i think you will see a lot. i don't know how many of you were following this closely, but the senate had a key procedural vote that would advance and codify the right to gay marriage. they will possibly do something to raise the debt ceiling, there is also possibilities for the electoral reform bill which we expect to be sworn in before --

to be passed in before the democratic majority. -- voted for the marriage codification act, maybe he would've done that or we don't know, if you were still in politics. >> john, you and i saw a version of this movie wants, 1994, the democratic president lost control of the house. he lost it badly in that election. he looked to be in terrible shape that he pivoted toward the center, he began to triangulate putting himself between democrats and republicans. he worked with newt gingrich, and beat newt gingrich had his own game and some extent -- to some extent. can joe biden do such a thing? >> it depends on how you defined left of center and how you define the center.

>> we have seen this more than once, we saw the same thing with barack obama, barack obama got hammered in 2010, lot -- a loss to the house and senate. i think it's important to remember that the clinton come back, started his recovery, wasn't a compromise with the republican majority, in fact, a fight in which he exposed the republican majority as being more aggressive than the american people wanted on issues like medicare, medicaid, and other levels of social spending. so i think, first of all. the fact that it was a good result for democrats, and unexpectedly good result for democrats, increases the pressure on biden to stand aside and not run, but also to change

course. i do thought -- i do think more so than in the past, the democratic party occupies issues that are of concern to americans. most of the things that joe biden did were popular. but there were atmospheric conditions -- inflation, which he did not contribute to inflation, i believe, but many things were out there which were not the function of ideological excess by the democrats. the question is, how do they play off of each other? on your point on bipartisanship, there will always be underlying conditions that allow for bipartisanship if you can get to them. olivia was describing what happened today with the codification of gay marriage.

there will be more votes for that next year as there are this year. but the question is can you get to it. if kevin mccarthy is the speaker of the house, would they put that on the floor? >> it would pass. >> exactly. the same thing happened after the 2012 election would barack obama was reelected. this was a time when many republicans. but the party needed to do -- many republicans believed that the party be needed to the hispanic center. -- it would've gotten to the house if john boehner had not been on the floor. >> it was basically the same group of people who basically threatened him. >> exactly, i think what we are

likely to see is some spectacle, you will see high-profile investigations where, hunter biden, joe biden, -- all of that stuff, that will have no legislative impact, but it will have it -- political impact one way or another, i don't know which way it will run. there are some issues that could be slightly less partisan. you could, for example, have a free-trade agreement with taiwan. that would be possible. because anti-china sentiment is pretty widespread at this moment within congress. small things like that. otherwise, it's about keeping government open, that poses serious dangers to the economy. and unpredictable political consequences because, there's

going to be a lot of pressure on the issue that lindsay just identified, the debt limit. the result was a debt crisis, the first-ever downgrade of u.s. government debt. that will be, i believe, resolved without any default. the way it was then. but i don't know how exactly you get there, it will be a harrowing journey. >> do you believe there'll be a government shutdown? >> government funding runs out on december 16, i think it is probably unlikely -- i do not -- they may be able to pass some sort of funding bill the -- before january fifth or something like that. will it go until they kick in in

march, or is in an omnibus spending bill. >> can i interject? one of the reasons why democrats did well in this election is that they did occupied the center in this respect, it was separate from policy, not about whether you were for higher minimum wage, which is popular. or if you work for the infrastructure bill, some of the very popular things that they did. it wasn't about the size of the american rescue plan, which is probably too big and contributed to reflection -- contributed to inflation. it is about -- one of the reasons we didn't do as well as we thought a lot of our candidates scare off independent voters. the supreme court court decision on roe v. wade contributed to that, if you defined the center

as called, wanting orderly government and not trying to raise the temperature but lower it, the democrats hold that center right now. that's going to be a challenge for republicans to try to pivot to that center. it is not really -- >> it's not an ideological center it's more of an attitudinal center. i think we saw that in kansas this year. i think that she managed to stand in that space in that state and it worked for her. >> i think it would be interesting to find out what audience members who voted here think, but talking to people who were working on the races, like the third district race, i feel like what i was hearing before the election was that -- i heard a story from someone, a

