host: good morning and welcome to "washington journal." it is sunday, january 21. our question this morning, we are going to start off by posing it to women only. women, listen up. we would like to hear from you. the question is, what are your thoughts on abortion? how important is the issue of abortion to you? you decide -- as you decide who to support in 2024. men, we will hear from you later. if you are a democratic woman, call us at (202) 748-8000. republican women, (202) 748-8001 . independent women, (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text message at (202) 748-8003.

please include your name and where you live. you can find us on facebook.com/c-span and on @cspanwj. we are posing the question on abortion this morning as the topic heats up on the campaign trail. we know that the anniversary of the roe v. wade decision is next week, as well as new hampshire's primary, which is the first primary in the nation. let's start off by looking at the cnn article, the headline, biden and harris to make reproductive rights push in first joint 2024 campaign event. a little bit from the article. it says president joe biden and vice president kamala harris are set to make their first joint campaign appearance of 2024 next week as they look to lay out how

abortion rights are at stake in november's election. biden and harris, along with first lady jill biden and second gentleman doug emhoff will speak at an event in northern virginia on tuesday, the same day as the new hampshire primaries. let's hear now from vice president kamala harris. she highlighted abortion access while delivering a speech in south carolina last week. [video clip] vp harris: today, in states across our nation, extremists propose and pass laws to attack a woman's freedom to make decisions about her own body. laws that would even make no exception for rape and incest. and, let us all agree, one does not have to abandon their faith and deeply held beliefs to agree. the government should not be telling her what to do with her

body. [applause] host: again, that was vice president kamala harris speaking on abortion access last week in south carolina. we are going to get to your calls soon. we want to give you the numbers once again. again, right now, we want to speak to women only. men, we will bring you into the conversation later. democratic women, (202) 748-8000 . republican women, (202) 748-8001 . independent women, (202) 748-8002. so, again, abortion is our question. how important is the issue as you decide who to support in 2024? let's show a map compiled from the new york times. it is tracking abortion bans across the country. the deep red are states where full bans are on -- on abortion

are in place. the lighter the shade, the more leeway, up to 15 to 18 weeks, which is a couple of the states, utah, arizona and florida. then, the other shades have asked week bans, georgia and south carolina. 12 week bans, nebraska and north carolina. the states with deep shade right have full abortion bans. let's look at the gop side. i want to bring up an article in the washington examiner. it talks about how this week, the house led by republicans passed two antiabortion laws. it says they passed two antiabortion measures thursday ahead of the 51st annual march for life in washington, which was held on friday. speaking on the march for life,

house speaker mike johnson did speak during that event. it was held on friday in washington, d.c. he said that he himself was an unplanned pregnancy and urged attendees to feel encouraged that the u.s. can develop a stronger culture of life. let's watch. [video clip] >> i am myself a product of an unplanned pregnancy. in january 1972 on a one year before roe v. wade, my parents who were just teenagers at the time, chose life. i am very profoundly grateful that they did. what we have to do right now and i believe the reason all of you are here is we understand we have to build a culture that encourages and assists more people to make that same decision. this is a critical time to help all moms who are facing unplanned pregnancies, to work with foster children and help families who are adopting. to volunteer and assist our

vital pregnancy resource centers and our maternity homes and reach out a renewed hand of compassion and to speak the truth in love. that is what we do. all of us can play a role in that important work. this is a pivotal time to promote quality health care for women and their unborn children. this week in congress, you will be encouraged to know the house passed the pregnant students rights act -- that is right. [applause] because being pregnant while finishing your degree can be really difficult. women should not be presented with a false choice of being a mom or being a student. that is right. [applause] we also passed the supporting pregnant and parenting women and families act. that is a big one, too. right now, you should know the biden administration is proposing a regulation to restrict funds to pregnancy resource centers. [crowd booing] >> we know those are the centers

that states rely on to assist expecting moms and dads. that action would undercut that important work, the material support that expecting and first-time time mothers get from these centers. our bill would prevent that ledge -- that from coming into effect and ensure the states can utilize these centers to help people in need. who could be opposed to that? we are passing these bills we are marching today because it takes a lot of work to convince people every unborn child has a value that is too profound and precious to ignore. host: again, that was house speaker mike speaking at friday's art for life in washington -- fridays march for life in washington, d.c. let's go to the phone lines. we are speaking to women only. men, we will bring you into the conversation later. we want to hear from you, how important is abortion as you consider who to support in 2024? democratic women, (202) 748-8000 . republican women, (202) 748-8001

. if you are a woman who identifies as an independent, we want you to call us at (202) 748-8002. let's start with michelle in upper marlboro, maryland, independent line. go ahead, michelle. caller: good morning, tia. i am up. i am on my way to church. i am a christian. this issue is something that does not along in the political sphere, i believe. i am reading from tim alberta, the king, the power and the glory. it talks about how it was brought into politics just to raise money for the church. do i think abortion is abused? yes, but it is also a gutwrenching decision for women. i have never had an abortion, thankfully, but it is not an easy decision for women to make. i do not believe it belongs in

politics. for me, i will not vote for someone who wants to take that right away from women. i believe that it is a decision for a woman to make between her and her god. i believe the babies go back to heaven. the bible, i believe, tells us that aborted babies go right back to heaven. i hate abortion. i do think women abuse them -- some women abuse it. but, i think that it is a right that a woman should have. we will just have to deal with the consequences if it is not an easy decision. sometimes, having an abortion can ruin a woman's psyche. it just does not belong in the hands of politicians, male politicians that want to control women. host: all right, michelle, thank you for your call this morning. let's go to annette on the republican mine from middletown,

ohio. caller: hi, good morning. it is not an easy call for me to make. first time i have spoken up against this. i was an unwanted pregnancy, as well. it is extremely upsetting to me that ohio's issue one went through. there are absolutely zero protections for the fetus after 18 weeks. they can feel and express pain. there is no anesthesia for these babies, regardless of if it was rape or incest, i think it is absolutely cruel and inhumane. that is pretty much my comment. host: thank you for calling and sharing with us this morning. hillary is up next in to levees that, california. democratic line. caller: hi, good morning c-span. full disclosure, i work in abortion health care. yeah, it is a very important topic in terms of -- excuse me,

decision in terms of who i am going to vote for in 2024. definitely not going to vote for a republican because they are insane. voting for a democrat is also going to be a difficult decision, but i guess i do not have a choice if i want my patients and everyone else in this country who think they are pregnant to have access to abortion care. the previous caller, i definitely do not agree. [laughter] it is ridiculous how, abortion is health care. i do not understand why people can't accept that. the only way for this to not be so stigmatized is to decriminalize abortion. it is a normal health procedure that many people go through and have. i have literally had patients

telling me i am doing the lords work. for those of you who are super religious, hope you can understand -- host: since we have you on the line and you work in abortion care, are you seeing a lot of people from other states where access is limited coming to your place of business? can you tell us a low bit about that? caller: app so freaking lewdly -- abso-freaking-lutely. it is so depressing to see these people struggling. they are coming from all over the country, especially the southern states. i can't even begin to imagine how they must feel. first of all, to make the decision to have an abortion. for some people, it is not a light decision. for others, it is the only option that they have. it is incredibly heartbreaking. people do not take into account the financial cost, the emotional burden, the

accommodations of where they are going to stay in a different state to get an abortion. potential childcare, the fact they are going to have to miss out on work. these are all factors that these people have to consider when they decide to get an abortion and have to travel out of state to get an abortion. people just want to criminalize them and shame them. it is really sad. host: hillary, thanks for your call this morning. our next caller is judith, independent line, baltimore. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for having me this morning. i actually am also a reproductive health care provider. the caller that was just on expressed a lot of the sentiments that i was hoping to share, as well. the other thing that i would like to add is that even in a state that is what we would consider navy permissive as the state of maryland, we find there