republican operative, who came to do a focus group. the first thing they asked, what do you know about amanda atkins. the first thing they all said was that they -- she used to run of four -- and the republican operative that was studying, they said that the race was over. i am familiar with how that played out, i think we are seeing a ripple effect, i'm not sure how to describe it, how many cycles now has it been since barack obama was in office, three? it still having an impact, i still tied to people who voted

here who voted republican, except for her. you can't make an exact parallel, but you could make the argument that republicans could look to kansas to understand what might be happening nationally. some people could view or have viewed brownback, kansas experiment as an -- some people came to view it that way. the implications like the blowback from voters are still being felt here. i think what may be we are seeing nationally, is like you said, and it striking to hear mitch mcconnell say that. and i've also heard his closest advisors saying publicly that they are afraid that the republican brand is scaring independence.

and middle row of the road center right -- and middle-of-the-road center-right voters. someone who made it very clear that he did not believe that the election of been stolen -- i think it's clear, maybe as in the journalism world wondered if they missed this argument about this stability of institutions may have resonated with voters. >> we had coffee, and we were talking earlier, there was a postelection strategy, that found that 50% of voters said that the top two issues were economic related, but 56% said that their top two issues were abortion or democracy.

i think that there was an idea that those issues had faded and that the pocketbook would prevail but not so much. joe biden and chuck schumer are still leaders, but mitch mcconnell is the republican leader but he's been challenged by rick scott. if kevin mccarthy he comes house speaker and he's been challenged by the freedom caucus is he in charge? and what about nancy pelosi. tell me who's in charge in washington. >> first of all, mitch mcconnell cannot be compared to kevin mccarthy in terms of strength and ability to function within his caucus, he has been secure within his caucus, and he has been very effective from a republican point of view. kevin mccarthy is somebody who

has tried to ride the waves up and down and has not -- his progress in his career has not been the result of his strength or his own character attributes. it has been him trying to be as ingratiating as he can beat with a large number of people. that makes him very vulnerable. he has very little ability to tell people know. to say, jim jordan, or andy biggs, or paul gosar, no, don't say that, don't do that because they can come at him. that's the motion to vacate that we were just talking about. that is a powerful weapon. i think nancy pelosi will be gone. she has said that she is getting

questions from people within her caucus about if she can stick around, i don't believe, i guess it's possible she could stick around, but she won't be speaker because the democrats won't control the house, that's a pretty big come down. she is 82 years old and she's had a successful run, i can't imagine her not saying thank you, i'm done, take it over. >> i would say we are in such a close margin, and we look at the history of how much turnover there is in any congress, usually there is a couple of indictments and deaths, in all seriousness, people leave to run for senate. there is a chance -- it may have been more of a chance -- >> you are saying if democrats are within a couple of seats,

she might say to her self may be all stick around a little while and see if somebody disappears and we get the majority back. >> i think that's a fun scenario that we like to think about as journalists. i'm just looking at historical possibilities here, but i do think that there is an interesting possibility on the votes that they will take on the floor, you are political junkies, they be want to watch c-span on the day they vote for speaker. they keep going until -- if somebody is not strong enough, it could be skill lease, it could be one of the moderates that was just reelected. a representative who was from a district who voted for biden, said that he could run.

democrats could although for liz cheney. i'm just saying it could be an interesting time for people who like to watch these sorts of things. but the possibility that nancy pelosi moves on and then the question begins, is there a caretaker government -- caretaker leadership, from cliburn, do they move aside for the younger generation. such as picking jeffries from new york and other people who are close to him -- hakeem jeffries from new york and other people are close to him. >> i believe that nancy pelosi will announce that she is leaving her seat. i think there is too much in patients for cliburn or steny, both of whom are older. in terms of the other