can be barriers to women who need to have abortions. i am talking about situations where there are major fetal of anomalies, maybe situations where the individual who is pregnant is homeless or perhaps has other things going on in her life where abortion is the answer for the situation that she is currently in. i find that even in maryland, sometimes we do run into barriers for people who need to have such health care service. host: i was going to ask you, you talked about barriers. again, you say maryland is a state where access to abortion is considered, you know, pretty open, pretty liberal. has it become more difficult in maryland since the supreme court overturned roe v. wade, or are these just baked into the system

already? caller: i would say they are baked into the system already. i do not think anything has changed before or after the turning -- the overturning of roe v. wade. certainly, i think there are ways that our health care system has already kind of put up areas. for example, i see a lot of problems with insurance. in my situation, i usually have to refer patients to other health care systems and sometimes, insurance can be a problem getting the health care they need at other places. host: appreciate your call this morning. let's go to marietta, georgia. deborah on the democratic line. caller: good morning everyone. i am calling because i do not leave in stopping women -- believe in stopping women from what they believe is right for their body. i think it is ludicrous for

the republicans to try to decide on another woman's health. they have no idea what a woman has to go through. my heart goes out to the lady in texas and the lady who lost her baby. this right there will show you that understanding that a man -- a woman's body, not knowing what they are going through. really, they do not care. it is just a political thing. they think they can get somewhere with it and they do not care. even if the babies come here. i was looking on your show one time where they even try to cut the school lunches out. all of these things they have done to not support these kids, but they are going to make you bring them here. for what? to put them in foster care or something like that and let them be spread on the streets? it does not make sense. it is ludicrous.

i thank you for listening. host: liz in oregon, independent line. how important is abortion to you going into 2024? caller: it is extremely important. when a candidate comes up on the ballot, i checked their record. i think abortion is a very complicated issue, that people that do not allow incest, rape and mother's health are mean and cruel. all of the laws are passed to punish the mother. nobody ever mentions the father. in my lifetime, i have at least 360 times where i could have had a pregnancy. i think i have a right. another thing, i do not want to hear from the men because they are passing all of the punishment on the woman. nobody ever mentions the father. there is this thing i call

father enforcing where a woman tells her and he deserts her. she is all alone, pregnant. she thought she was in love with this man. he loved her, now he is gone and they are forcing her. abortion has many issues. it is like, when the habit, i do not -- when to have it, i do not believe abortion is birth control. i do not believe in third trimester abortions. there is many aspects of it. but, i do look up a person's record on abortion. if they are anti and inhuman, mean and cruel, i do not vote for them. host: all right, liz. let's go to the democratic line now. natalie in dover, new hampshire. natalie, you are in this first in the nation primary state. how important is abortion to you as you are considering candidates? caller: hi, thank you for taking

my call. abortion is very important to me. i have a daughter. i do not want her to grow up with fewer rights and fewer access to health care than i had. so, in every election, i have been voting -- the local elections, the federal elections, and not only have i been voting, i have been personally bringing other people to vote, to get registered to vote, because i believe that people really need to be able to get to the polls. sometimes, that is difficult. i want to make sure that this is a top issue for not just me, not just my daughter, but for everybody that this is impacting. host: alrighty, appreciate your call this morning. ann, easton, maryland, independent line.

you are on. caller: thank you very much. the abortion issue is at -- has actually caused me to make a decision as to who i am voting for. i am voting for nikki haley. the reason is, her approach to abortion is far more moderate and logical. it is up to the states. for example, the state of utah with its high population of latter-day saints people might very well want to have a different policy than those of us who live in maryland. so, when she says i will leave it up to the states and furthermore, her husband was adopted. i have three adopted kids. i adopted them when they were teenagers. i support a woman's right to choose. i think that is all i have got to say. think about nikki haley, people, whether you are a republican or democrat.

she is down the middle of the road on this issue. thank you. host: our last caller just mentioned nikki haley. here is a bloomberg article about some of her latest positions on abortion. it says that she has tried to strike a balance that, on a issue that has hurt republicans but she has told iowa voters that major, federal bans are unlikely. it says she sees the possibility of a federal ban on late-term abortions only. again, this is a little bit from a bloomberg article. we want to hear from you, from women only for now. how important is abortion to you in your 2024 vote? if you are a woman and a democrat, call us at (202) 748-8000. republican women, (202) 748-8001 .

if you are a woman who identifies as an independent, (202) 748-8002. before we go back to the phone lines, i want some responses we are receiving when we posed the question this morning on facebook. stephanie hilton wrote, no national abortn ban. vote in 2024 aordingly. chelsea ward says, government should not be in anyone's for china --anyone's vagina. barbara johns says crucial, my body, my life. joanne writes, i have nine gre grand daughters. it is very important to me that they all live in red states. again, that is some of the responses we are receiving on facebook. we went women right now to call in and give us your thoughts. our next caller is robin in

michigan. republican line. what are your thoughts, robin? caller: hi. i am a christian person. i believe that it is their choice. i know that sometimes, the baby is the one that suffers. but, i also believe it is their choice. it is the consequence of their actions, if they want to make that choice. i do feel that when people call in and say that republicans are, you know, they blame republicans, i do not believe that. i feel that is a political statement. i feel that i am a good person, whether i am a republican. i do not blame the democrats or independents for anything. i feel that god gives everybody choices. i feel that whatever choice you make, whatever it is, it is the

consequences, are yours. i just feel that it should be their choice. it is their body. what they do with it is up to them. host: let me ask you as a pro-choice republican woman, which candidates are appealing to you on the presidential ballot? is abortion factoring into your choice of a candidate? caller: as far as who i am voting for, is that who you mean? host: yeah, who you plan on voting for and does that person align with you on abortion? or, are you saying i agree to disagree with this person on abortion? just tell us more about who you are voting for and how that does or does not align with your views on abortion. caller: i am actually voting for trump. i do like trump. just because of the economy. i feel the economy is not doing so well right now.

i put everything i have into god. i pray about things. i just feel that he puts me on the right track. i do not blame anybody for anything. i feel that -- i feel for people. i try to help out people where it is needed. i feel for people that have to go through abortions, stuff like that. where i am at, i feel that every time i have been in a situation, god has helped me out, even when i am in a bad situation. he has helped me out. you would be in shock the things i could tell you with how he has helped me out. i feel like when people are blaming people, it is not about blame. it is not about politics. it is about yourself. it is about self-worth. it is about yourself and choices that people make. so, if people took a look at god

and just about yourself self-worth and about choices, just remember where you are at and how you make those choices and the consequences that it is. then, you will be where you are apt because you put yourself there. host: robin, we appreciate your call this morning. we are going to move to philadelphia now. aaron on the democratic line. go ahead, erin. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i am 1000% pro-choice. pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. it means pro-women having the choice to make that decision for themselves, for their bodies, for their futures. i was sexually assaulted at the age of 15. fortunately, it did not result in a pregnancy. i have a 15-year-old daughter now. she is a straight a student. she is in a college program in

the ninth grade. she is planning to go to medical school. i cannot fathom if something happened to her and she was assaulted and impregnated, forcing that child to become a mother, destroying her life. i understand that republicans -- typically republicans, we will say, everything -- every child is a blessing, there is help for mothers. when they are making such extreme cuts and shaming people for being on public assistance, for not wanting to help with childcare, with maternity leave, with food, all of it. who are going to care for all of those children, all of the women being forced to be incubators, produce able-bodied workers as we hear them say over and over -- who is going to care for them? you cannot force a human being to give birth and expect them to just willingly be ok with that

situation. it does not work like that. removing access does not stop abortions. it just stops women from being able to have safe ones, thus harming themselves. this is a war on women, without a doubt. host: next on the republican line, farrah is in indiana. caller: hello, tia. host: hello. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: what are your thoughts? go ahead. caller: you know what, it is nice to talk to you, by the way. what i can't understand is, this is 2024, ladies. wake up. they have got all kinds of birth control out there. i do not want to get graphic about it. for god sakes, you know. i had a granddaughter that was a senior in high school and got pregnant. they didn't know it until she was almost seven months. at that time, they act like she

could get an abortion if she wanted but my daughter not let that happen. luckily, she could stay home and take care of her. she is seven years old now and very smart in school. i cannot believe the women out there. the bible says, love -- thou shall not kill. whether you want to believe it or not, that is a lie. so. i just do not understand people. the way the democratic party has went to the left, it is just unreal. they have no scruple. i can't believe it. blows my mind. but, anyway. i hope they would consider doing something else besides having an abortion. it is so sad. host: thank you, sarah. let's go towren in mesa, arizona. independent line. caller: hi, sorry. i am kind of nervous. host: it is ok, take your time.