80-year-old, joe biden, i think he will run for reelection. >> adam schiff has also run a campaign for speaker. i think he's considered less of the favorite now. >> he was featured in a prominent impeachment. >> there could be some maneuvering and shuffling around. >> let's talk briefly about things that may or may not happen in terms of policy of substance. let me throw one out? -- let me throw one out at you. it was very striking last night listening to donald trump, there was not a word in there that said that they would stand with ukraine. you had people from the american first right, and the progressive left, who think, maybe we don't need to help ukrainians what do you each think? >> i know the white house is

requesting there to be a significant chunk of ukrainian aid added to whatever funding bill goes through -- so we are likely to -- >> you mean the -- >> something that would pass if democrats held both chambers. they may try to push through another period before they have to go back to kevin mccarthy's house and push for more funding. kevin mccarthy has said publicly that he doesn't want to give a blank check to ukraine, and that comes from a strong strain within the republican base, use it with marjorie taylor green, and you see it at eric's shoots rallies. why are we spending tens of billions of dollars on ukraine when we have these problems at home.

there is also an interesting, among some in the base, admiration for putin. there is some admiration of the ukrainian president. i think that j.d. vance called him a saga at some point. there are traditional neocons versus the trump side isolationists of the party. what we will see going forward is a growing struggle to get ukraine aid past. and if it does get passed, kevin mccarthy might turn democratic votes for the implication of his leadership. we have also been spending a lot of money to prop up the ukrainian government budget so that they can pay their soldiers and continue to have a government.

even for those who have voted for aid in the past, it might be difficult to have them fund government rebuilding or the ukrainian government itself. we may be able to provide lethal aid, but not humanitarian aid. one day it may become difficult to pass it at all, that has implications internationally. >> i think this was a good election for president zelenskyy. i think the fact that the democrats controlled the senate is significant although mitch mcconnell has been a strong supporter of aid for ukraine. i think this is not an issue where ultimately the republican party is going to try and block aid. i think it's going to be -- there will be run maneuvering,

scrutiny,, but i think a significant chunk of the admiration for putin, and the sympathy for the russian side is connected to trump. and i think some of it, not all of it, is significant chunk of it, the weaker the prospects are for ukraine aid. i think ultimately they will get with the administration wants to pass. >> we've shown that we've gone past expectations with what we've already given them. when we have more of these videos alike those from caps on -- kherson. i remember in the early days of the conflict -- i think it will be easier to pass the stronger that ukraine shows that it is fighting.

trump has positioned himself as a fighter for traditional christian nationalism. he's played that card brilliantly. that's what it is. that's the part that trump may have magnified but it's not about truck, it's about strength and putting down dissent, it is about preserving tradition and a significant number of republican voters and influential commentators who identify with that, especially it is related to january 6. there was a lot of christian iconography among the people who were storming the capital. again, that belief of people that we are losing the country that we grew up in, the we are losing the traditional values that we grew up with. it leads to desire for someone

strong to stop change. putin manifests some of those qualities, and that has generated some sympathy. but i don't think, it has become so deeply partisan eyes -- partisan eyes -- partisanized, that i don't think it's where it will lay down their marker. >> this gets at, for me what you were talking about, about the democrats and the republicans and center voters, because one of the things that -- the puzzle that republicans face right now, there base voters were very excited and revved up for the election. when you look at the data as far as i see it, the voter survey

that we use to analyze the election, the republic -- democrats -- republicans turned out more voters than democrats this election. i spoken to voters who believe that there way of life or their tradition or their idea of america is being threatened, and those voters would walk over broken glass to vote against stacey abrams or whoever. vote against biden. they turned out this election. and that's what republicans need, they need the base voters to show up, it helped in places like north carolina, but at the same time in order to be appealing to the base voters, some of the candidates did some things that scared off the middle. you have people like mitch mcconnell and his allies, and people in the more establishment republican party saying, wait a

minute, we need to appeal to the middle and not scare these voters. how do we fix our brand? but then people like rick scott, and people like josh howley, i keep hearing from them, the problem is mitch mcconnell and the establishment doesn't understand or like there base voters. they cannot communicate with them and they don't understand them. >> you are describing a situation in both houses of congress where there is now an almost open fight between mitch mcconnell mark -- bob dole, and traditional republicans, and that's reflected by the split with the freedom caucus. >> very much so, i think that i'm not entirely sure that either side is wrong. i don't think that mitch mcconnell knows how to appeal to the base voters. and i don't think that enough of