brief. caller: thank you. i just wanted to say as a response to the previous caller, birth control does not always work because me and my partner -- i was on birth control and got pregnant, anyway. i went to get an abortion, but they were like, at least with the laws out here, you have to wait so many weeks to think it over and stuff. i was so far along that if i waited more than one week, i could not get it. i was forced to have a kid that i did not want. it ruined my life. i had to quit my job. i was working as a really high. -- high paid, i.t. tech and i had to quit it because i could not afford to keep my kid in childcare long enough. i sank into a massive depression. i almost killed myself. forcing people to give birth is

terrible, all over just a tiny clump of cells. it is wild. host: thank you, wren, for calling to share your story. wishing you all the best. we are going to move to kai in arlington, virginia on the independent line. caller: hello, everyone this morning. hello? host: go ahead with your comments. caller: i do not agree with anything -- i understand why abortion isn't even a topic. it shouldn't be someone's prerogative, whether male or female, whether or not they want the child or whether the child has down syndrome or whatever. if i have a child because i have

a heart condition, if i get pregnant, i have to get an abortion because i will die. i can't take birth control or anything due to my condition. all i am going to say is, it does change your life. i love my children. i would not want anyone to go through anything bad for them. but, abortion should not even be on a ballot or a topic because it is a choice. i do not agree with it being an issue of discussion. host: appreciate your call. audrey is next in macon, georgia, democratic line. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i personally have never had an abortion. i have never wanted an abortion. i had an up topic pregnancy --

an eptopic pregnancy that almost killed me. i will vote for the first man that has a reproductive system that can go through what myself and so many women have gone through with cap topic -- eptopic pregnancies. it is my choice, any woman's choice with how she wants to deal with her body. i could never take birth control. there is a lot of us that cannot take it. abortion, if you have one, i am going to love you if you have it. i'm going to love you if you do not. it is your choice, it is our body. i want men with reproductive systems to start talking about abortion. that is what i would love to see. thanks. host: we are talking to women for now, but he will bring men into the conversation a little bit later.

again, to remind you of the phone lines, democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we are speaking with women only this morning. gene in kalamazoo, michigan on the republican line. what are your thoughts? caller: i am totally pro-life and i only vote pro-life. our children are actually protected, or are supposed to be protected in the constitution. they are supposed to be protected. i only vote pro-life. i do believe in the exception for rape and the life of the mother. those are the only two exceptions that i think are right. host: all right, gene.

gail is next, calling from athens, georgia. independent line. caller: yes. i would like to say that i am 82 years old. there is no reason for a woman to have to have an abortion. they got condoms, pills to stop that. if you do not want the child, do not do nothing. get yourself some pills and all of that kind of stuff and everything. a child is a gift from god. i have got a granddaughter that can't have one. she would give anything to have one. i have had three. i have got six grandchildren. i would give the world for anybody to have one, because they are so precious. to me, that is murder. that is the way i look at it. anybody have that that get pregnant, that is their fault.

so, they should take care of the situation and not put themselves in that position to have to have one. if you are raped or something like that or if it is the life of the mother, that is different. i think it is a shameful disgrace. host: let's go to the democratic line now. nancy is calling from concorde, new hampshire. caller: hi, good morning. i have a few things to say. i just turned 70 years old two days ago. back when i was a teenager, abortion was illegal because it was before roe. there had never even been legal abortion at that point when i was growing up. when i was 16 years old, a friend of mine got pregnant. we were sophomores in high school. this is before the internet, before any of that stuff. i can tell you, when you promise your daughter that if she dishonors you or shames the

family and you are going to banish her because she is pregnant, teenagers will take matters into their own hands. what we did, her boyfriend at 17 years old, was able to ask around on the streets and find out that an illegal back alley abortion could be had in new york city. 250 miles away, five of us teenage girls pulled our money and we came up with one round-trip bus ticket for a 16-year-old girl to go and get a back alley abortion. her boyfriend came up with the honey. -- the money. one morning before school, we put this girl on a bus by herself. she was hellbent on not having to tell her parents that she shamed them that she was willing to take her life in her hands. the reality is when you are 16 years old like we were, we did not think anything could possibly go wrong. fortunately, nothing did. she came home.

they got married after they graduated, but we were only sophomores and 16 years old at the time. that is what you do when it is illegal. just because abortion is illegal, you do not stop it. you put girls in the hands of back alley abortionists who are not even licensed doctors. you do not have to be a doctor to figure out how to perform an abortion. that is the reality. the other part of it is that i have had -- when i see what is happening to these young women having miscarriages now, i was one of these unfortunate women who i had been pregnant six times. i have one living child and no abortions. i have had three miscarriages. one was undetected. my twins were born prematurely at six months and both of them died within 24 hours because they did not have the -- their lung development was not there. whether people like it or not, the babies bodies are not fully developed. two years after my babies died, i got pregnant again and it was

a ectopic pregnancy. my doctor told me i was having a hysterical pregnancy. he said, you just want to be pregnant because were babies have died and you have had so many miscarriages. they ignored my pregnancy. my tube ruptured almost 13 weeks into another pregnancy. that one almost killed me, because i had to go through surgery. i never got pregnant again because i lost a tube and an ovary to that. today with the doctors and these laws saying they can't treat women in these conditions, i would find myself in a parking lot today becoming septic with these crazy doctors and these laws that these were publicans are making. back in those days, five times when i called my doctor because of my hemorrhaging, i met him at the emergency room. they put me in surgery. i did not get questioned about whether i caused these miscarriages of my own, like they are claiming women are forcing themselves to have miscarriages. this witch hunt is absolutely

appalling. back alley abortions, they are still happening and are going to happen again. why anybody would want their daughter or granddaughter to be subjected to that -- if you do not know history, i would suggest you go back and look at some of the old movies from 1920's. look at documentaries. i am a researcher. i do my ancestry. i am a french canadian woman in new hampshire. i want to tell you, four of my grandmothers and great-grandmothers produced 48 children because there was no birth control. they could not stop it. host: nancy, we appreciate it. you have had some great context and great angst to add to our conversation this morning. we are going to go to manassas, virginia now on the independent line. what are your thoughts? caller: hi, i have a scripture. leviticus 18:21 says, thou shall not lead any foul seed pass

through the fire of mallik. leaders shall profane the name of -- that pretty much means no abortions, anything that you pretty much put yourself in, anything that happens to you, we have to pick up our cross and where it, bear it. it is not about us. the world is not about us. people do not know that we have the end of days. people are very oblivious about what is happening, even in exit is -- in exodus. his heart was hardened. when he wanted to do, he held onto his people. you have to understand that we are not free. we will never be free. we are in a dome. this is not what people think it is. we are not here to have a good time. we are here to write our wrongs of our ancestors, from the people that put us in slavery. we were in slavery.