the republicans are able to just up the base and lose independence. what we are hearing from this election and, i was definitely surprised about the outcome of the election because i was talking to people who use internal polling and other data and surveys, independent voters or swing voters who may be undecided in the final weeks of the election -- they tend to break for the party out of power especially in an environment like this. that's the traditional expectation. that's not what happen this time. the question now, why did the independent voters, instead, especially in senate races in key state vote in huge numbers for democrats? it's in the double digits in pennsylvania, arizona and places

like that. >> the break at the end was more toward the republicans rather than the party in power. >> some of it was the -- they are interpreting it as candidates who don't need to talk to the middle. as they go forward, they need to understand how to bring those base voters and trump voters along, but how can they do that and appear to -- appeal to the general public, they need to figure that out. >> we need to talk about how this effects 2024, but before we go there, can we talk about what on the democratic side can democrats do with a president and 50 votes in the senate. importantly, what can they do differently if they have 51

votes in the senate, which is to say if warnock wins the runoff in georgia, what's the difference between having 50 and 51 votes in the senate? >> the obvious difference is eliminating a sliver of the problems that they had in 2021, which is any single democratic senator could hold up wit joe biden and his or her colleagues wanted to do. now there would be two votes. you have cinema and joe manchin -- sinema and joe manchin, it makes it a little bit easier you have a little more breathing room. when you get to the committee structure and you have a 50-50 senate, you have a even balance in committees where you need to move partisan objectives like

judges -- or ambassadors, or cabinet members moved to the floor. it might sit -- it makes it more wheeled lee for the party in power to move things along. >> even a one seat majority would make it easier to move things along. so people who think it doesn't matter who wins in georgia should think twice? >> i think they will be able to pass more, like judges, that kind of thing. we will see the senate become a nomination, confirmation taskfor ce. it will be helpful for the speed and volume -- especially the executive branch but the judges i imagine they will get a record number in there. >> you've talked about gridlock

and not being able to pass a lot of legislation, that is true but would -- what would fill that void is a brisk pace of traditional nominations. >> beyond that, taxes, spending, climate change? >> i think we will see china related bills, there is bipartisan feeling on that. we could see more consumer regulations perhaps. and beyond the lame duck, big next year, maybe some stuff on big tech regulation, privacy something like that. there is division within the parties about big tech, there are big bills on privacy, regulation, things like that. >> let's talk about 2024, donald

trump didn't wait even a week to announce that he is running for president despite many in his party not wanting him to. ron desantis had a fabulous night. how has this midterm effected 2024 calibrations? >> i think it has helped to stabilize biden's position within the party, because had he -- had democrats lost in a decisive way and house elections, and or lost control of the senate, there would be people that would associate defeat with the fact that joe biden is 80 years old. i don't think those things would be related but i think people will make that association and put pressure on him. i think it makes it more likely that he will run. and trump's announcement makes a more likely that he will run. part of joe biden's calling card and what he has identified as a

purpose for him is to keep donald trump from being president again. i think he would be regarded as the favorite. of all in the country, he is most likely to be the next president. after that, the real question will be, donald trump is the most powerful single figure within the party, but he is a much less dominant figure than he was before. can he convert -- does he stay in the race for president? many things could happen, health events, legal troubles, i thought it was notable that ivanka put out a mincing she would not be involved this time. i don't -- announcing she would not be involved at this time. i don't think his family wants him to run. he would command a significant chunk of the electorate.

and given republican rules where you don't need 50% of the votes to get the delegates, he would move on with that. other than that, ron desantis is the strongest republican at the moment. but that's only at the moment, you have the potential for many other republican figures to get in the race. i think when we talk about the pattern of what we've seen before, most presidents win reelection. we have had three recent exceptions, george h w bust, -- george h w bush, carter and trump.