the slaveowners, y'all are pretty much their children, your ancestors, the people that were in slavery. those are our ancestors. you have to understand you have to repent -- host: i have a question for you. i can tell you were not in favor of abortion rights. how is that affecting your decision on who to vote for in 2024? caller: i can't really say we are supposed to vote. you have to look at everyone is really pro-choice, everyone is about themselves. no one really cares about how you live, what goes on in your home. they only care about what goes on in their home. scripture pretty much explains that this is not how life is supposed to be. we are supposed to submit to the most high, submit to his word. open it up, repent for your

sins. hell is high, it is a longtime eternity. we are only here for a portion of that time. just think about it. open up your heart. open up your mind and release anything that you have done. host: all right, appreciate your call this morning. let's go back to the republican line. janice is calling from wilmington, north carolina. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: well, i just want to say that i definitely do not believe in abortion. women talk about all the time about their rights, their rights. i do believe that women have a right to their bodies, but it does not -- i do not talk about abortion for that concern. you know, you have had previous

callers calling -- one woman made a statement that it is only tissue. all of these women talk about their rights, their rights. when is it the babies right? god put those tissues there, as she says. once that child has a heartbeat, it is a child. we are not supposed to take life. there are so money avenues out there that women can have children and let those children be adopted. it is very important to me that the person that i am voting for be against abortion. like i said, you can take a baby to a hospital. you can take a baby to a fire department. you can take a baby anywhere that you do not want and let it be adopted out. host: all right.

caller: these women just talk about their rights, their rights. nobody is for that unborn baby. what about their rights? host: all right, janice. janice mentioned, she is calling on the republican line, wants to support candidates that are wanting to limit access to abortion. i want to bring up a chart that was compiled by npr. it starts off with the headline, where the republican candidates stand on abortion. again, this is an npr article. i'm going to scroll down to a chart that lists where the various candidates stand on if they want to limit abortion, what gestational limits? we know a lot of these candidates are no longer in the running, but of the three who are, the main three, desantis,

florida governor ron desantis has said he would sign a 15 week federal abortion ban that would preclude any abortions after 15 weeks of gestation at the federal level. governor of florida -- as governor of florida, he has signed a six week state level abortion ban. nikki haley, former ambassador, former governor of south carolina has said she would also sign a 15 week federal abortion ban. she has repeatedly tried to soften that stance, saying such a bill would never pass the senate. as governor of south carolina, she signed a 20 week state level abortion ban. finally, let's look at and see what former president trump, where he lands. it says trumps you on this is unclear. trump backed a 20 week federal ban as president.

in the current campaign, he has good sized six week state bans as too restrictive. however, he has not come down on a level of restriction he supports. instead, claiming he would try to create compromise on the topic as president. again, that is an overview of where some of the republican candidates stand on the issue. let's hear now from house democratic leader hakeem jeffries. he was speaking ahead of the houseboat thursday -- house vote thursday on antiabortion legislation. he attacked republicans about these two pregnancy related bills that later passed. let's watch [video clip] >> extreme mag republicans will have two bills on the floor today that undermine reproductive freedom for the women of america. house democrats will continue to

stand up for a woman's freedom to make her own reproductive health care decisions. and the american people support reproductive freedom. house republican extremists want to impose a nationwide abortion ban. house republican extremists want to criminalize abortion care. house republican extremists want to see an america with government mandated pregnancies, even when that pregnancy undermines the health, safety and well-being of women in this country. we are going to continue to stand on the side of reproductive freedom and expose

the republican extremism on this issue. host: that was house democratic leader hakeem jeffries speaking thursday ahead of two bills that passed the house that were considered antiabortion legislation. they were pregnancy elated bills. again, our question today right now, we are speaking to women only. we want to know, how important is abortion as you make your decision about who to support in 2024? if you are a democratic woman, call us at (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. women who are independents, call us at (202) 748-8002. before we get back to some of your calls, i want to read a few more responses from facebook. cindy writes,emocratic party knows the unborn child is not part of man's body.

yet, they continue to push abortion under the premise of a e. ask yourself why they have to lie if they think it is all good. they are taking the life of another human being. connie christianserits, very important. women must have the right to decide what is right for themselves. little, olmen should not decide for them. linda says, keep in md, no one aborted you. oneore, mary writes, i will definitely vote democrats. again, we want to hear more from you. sylvia in georgia, you are on the independent line. tell us, how important is abortion for you this election year? caller: well, i am 87 years old. it is very important. i will vote for the democrats. i would like to say that the c-span junkies have heard a lot of stuff.

i was 15 years old, statutory rape, pregnant the first time. it happened. did not even know i was pregnant. had the baby, thank god. i do not make decisions for other people. i refuse to allow anybody to tell me what to do with my body. another thing. these men making those decisions. who is dying, the woman or the baby? -- who is --they have nothing to say. thank you. host: our next caller's janice in jacksonville, florida. democratic line. caller: yes. normally, i do not get involved in this kind of thing. but, when i heard the woman say

the bible says thou shalt not kill, right? my -- i am 79. when i was about 20, early 20's, i came in from something and my mother was here watching a daytime television show. the abortion issue was red-hot. she was very bright and enlightened and so forth. i just said, the bible says -- she had brought us up in the christian church. the bible says thou shalt not kill, right? she says, it is much more complicated than that. host: all right, janice. we appreciate your call. let's go to oklahoma city, oklahoma. republican line. go ahead. caller: hello, good morning. i have been listening to a lot of comments this morning. they are all very enlightening.

they are very enlightening. i actually had an abortion when i was 19 or 20. it was because of medical issues. i just had a baby, as well. i know a lot of people who have had abortions. i do not understand why this roe v. wade was overturned. i do not know. i do not think this should be the basis of -- it is so important in the presidential election. that is what i feel. i feel to each his own because we all stand before judgment. we all stand before god in judgment. there has been a lot of great comments. there has been a lot of great stories. i have a story, too. but, i'm going to vote for donald trump if i can.

but, i do not think the abortion thing should be the number 1 -- i do not think it should be the number one main topic of all of this, because this, i feel, is a personal preference. it is a personal preference. that is how i feel. everybody -- what i do not like is people using an abortion for birth control. do not use that as a source of birth control because there is so much out there. that is all i am going to say, because i'm going to get myself in trouble. thank you for letting me share. host: pat is next in michigan, democratic line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: good morning. caller: this subject really angers me. i can't understand why women would choose to vote republican.

when you lose the right to your own body, you are not a free citizen in the united states of america. i chose not to ever have any children. i am open about the fact that i am terrified to go through childbirth. i think it is the worst to go through and live. host: all right, pat. susan is next in orlando, florida. democratic line. caller: yes, unfortunately i kind of live in the taliban state of florida right now. we have our governor wanting to control everything. i definitely understand about abortion. i worked with women in domestic violence situations. i also testified in rape trials.

i cannot believe that men have any control over a woman's body. i believe that if the christian coalition wants all children to be born, then they should except every child -- accept every child and raise and provide the funds for that child. there are too many kids that live in poverty. i will not support any, any official that will not allow women to have control over their bodies. i also believe in forced paternity tests so that if the men do not want to take care of the kid, then they have to suffer the consequences. if that is vasectomy's or forced support, that is what they should have to endure because this is not right for women.

i will not vote for any, any person that is pro-life. host: all right, susan. appreciate your call. let's hear from gigi in wyoming, republican line. go ahead, gigi. caller: yes, i agree with the previous caller. i too am a republican. i am a very devout catholic and i do not leave in old, white men telling women what to do with their bodies. they have no idea what the reproductive system does. it is a form of control. i am angered that roe v. wade was overturned. i do not believe in it. if they feel that everybody should not have an abortion, then i feel that the republicans should be, they should raise that child, send money, because a lot of people cannot afford to

raise children. i do not believe that children of incest or rape should somehow be responsible for somebody trying to make them, raise that child. host: gigi, let me ask you as a pro-choice were public and woman, who are you planning to vote for for president? does abortion factor into that decision? caller: certainly not goddamn trump. host:i probably would be maybe r nikki haley, but certainly not trump and not de santis. host: thanks for your call. mary in new jersey, republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i want to tell you that i am republican, but i also find that

life is sacred i am that it's a miracle -- and that it's a miracle. no one to take away a life, a god created life. however, i feel like -- i know there is incest out there, i know that women get raped, but there are many couples who do not have children, who can't have children. these babies can be adopted. i don't believe -- especially i don't believe in late term abortions. babies are fully grown, fully viable and it can't be -- it can be adopted. nothing is greater than god's laws. yes mistakes happen, we are all human. to take a life is wrong. host: appreciate your call this morning.