bill clinton, playing off the newt gingrich congress, had a recovery fueled by economic progress. he won reelection. and barack obama, was able to -- of all those races, i think that was the most stunning for republicans. one of the things that led to the rise of trump, and they were -- they believed that romney would be able to beat obama when that didn't happen there was a lot of unrest within the party. i think joe biden is in a reasonably strong position, depending on, do we have a recession next year, how long is the recession, how deep is the recession? we would rather have it in the first half of 2023 if you are running for election in 2024 or later. of joe biden does not run, then i think that the democratic race

is wide open. no one would step aside for kamala harris. she has not wowed to party as vice president. she did not while the party in her campaign in 2020 -- wow the party and her campaign in 2020. buttigieg, the transportation secretary, -- gretchen whitmer is getting a lot of attention as a result of her win. she put out a statement today saying she would not run for a test run for president. she put on a different statement than joe biden. >> lindsay, handicap it as you see it. >> i meant to say this about the senate race in georgia, and i will segue into that, this end

race in georgia, one of the reasons is important -- it is important is because the term is six years. the next pickup opportunities are texas and florida. it is much more likely that they would lose majority next time around. people like joe manchin are up. that's a reason why georgia matters if you're from either party. i cover congress, and every senator thinks their future president. i think it's interesting that tom cotton came out before the election saying he wasn't going to run. >> why did he say that? >> i think he wants to be secretary of defense, that's my

guess, or something like that. you guys new josh hawley, mike pompeo, he might run. in the absence of trump, or if trump is running -- >> the crucial point is, if you are donald trump, you have probably concluded that you are not going to clear the field. if somebody gets into challenge donald trump, maybe 10 people do it. they divide the anti-trump vote. >> like desantis and trump, i think trump would lose today in iowa or wherever,, nationally but it will probably not be head-to-head. if it is pence and hogan and hawley and pompeo, if it is -- >> close.

>> throw them on there. abbott. kemp won by eight points in georgia and he is a hot commodity now among republicans. >> just list the people in florida who aren't interested in being president. that would be harder. >> we talk about the republican side mostly. i think the biggest issue republicans will have is they can probably stop trump if they could all just agree for nine out of the 10 to stay out of it, but it never happens.

>> they stayed in the race covering up that boat and he got himself nominated. there is no question donald trump will be in a weaker position in 2024 than he was in 2016. but he's still got a lot of -- a big chunk of people who are loyal to him. >> this remind me of the perennial question, almost a cliche in newsrooms across the country, especially in washington, is the fever broken on the trump -- you know, the trump fever? the answer is always no. i think we are all trying to analyze this election. if you talk to republicans -- when i was in the senate a couple days ago talking to

republicans, you endorsed trump in the primary, it's definitely shifted. jerry moran was like, i don't know, i think there's a lot of good candidates out there. people like todd young. the head of our party now from wyoming, she is conservative. you are hearing, let's see who rises to the top. and then outright people saying, he cost us three elections. i definitely think inside the beltway you are hearing that, but then you've also got -- and even rick scott was asked about this today, but he would not even endorse trump, who endorsed him for leader. i think there is definitely not an anointment that will happen, but at the same time both republicans and democrats have to be cautious of this idea that it is over, that the trump magic is gone. also i think democrats need to

be -- i think they need to be cautious about interpreting the election in their favor rather than a vote that was against something else. if you look at the data, a lot of these independent voters are angry at both parties, but were picking a lesser evil in their mind. i think the democrats have to -- if i were them, i would not take it as some resounding victory that they will dominate in politics for decades to come and that trump is dead and -- i remember in 2016 the democrats could not wait to run against trump. i'm not ready to say that trump can't somehow win if nominated. we don't know what is happening in the next four, or two years. >> or one year. >> i'm a little bit like, let's wait and see on that. >> i want to open up to your

questions. we have two microphones. if you raise your hand, i will call on you. if you have a question, stand up so we can see and hear you better. a question is a question and has a question mark at the end of it. who wants to start? right here. please stand up. thank you. >> you were talking about the base red voter. what is the average age of that? what is the republican view on reaching the younger generation? >> that is a good question that i don't know the answer to, but i believe the younger voters in this cycle showed up more for democrats, especially in places like michigan or where abortion was on the ballot in some way. sorry, i don't have the answer to that. if you can reach out after i