that's going to wrap up this first hour. men, we will bring you into the conversation later on today. we will take a quick break but as you know, the new hampshire primary is just two days away. first we will be joined by andrew smith, director of the survey center at the university of new hampshire. we will take a closer look at recent polling trends and how the electorate in the granite state has changed since 2020. later, we will talk to strategist and former wmur-tv political director, scott spradling about what he is watching in the days ahead, and the future of the state's first in the nation primary status. ♪ >> discover the heartbeat of democracy with c-span's voices 2024 as we engage voters nationwide, asking what issue is most important to you in this election and why? >> this upcoming election, my

most important issue is human rights. i am very pro-choice. i believe all women should have rights to their body and making decisions with their doctors. i believe my family, friends and girlfriends should have the right to do what they want with their body. i am also pro-gay and trans rights. everyone stopped the right to exist as a free citizen in america. >> i teach in north carolina. i'm the father of a nine-year-old. for me, the biggest issue we face right now is education. how do we make sure our kids not only graduate from high school but have the opportunity to go to college, to learn and grow and see the opportunities they have in the future? hopefully we will be able to fund not just secondary, post secondary and even graduate school. >> let biggest issue is getting money out of politics, making a more democratic society, reducing the general election corruption you see in a lot.

it is pretty obvious that the government is bought. it is not beholden to the people as it should be. >> be a part of the conversation by visiting c-span.org/campaign2024, and navigating to our voices 2024 thaad or you can share the issue that is most of -- where you can share the issue that is most important to you. listening to programs on c-span just got easier. tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio and listen to "washington journal" daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern and public events throughout the day. catch washington today for a fast-paced report on the stories of the day. listen to c-span any time. just tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's

online store. browse our collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: good morning and welcome back to "washington journal." we are speaking first this morning, two days ahead of the new hampshire primary, with andrew smith. he is the survey center director at the university of new hampshire. we are going to be talking about new hampshire primary polling and other trends. good morning. guest: good morning. host: let's start off. tell us about the new hampshire survey center. how do you get your funding?

is this partisan or nonpartisan research? let's start there. guest: the unh survey center is an academic survey center. it has been around since the 1970's. i've been the director since 1999. i am also a political science professor. we are not funded by the university, we get our funding largely through research that university faculty are doing, government grants or projects on various -- usually health care projects and so forth. we also do media polling during elections. we do not do work for candidates or parties. we are a nonpartisan organization, but we do work for media organizations, and at least going back to 1996, we've been doing polling during the presidential primary for cnn but we have also done polling for fox news, with newspapers across the country.

that is my fun part. i am a political science professor. frankly the media polling is a small part of what we do, maybe 5% of all the work we do. host: a lot of attention on that polling right now. tell us before we get into some of the substance of your unh polling, how has the methodology for polling changed? we hear about the trends, we hear about the difficulty getting accurate polling, with cell phones and other things. tell us how you ensure your polling is accurate and reflective of the population? guest: that is a big question to unpack because frankly the whole industry is going through a paradigm shift in how we do our polls. this is similar to the shift that happened in the 1960's and 1970's when the industry moved

from in person surveys to telephone surveys. it took about 10 years for the best practices to be developed, how to reach samples, how to call people. how many times to call them, etc. we are in the same shift moving from telephone surveys to web-based surveys. we are moving to web for the same reasons we moved to telephone surveys. they are far less expensive. i will give you an example of the costs. between 2016 and 2020, the costs for us to do a statewide survey in new hampshire almost doubled from about $45,000 to over $90,000. it was a big increase and most organizations can't afford that. we moved to web-based surveys. what we do at the unh survey center is a probability panel. this is a key concept.

for surveys to be generalizable to the general public, you have to start with a random sample that allows us to use some statistical models. if you don't start with a random sample, you can't do things like how collate margins of sampling errors. you are just violating the assumptions of math. we use a probability sample where we recruit people from across the state at random, by telephone, text, and address-based sampling, sending mailers to people's houses. we have a panel in new hampshire of about 8000 people that have been selected at random and we go to do a poll, we have email addresses and we send them an email invitation. we interview them that way. it is much quicker.

we don't have to ask demographic questions as often because we already have that information from past surveys. it is much less expensive. there are drawbacks to web-based surveys as there are two telephone surveys. it is hard to reach people, hard to get people to want to talk about political questions. and the people who do talk to you tend to really want to talk about political questions. the methods used to make sure we have a representative sample of the population, not just a random sample but a represented of sample, we are still working through those. the 2016-20 20 elections really pointed out those problems and i hope the public understands that the whole industry is not quite flying blind, but the ground underneath our feet is shifting. host: we are going to get into some new hampshire specific questions but i wanted to go ahead and open up the phone

lines for our viewers, if they have any questions for andrew smith, the survey center director at the university of new hampshire, or if you have any questions or comments about the upcoming new hampshire primary. if you are a democrat, call us at (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. if you are a new hampshire resident, new hampshire voters, we want you to call us at (202)-748-8003. as we go into the primary, i want to ask you. new hampshire, tuesday. the union leader, which is the big pete -- big paper up there, did have an endorsement. it is endorsed nikki haley. i'm going to show a tweet.

this is from governor chris nunu who is also endorsing nikk haley. he writes, the union leader said it best. nikki haley is catching fire in new hashe and is the next choice -- is the best choice to be the next president of the unit stes. he then links to that union leader endorsement. i first question for you is -- the latest polling, where does it show nikki haley in relation to donald trump? is it close enough that haley could win on tuesday? guest: i wish i could tell you the specific answer to your question, but our polling is embargoed until 9:00. i can give you hints about where things are going. we are seeing that nikki haley is within striking distance, but not that close to donald trump. this year we will probably see less movement than we have seen in previous primaries because

trump has a quasi-incumbent supporters and he has 40% plus of the support in new hampshire for the past year. haley is an unknown commodity and what she is doing is garnering support from republicans who really don't like trump and then some other people, independent voters who may be considering voting in the republican party. i don't things will move around -- i don't think things will move around too much. endorsements have a little impact but largely they are preaching to the choir. the union leader wasn't anti-trump newspaper since 2016 and the mainstream of the republican party certainly is not pro-trump. but there is obviously, like other states there is a significant segment of the republican party that is the trump maga party. the rest of the party, presuming trump will be the nominee will

come around to vote for him but they are going to be supporting the team, rather than the captain. host: i know you're polling will be out with cnn and a little bit, less than an hour but this is 5:38, a compilation essentially of polling averages. it has trump holding around 49%. -- polling around 49%. nikki haley is around 34%, 35%. and then ron desantis at 5%. can you tell us about -- ron desantis was second in iowa, but he is barely in the single digits in new hampshire. what is the difference? why did ron desantis decide not to compete in new hampshire? guest: i think it is really important to understand that the

iowa republican caucus electorate and the new hampshire republican primary electorate are extremely different. in turnout, iowa has very low turnout, typically 5% to 10% of voters across the state turnout for the caucuses. in new hampshire, turnout is estimated to be -- this cycle -- around 45% to 50%. you have a different type of voter. iowa voters tend to be very socially conservative, driven largely by even joe little churches. in new hampshire, republicans here tend to be much more moderate in the sense that they -- that their concerns are more on taxes and the size of government. republican electorate in new hampshire is more highly educated than an iowa. -- than in iowa. i don't mean that they are smarter, just that they have

things like college degrees. iowa is a very religious state. new hampshire is the least religious state in the country. the social conservative messages of ron desantis, that work for him in florida and that he hoped would help him over the top in iowa just don't resonate with voters here. you can see this historically, when more conservative republicans win iowa, think of ted cruz and pat robinson. they don't do well in new hampshire because the audience is completely different. i think desantis's biggest mistake was the message that worked for him in florida really can't be replicated in new hampshire, and he didn't change his message. he was talking to voters about things that they weren't that interested in and i think that is why we saw his numbers decline from a year ago. he was leading the new hampshire primary at 43% over trump in our polling. he has declined ever since. as soon as he started campaigning here, his numbers

really went down and i think it is the fact that he is not campaigning here now, he is basically skipping new hampshire, an indication that he knows he does not have any chance. host: we are speaking this morning with andrew smith. he is the director of the survey center at the university of new hampshire. we are talking about polling and other issues ahead of that state's first in the nation primary on tuesday. the phone lines for you to call in with your questions for andrew, all your comments about politics in general or new hampshire specifically, democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. if you are a new hampshire voter, we want you to call us at (202)-748-8003. this is open to all now. marian in waldorf, maryland on the democrat line.

what is your question or comment? caller: good morning. my question is when polls or surveys are taken, are the same households or individuals called yearly? is it a random thing where we ask different people throughout the country? because i'm 62 years old and i have voted since i was 18 and i've never been pulled or surveyed -- polled or surveyed about anything. guest: the short answer -- thank you -- the short answer is yes. we call different people. randomly selected people from across the country, but if you think you have a country like united states with over 300 million people, about 200 million or two and half-million households, the chances of being called are not that great. in new hampshire, your chances are pretty high because there are so many people that we

survey, but it is a random process. we try to call people from across the country. you may have been called from -- in the past but maybe you were not home or you didn't recognize the number, so you did not answer it. it isn't a surprise that you have not been called or participated in a survey. i compare it to getting called for jury duty. everyone can get randomly called but i have not been called for jury duty since i was 18 years old. i keep hoping it'll happen but it does not. host: andrew, i wanted to ask you, we had a couple more methodologies questions come in. viewers on twitter. j sanders writes, are there any differences betweepele who ow they are parts of panels as oppod to those who didn't know they were going to be surveyed before being studied?

i guess he is asking, are these blind surveys or how do you ensure that people are coming at it and you wynne lee -- coming at it genuinely? guest: there are differences in the people who participate in any kind of survey. they be -- they tend to be more willing to give their opinions. there are differences between the people who participate in any surveys, and that is true of panels as well. they do new that they are a part of a panel, we tell them specifically and then we continually recruit new people as this goes on. i think it is important to remember that in any survey, response rates are very low, telephone survey results are about -- response rates are about 5% or less and that is well-funded government connected surveys. if you call 100 surveys, only -- 100 households, only 5% of them

are going to complete the survey. that had not been that big of a concern for survey researchers because the people who didn't answer surveys tended to be like the people who did. what we have seen increasingly and in particularly was evident in 2016 and 2020 elections is that some people are more likely than others to participate in surveys of any kind. for example in 2020, i was on a task force and looked at polling , and our major conclusion as to why a trump's numbers were low in polls across the country was that republicans were less likely to participate. they just didn't answer the phone, didn't participate in surveys as much as democrats did. there are some theoretical modeling's for that, a spiral of silence. if you think about what trump had done since 2016, he talked

about fake news and fake polls's . a lot of republicans took that to heart. they said i'm not going to participate in any of those fake polls and as a result, his numbers and other republican numbers tended to be lower in the 2020 election cycle. host: let's go back to the phone lines. ronald is calling from orford, new hampshire, independent line. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i got a call a few days ago from morris. i picked up the phone and they up on me. as far as i'm concerned, all of these polls are just made up. you guys are just trying to get the two impound -- incumbent candidates to run against each other in a condition where dissatisfaction is higher than it's been since the civil war. i think it's all corrupt. the pollsters, the media, the politicians, everybody.

i support the revolution. host: andrew, how do you convince people like ron that you guys don't have a political agenda, or is there a way to convince skeptical people to participate? guest: it is difficult. people believe what they want to believe. certainly our political environment today is very polarized. the news media is polarized. polls have become used as a weapon in elections, used by candidates. if you're winning in the polls, it's a good pole. i think trump said it best a couple weeks ago. he talked about the des moines register polls, saying it was a wonderful pole, a very powerful paul because he was leading. then he said if he wasn't winning, he would say it was a terrible poll. as a survey researcher, we are nonpartisan. we don't care who wins. we want to make sure that what we are doing with our methods is

to accurately reflect what the public thinks. that is tough because part of it, part of the problem we have is most people really don't pay that much attention to politics. voters like ronald, they do, they really focus on these things that are very important to them. to most people, that is not the case. we do have problems in getting representative samples of people, but i can tell you i've worked with democratic organizations, perceived democratic media organizations like cnn and perceived republican media organizations like fox news. there polling directors and people on the polling teams really just want to get an accurate reflection of what is going on. i can't prove that the people like ronald. i can invite him to show him what we do but if they have that opinion, there is not anything that they see or hear that is likely to change that opinion.

their minds are made up. host: let's hear from don, austin, texas, republican line. caller: thank you. you had mentioned that the base in iowa is a little different from the base in new hampshire, that the new hampshire may be more educated or issue oriented. do you see that is going to be the case across the nation, that trump is gaining more support in the educated area of voters? guest: i don't think so. what i was doing was comparing the republican electorate in iowa and the republican electorate here. new hampshire like much of the northeast is a highly educated wealthyish part of the country and frankly the help -- the wealthy and highly educated people tend to vote democrat. the democrat party is sort of

the social and economic elite party. the republican party is sorting itself out as the more blue-collar party, attracting those people that the democratic party has kind of abandoned. others have written books about this. academic research looking at this phenomenon but it is up of it has been going on for the last 40 years. any primary election, the electorates in new hampshire and iowa are very different and any general election, you will see that new hampshire is going to -- the highly educated people in new hampshire are like going to vote democrat regardless of who the nominees are. guest: staying -- host: staying on the republican line, next is elaine in washington. caller: i have a question about what polls are being run. have you ever run a poll to find out the number of people who have committed voter fraud?

have you ever done that? guest: we haven't done that specifically but i have been involved in many studies looking at voter fraud and trying to find voter fraud in new hampshire. yes, there are occasions of voter fraud in new hampshire but they are very very small. a handful of people in any given election. there are myths about all of these voters supposedly coming up from massachusetts and voting in the state but there is no evidence to support that that is the case. after the 2016 election, you might recall that donald trump had a big push to say that there was voter fraud in the state and new hampshire was the first date that they came to and i worked with the secretary of state's office and looked at voter fraud and people's trust in the election which i think is more important, and nothing is really uncovered. very few people are going to admit that they commit voter fraud because that would be illegal, and basically they are

saying that they committed a crime but there are a lot of methods being done, looking at databases across states, to see if voter fraud occurs and it does occur occasionally but it is usually on the part of people with two homes like a home in one state and a vacation home in another state. new hampshire does have a lot of that. our tourism industry is very large. the voter fraud that has occurred tends to be among people who live in florida and the winter and new hampshire in the summer and they voted in both places thinking no one would find out. there is certainly not the voter fraud the any numbers -- in any numbers that would sway an election. host: let's hear from rick now, in madison, alabama on the democratic line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i wanted to ask your guest, how has the integrity of the surveys in his mind changed since going

to a web-based survey versus a traditional phone call? thank you. guest: that is an excellent question. i think that is one of the reasons we are seeing this increasing use of web-based surveys. research i've done and other scholars have done, looking at the accuracy of surveys done through different methodologies did not show any consistent pattern that one methodology is more accurate than the others. when we are talking to a news organization, we can say we will do a survey of the state of new hampshire, for $100,000, by random digit dialing, what used to be the gold standard method. it'll cost that much money. or i can do one with a web-based survey and it might cost $25,000. i can't prove that one methodology is more accurate than the other. the customer is going to say why should i pay $100,000 when i can

pay $30,000 for essentially the same thing? the credit ability problem is real because we see these different methodologies, they all have their perks to them. we don't know which one is necessarily more accurate. they started this segment by saying we are trying to figure out all of these things, to understand how web surveys work and we are about three years into a five to 10 year process. thankfully at the unh survey center, we started doing experimentation with web-based surveys, probability panels, as far back as 2010. we were kind of ahead of the curve when this big shift moved and we understand how our panels work. this fits in with what the previous caller -- the credibility gets called into question because they are not all the same. they are not accurate.