could try and get you an answer. >> well, i think the median republican voter is older, and that is why you get a lot of emotion around the idea that the country is changing, the country i grew up in is changing. young voters broke pretty strongly for democrats. there was not a surge of turnout for young people. one of the reasons why older people continue to have a disproportionate impact on our politics is that they vote more often than young people. so turnout in older counties in this election was in relative terms better than turnout in younger counties, but the composition of the turnout was favorable to democrats. i think republicans are counting on a condrey -- a cadre of socially conservative younger people. obviously every generation is

not monolithic. even if a majority is leaning in one direction, you've got a significant chunk going in the other direction. i think they are trying to capitalize on some of the economic insecurities that some of those people feel. that plays into the issue of immigration, are people coming into take my jobs? they are generally appealing to voters under 30. they are appealing to those who are not graduated from college. they might be making less money in many cases. you may be less economically secure than college graduates. some of that has to do with younger hispanic and african-american men who are in that blue color category who are

responding to some of the economic concerns that republican raised, inflation and that sort of thing. in the democrats' favor right now is unemployment is low, but that may go up next year if we have a recession. >> intellect -- in the last few elections pulling for republicans generally is in the 50 to 64 range. that has been their sweet spot. they will is some evidence that was true in this election as well. >> but the future of polling. >> that is a good question. >> polling has gotten a lot more difficult and expensive to do. it used to be a much simpler proposition where posters could use a computer and generate random numbers and call it random and be confident with the

scientific methods they used that they were getting a random sample of the population with the result that would be generalizable to others. as land lives -- as land lines declined, you can't do random digit dialing of cell phones as you could with land lines. people don't answer their phones. so how do you reach enough people so that you are not biasing your poll in favor of the oddball people who answer phones? so they supplement the ways of contacting people online, by text, and other ways. i think that for all the difficulty associated with pulling, and it is more expensive, and that is why media polls don't tend to be as accurate as some of the polls campaigns take, because they

invest money to do everything they can to have the best information. the punditry failed more than the polling failed in this election. there was a lot of pretty close to the money polling in some of these contested senate races. even in the national assessments of where voters stood, the so-called generic ballot questions would ask in a national way, would you rather vote for the republican in your district or the democrat? those numbers were not all that far off the mark. what happened was people like me in the punditry and analysis business take those numbers and then overlay onto it what our life experience has been in covering races. almost without exception, presidents have gotten beaten pretty badly in the first midterm election.

that is an overarching expectation. the belief that in difficult election years the close races tend to fall in the same direction. people were laboring that. the belief that polling in 2016 undercounted republican voters for some of the same reasons we were talking about a moment ago. republican voters tend to be more distrustful of the system, of elites, of the organizations that conduct polls, so they are less likely to answer those polls. the posters refer to the social trust problem. people with lower levels of social trust, trusting that the person at the other end of the phone is who they say they are, trusting that institutions are trying to get it right, those people have stayed away from polls and are somewhat undercounted in those elections.

those errors don't always go in one direction. this time i think the biggest errors were of analysis. >> i will plug our wall street journal poll. it is more expensive if you do it right. we poll in multimodal fashion. we poll some people in land lines, some people in cell phones and some people text to web, which means you get a text and it asks you to go online and respond to the survey. that way we only poll among registered voters, people who have a history of voting. and i would add that in the last survey before the election the national generic house vote among likely voters said that republicans would win the national vote by 4%. that is pretty much exactly what they lead by, in the popular vote. not each district, but in the aggregate number of houseboats.

we got that downright. does not tell you what will happen in shreve david's district or if the poll -- if the polls in colorado are correct. i think it is more a lack of imagination. >> some of the people making analytical errors were not just people like us who talk and write about politics, but even some of the posters who were pulling accurately -- polling accurately were looking at the numbers and overlaying their own experience. one of the leading democratic pollsters in senate races ws -- was at my house for dinner 10 days before the election and he was like, it's going to be really bad. i'm like, what about this and this race? oh, it is really close. this guy had the belief that they were all going to fall the other way, and they didn't.