they shouldn't be all the same. you take a random sample, you will see variability based on a sampling error but the methods that you talk with people, and the people that you can reach through different methods are slightly different, and you come up with slightly different answers. i would encourage people, first off to look at the methodology that is used. on the american association of public opinion research website, they have a nice description of election polling and its strengths and weaknesses. another thing they do is something they call the transparency initiative, which is kind of a seal of approval on our willingness as pollsters to show the methodology that we are using, to be descriptive of how we collected the data, what we do, we are doing in the process of compiling our surveys. i would trust and look at surveys that have that transparency initiative seal of

approval because we are willing to show you what we did. we can't guarantee that the numbers are going to come out the same depending on who does what, but we will show you how we did it and i think that is the thing that consumers of polls ought to pay attention to. don't just look at the numbers. look at how the numbers were compiled. don't cheer for the poll or say that the one that shows your candidate winning is the accurate one and the poll that does not show your candidate winning is methodology -- is flawed. it is how you show what you did that is important. host: i'm showing that the american association for public opinion research transparency initiative website on my screen, but i wanted to ask one more methodology question that we received o twitter. how do you measure human error margins, lying, changing their minds, etc.? guest: that is the biggest

problem that we have. people often think of survey researcher polling as a statistical operation. you have to be a math ways to understand how this is done. the truth is that it is a psychological problem. it's a problem with humans. we answer questions differently based on who asks. we talked differently to our spouse, to our friends, to strangers. we will answer questions differently based on who talks to us. i mentioned the spiral of silence theory. this is a fascinating thing that touches on what the caller just said. a german social psychologist said that humans are social animals. one of the worst things that can happen for humans, and this is some them it has been developed in our minds and our culture, largely our dna, is that to be successful animals, we have to be part of a group. the worst thing that can happen is that we are excluded from the group.

we act in ways that don't isolate ourselves from the group, which means we tell people what we think they want to hear. we've heard about flattery. being nice to someone even if you don't like them. we do the same thing in survey research. people tell interviewers, the answers to questions that they think the interviewer wants to hear. that is a problem. we have rates of -- race of interviewer biases, sex of interviewer biases. if you want to ask questions to college kids about the drinking behavior, if they are talking to an interviewer that is their same age, they might be more honest about what they do, than if they talk to an interviewer who sounds like their grandmother. they aren't telling their grandmother they were up until 3:00 in the morning drinking beer. it is a real problem, a psychological problem and there is no way around it, in advance to tell the truth or not but

there is a luminous body of research that says that people shape their responses based on what they think the interviewer wants to hear. my old professor when i was in graduate school at george bishop even wrote a book called the illusion of public opinion, because it starts with the premise that most people aren't paying attention or don't know much about a lot of the issues that we have asked them about. we are the questions we ask are quite vague. for example, generally speaking, do you approve or disapprove of the job joe biden is doing as president? what do you mean by that? do you mean economy, foreign affairs, what do you mean? we ask this vague question. we also change the form of the question, rotate the order of questions that are read to a respondent or rotate the responses that are read to a respondent, we can switch distributions by up to 20% or 30%. we understand this as survey

researchers. we have tried to account for some of these problems. randomize asian of question order, randomization of response order. -- randomization, of question order, randomization of response order. we make sure that the questions that we ask our about topics that people know and understand, that the questions are written clearly and try not to be vague and recognize that these certain people will change the way they respond based on what they think the researcher wants to hear. host: and again, we are talking to andrew smith, he is the director of the survey center at the university of new hampshire. if you have a question or comment for him, you can call us now. democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. if you live in new hampshire, call us at (202)-748-8003.

our next caller is in austin, texas. ricky on the democrat line. what is your question or comment? caller: i have several comments. please bear with me. i want to point out that a random group is not at all the same as a representative group, and people don't understand that. here is my main concern. i worry about the damage that polls are doing to voting behaviors of people. the polls are shaping behavior of voters. for example, and the hillary versus trump contest, the polls gave false reassurance to voters who supported hillary and so some of them just didn't turn out, and then it led to trump surprising people because the polls predicted that hillary would win. what it did was suppress voter behavior of hillary supporters. also i agree that the polls

should be more explicit in their methods. but you are not going to see that. you will never see that on tv. people don't even understand the error range. the second thing, the final thing is that when you ask these questions like, how is the economy? people are going to answer in order to manipulate things, like a maga supporter is going to say the economy stinks because they are supporting trump. they may not think the economy really stinks but that is their way of trying to do their political support for trump. the same thing happens if you asked someone, how satisfied are you with biden in any realm? they are going to manipulate their response depending on if they are a biden support or cash i didn't supporter or not -- if they are a biden supporter or not. these polls are misleading and they are not transparent there

-- they are not transparent. my main concern is that there is no study out there showing how polls actually shape voting behavior and the damage it is doing to voting outcomes. thank you. host: she made a lot of points. is that backed up by your research? guest: some of it, yes. the difference between a random sample and a representative sample is quite different. you could take a random sample of the united states and get a sample of men my age named andrew smith. it is mathematically possible. that does not mean that that is a recruited of sample. it could happen -- a representative sample. it could happen. it is one of the reasons that we know that we are not going to get random samples -- representative samples necessarily is that looking at the demographics of people who responded versus what we know from the census, what the

population of an area is. we try to get the proper percentage of men and women in the population represented in the sample. it is true that a random sample does not necessarily mean it is a representative sample. as far as pulling shaping -- polling shaping, there is no evidence that demonstrates -- voting is not a difficult thing once people have made up their mind to vote and generally people vote regardless. police time we have seen strong evidence that polling shaped -- or the media shaped the result of elections was in the 1980's carter-reagan election for the race was called and carter conceded before the polls were

closed in california. a lot of people in california were driving on their way to the polls. they said heck with it. why should they fight through traffic to vote if carter has already said he lost? the results in california didn't change the presidential level, but it did supposedly or apparently change some congressional races down ticket where democrats stayed home and allowed republicans to win narrowly. the evidence of suppression of the vote because of polls, there are always accusations of that occurring but there is very little evidence to show that it does. if anything, what we are seeing is that spiral of silence i mentioned earlier is more impactful. the third point about how people answer poll questions is absolutely the case. there is a tremendous amount of research that looks at how people kind of cheerlead or

their view of the world based on who the president is. when barack obama was president, democrats thought the economy was doing great and republicans thought it was terrible. a month later, when trump became president, 2016, republicans thought the economy was doing great and democrats thought the economy was doing terribly. even among people of the same demographics, even among people who said certain things have happened in their life, the same things economically have impacted them. their view of what the world was like was based or colored on who the president was and they were kind of cheering for the president. that is well-known in the literature and it is clear and i have charts that i show my students that show consumer confidence numbers are so driven bipartisanship and how they shift immediately when the party

of the president changes. getting back to my overall point about this is survey research is not a statistical process. it is a psychological process, understanding why people come up with the justifications for the opinions that they hold. host: our next caller is miriam in texas on the democrat line. go ahead. caller: hello. i'm going to ask a question, looking through the lens of the media. for example, i watch cnn and msn and sometimes fox, but they seem to be delivering this idea that voters don't want trump or biden, and yet when you look at the iowa primary, people came out of the cold to vote for trump. there is a discrepancy between

the media and what the people want. i personally am a biden voter but i don't like how the media uses the polls to create their own narrative. what do you think about the media and using the polls? guest: the short answer is, the reason we have so many polls is frankly, we as people love them. it is the way they keep score. polls are click bait, largely. if you put the results of a poll on a website, people will click on that and read the numbers. it's a way that media makes their money. we see so many polls out there because human beings want to know what the score is. we want to know what people like us think, even if you want to argue with the polls and say it must be wrong because it is not square with the way you see the world.