he said, i hope i'm wrong, but i'm feeling very bad and i will be happy if i'm wrong. on election night he texted me and said, i'm happy to tell you i was wrong. [laughter] >> a question there. >> i wanted to ask about the prospect of the january 6 committee. some people are saying that it is possible to transfer it to some of this edit subcommittees -- some of the senate subcommittees. do democrats need to do it? on one hand and the investigation is pretty much done, on the other it would be useful to have the committee for political purposes. what is your view? >> the house committee as it exists exists through house resolution that was passed. i will not continue under kevin mccarthy in that form. they will put out a report. i'm not sure how soon. within the next couple months.

i don't think they are planning to hold more hearings, but i could change. they have the lame-duck period to finish up their work. it is possible some senate committees, the judiciary did a bit of work and the rules committee came out in 2021. i don't know how much appetite there is to keep going. i have not heard that there is a big push for that, but you could have better sources than me, for all i know. i think the january 6 committee as we know it will not happen. i think mccarthy might create his own version of it in which he gets to investigate nancy pelosi or whoever he blames for that event. something about the narrow majority kevin mccarthy is dealing with, yes there were the

investigations but because of how narrow the majority is and how many of his members will be coming from districts that biden won, i would be surprised if he would have the number of votes needed for impeachment. i never liked to predict things. there was this expectation on the hill where i work that we would be covering our third impeachment if they won the house by a significant margin. it's not just the freedom caucus and people who would love to impeach biden who will be in kevin mccarthy's hair and pushing him, but also the people that have to get reelected in districts that voted for biden. it would make it harder for him to find the votes. he said he does not want to do impeachment, but there are members of his caucus that want it. pelosi started out saying she would not support impeachment and then did. there was this feeling on the hill among the press corp that

we are headed for another biden impeachment. i don't think we will. >> i can't think of what the grounds for impeachment will be. >> pelosi was against impeachment when there were not specific grounds for impeachment. when they did exist, she did move. they existed twice. i don't believe any legitimate foundation exists for the impeachment of biden. and i think there will not be the votes to impeach biden. i don't expect that to happen. on the other hand, i would not expect the senate to take up the work of a january 6 committee in any comparable way. democrats look at the january 6 committee as having done an effective job, but i think they will be sensitive to this notion of looking backward rather than forward.

everyone remembers how dragged out the benghazi investigations were on the republican side. i don't think they want to look like they are doing the same thing. >> i think we have time for one last question. >> for the past few years it felt like everything was getting more divided. this midterm election it felt more like a race back to the middle. do you think this was the first sign of the tempter cooling down in the room, or was this caused by other factors? >> what i would say is i don't think it was a race to the middle on the republican side. i think it was a race to the middle on the voters side. they have wanted to turn the temperature down. that is why mcconnell said our guys frightened some people. the other thing we can't forget is that for all the talk about stop the steal and election denial, these trump candidates

who lost conceded their elections. maybe something will happen in the next few weeks. is there going to be turmoil in arizona with kari lake? that is the dog that did not bark. we did not have violence at polling places. we did have these creepy guys with their faces covered with guns sitting there and watching people vote. it was limited and scope and did not go beyond that. i think anyone who cares about democracy has to be encouraged by the fact that these candidates said i tried my best and i lost. that is the most positive outcome democracy i see. -- for democracy i see. >> if you look at the republican candidates that were election deniers barrel defeated, and the governors that have to certify

election results were defeated, that has big implications for the next cycle and next couple cycles. also i mentioned this earlier, there is a bipartisan bill, the electoral count act, which is to reform -- i don't know, a 180 year old law. the law that requires congress to meet on january 6 and formally count the electoral votes. that is what they were doing in a joint session on the day there was a riot on the hill. usually it is just a routine almost symbolic thing that they do, but trump introduced this doubt that the vice president had some ability to overturn that result, that congress could overturn the results.

while pence and other lawyers disagreed, it was something that i think created a lot of concern on the hill. i think what we will see in the next few weeks is a very bipartisan fix for that. it includes not just making it super clear that the vice president is only in a symbolic role doing that, but it creates -- there are certain measures put in place to prevent something like a rogue governor from sending a fake slate of electors. it is the first time in a couple centuries that we tried to address this. congress, i'm always worried about unforeseen consequences in trying to overhaul how we count the electoral votes for president. there was a real bipartisan effort with susan collins, joe

manchin and people like that. i think it will pass in the next few weeks. i think there are lawmakers -- mcconnell supports that bill as well. i think we will see some measures put into federal law to try and secure our democratic institutions -- i reported on january 6 and the capitol is where my parents met. my dad used to work on the hill. the hill is a very special place to me. i worked in egypt and covered unrest there. it was amazing to me. i texted an egyptian friend of mine the next day, i can't believe it. it was an interesting -- i think

a lot of people on the hill were shaken by it. it's not only the parents, because there is a difficulty in talking on the republican side, but don't miss the fact that there will be significant legislation passed in the coming weeks that tries to tackle some of the problems exposed by that and how close we came -- really within feet and inches if you know the hill, these rioters getting to mike pence, getting to the senate while there were still people inside, also on the house side. it was a matter of moments and inches. >> a close call. >> thanks for creating the chance to end this series on an optimistic note. i think this election marks a step back from the dangerous stuff. we can bank that for now and hope for more of the same. this is great. please help me thank them.

[laughter] i want to thank you all for being here. it is nice to see people who care about the stuff we care about. i appreciate that. also, we're not quite done here yet. there is a postelection conference that is quite good. i participated in the past. december 6 is the kansas one. december 7 and 8 is a national look back at the election. keep an eye out for that. it will be fun. i hope all of you can tune in and join us. thank you all again. appreciate it very much. >> c-span's washington journal. everyday we are taking your calls live on the air on the news of the day and we will discuss policy issues that impact you. coming up sunday morning, someone from the rand

corporation discusses the latest develop its in russia's invasion of ukraine and tensions over a missile strike in poland. and a civil exchange fellow gives his tips for civil discourse at thanksgiving and all year long. watch washington journal, live at 7:00 eastern sunday morning on c-span or on c-span now, our free mobile app. join the discussion with your facebook comments, text messages and tweets. ♪ >> sunday on q&a, a historian, author of "silent spring revolution" talks about the conservationist movement and the landmark legislation approved under the leadership of presidents kennedy, johnson and nixon. >> i am grateful to that generation that we did get an environmental protection agency, nixon did sign a vigorous clean

air act in 1970 that has made a difference. we had a clean water act in 1972. so this silent spring generation that i'm writing about how a lot of people, the three presidents were responsive to the public, and that is what great presidents do. in this regard i think knedy, johnson and nixon all were truly good if not great environmental presidents. >> douglas brinkley with his book "silent spring revolution" sunday night at eight a clock eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our free podcasts on our free c-span now amp. -- now app. ♪ >> middle and high school students, it's your time to shine. you are invited to participate in this year's c-span studentcam, edition. -- competition.

we ask competitors, what is your top priority and why? make a five to six minute video that shows your issues from supporting and disapproving perspectives. don't afraid to take risks with your documentary. be bold. among the $100,000 in cash prizes is a grand prize. videos must be cemented by january 20, -- b submitted -- be submitted by january 20, 2023. visit c-span org -- c-span.org for a guide. live sunday,ecember 4, on in-depth, the chief new york times white house correspondent and theew yorker staff writer will be our guests to talk about russia, the trump administration, and u.s. foreign policy. the husband-and-wife tm have written three books together.

and "the divider: trump in the white house 2017-2021." join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages and twee. in-depth with peter baker and san glasser at noon eastern sunday december 4 on book ton c-span2. ♪ 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 communitiesig and small. charter is connecting us. announcer: charter medications supports c-span -- communications supports c-span as a public service along with these other