the media uses the polls not to shape the narrative but because it makes them money. every time someone clicks on that pole link on their website, regardless of who did it, you hear a little coaching -- a little kaching in the media coffers. it is a problem but this has been the case throughout. when george gallup started the gallup poll back in the 1930's, he would sell this to newspapers by saying he guaranteed that there's of scription's would go up and they would sell more newspapers if they ran the gallup poll. and it was true. the television got into the pulling business in the 1960's for the same reason. whenever they would do a poll, more people would watch and that is the case today. you have a poll, people click on it and want to read about it and you are seeing the same sort of number nine. is it the media's fault? you could say so but what is the

proper job for the media in a democracy? frankly it is to make money. no margin, no mission. if you don't have any money coming in, you can't do any sort of journalism that you hope to do, to explain what is going on in the world and polls are revenue generators for media organizations. i am skeptical, kind of critical of media for the use of polls for the simplistic ways they are reported sometimes but if you want to look at who's fault that is, look in the mirror because it is us as citizens and consumers of news that love polls. host: we are going to stop it there. andrew smith, this has been a great conversation this morning. the survey center director at the university of new hampshire. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you very much are having me and boring people

about survey methodology over their breakfast. host: we are going to take a break. after the break, we will talk to strategist and former wmur-tv political director, scott spradling about what he is watching in the days ahead and the future of the state's first in the nation status. but first, for decades, provincial hopefuls have been taking part in retail politics in new hampshire. we spoke with amanda libby with the red arrow diner in manchester about its history. [video clip] >> this location has been open for 102 years and the first in the nation has been around for 100 years so the tradition has been here for some time. every president in recent history has walk through those doors. the road to the white house comes through those doors. >> how does that work?

is it usually a planned visit, is it unannounced? how do they show up and walk through those doors? >> sometimes it is planned. the secret service will just show up so that we know someone is coming. yesterday, marianne williamson came. you never know. you've got to be here to find out. >> when a candidate does come in, it is a very small space. people are trying to eat. what is the reaction to the people who are here when a candidate does come in? >> usually if people are sitting at the counter eating or having coffee, sometimes a candidate will come behind the counter, grabbed the pot of coffee, pour some coffee, have conversations. nikki haley went and sat at the tables and eight with some people. -- and ate with some people. if people did not want to be a part of it, they will sneak out

but most customers are here because they want to see them. they are here to vet the candidates for the country. >> and when they come here, are they just meet and greet? to they order food? is there a favorite? >> president trump came and ordered a newton burger. we changed it to the trump tower burger because he ordered it and enjoyed it so much that we put on the menu as the trump tower burger. we actually have a lineup of things that people have eaten since coming here. senator scott ordered grits and i got real nervous because he is from the south and they do it so well down there. he said they were great and he enjoyed them. >> and the tables, the bar, there are name plaques of people who have sat there. what does it take to get your name on the bar or a table? >> you have to come here. people think they just ask. to these people actually come

here? you don't get a name plaque unless you come through the door. you will see now that senator scott is there, nikki haley, president trump, president biden, president obama. they are all there. >> this is a very important stop for candidates. how important is it for the diner and the voters who are meeting them? >> it is grassroots politics down here. they come here, we take it very seriously. we ask tough questions. we've had this tradition for over 100 years. we do it well and i think the consumers come here for that reason during this time. >> and how does this year compare to previous cycles with the candidates? i you seeing fewer or more people? more interaction? >> this cycle definitely started earlier.

biden came in february of last year and president trump came in april. that has been different. people have dropped from the race much earlier in the primary this season. other than that, it has been business as usual. all the media is down here and we are happy to have them. people from massachusetts and vermont, coming here to ask questions as well. >> do you particularly have a favorite moment or memory? is there something that the staff remembers that is kind of a story that is going to be told forever? >> kevin costner came. probably the most starstruck we've ever been. he was stumping for buttigieg. we were all pretty amazed by that. that'll go down in history. >> do your memory what he ordered? >> i remember serving him our homemade twinkies.

he really enjoyed it. he was here for a couple of hours. i don't know what he had for a meal but he did eat and his whole team ate and he was very gracious. >> it's been here for over 100 years. any predictions for 2028? >> will be ready for it. we are ready for it and we are excited for it. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." we are joined by scott spradling . he is the former political director at wmur-tv. he will be discussing with us the 2024 new hampshire primary and the future of the state's first in the nation status. good morning scott. guest: good morning. welcome from a cold but sunny new hampshire. host: i hope you guys are having

a little bit better whether then what they experienced in iowa last week. not quite as chilly. guest: absolutely. it looks like primary day is not going to be a terrible weather day. it'll be like in the 30's. host: we want to start off, straight at the new hampshire primary. before we talk about the republicans, where that is the big contest on tuesday, the democratic race. i want to pull up a couple of things. on my screen, i have an associated press article. the headline tells it all. it says new hampshire's presidential primary ballot will have 24 republicans and 21 democrats, but no joe biden. that's kind of the top line. i have a tweet from truth sayer who asks, what are your thoughts on the dnc takinnew hampshire first in the nation and giving it to south carolin

with biden not on the new hampshire ballot, how will that impact things? your answers? guest: it's a good question. i want to start with an analogy from the perspective of new hampshire democrats, who have been loyal to the white house, loyal to the cause and fighting to stay first in the nation in new hampshire. many democrats around here would feel a little bit like a battered spouse with the dnc, basically trying to pull the plug on our status and giving it to south carolina. for those who don't know at home, but may already, new hampshire has a state law that basically says we have to be one week ahead of any other similar type of primary election. that is why caucuses can go first because they are structured so differently. with president biden skipping the state, with the dnc trying to play south carolina first, but the new hampshire law staying put and keeping this

process affixed with tuesday's january 23 new hampshire primary date, we have this logjam. if you were to stop people that are very close to the new hampshire democratic party machine, i think what you would get is folks that are feeling upset, feeling very frustrated, angry by what they see as a political maneuver, not one that is based on issues and perhaps race and the types of conversations being used to explain why this is happening. from the new hampshire perspective, what you hear them say is we are playing the long game. we will have this election. we understand it is not sanctioned by the dnc. the democrats are standing by their man, the establishment party leadership is running a very high profile to make sure that democrats even though biden is not on the ballot, write his name in on tuesday and still vote for the president for reelection. polls are suggesting that'll be successful, that biden will

still win new hampshire and then there will be some coming to jesus type conversations at the democrat national convention this summer and we will see what happens. i would like to think that the new hampshire vote outcome and those delegates will be accepted and embraced as likely president biden circles the wagons to get ready for the 50 state general election strategy. from the democratic perspective, it seems shortsighted and political risky if not foolish to pick this kind of fight with new hampshire which in the general election has been a bit of a purple state. it's gone back and forth. our little electoral votes can matter because they are -- there are only so many battleground states in the general. new hampshire could play a role. to pick a fight with a state that you need in november seems very shortsighted for the dnc and new hampshire democrats get that. host: i have one more question

before we open up the phone lines. i want to give our viewers those numbers so they can start calling in. democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. if you are a new hampshire voter, we want you to call us at (202)-748-8003. start calling in now because we are going to get to the phone lines shortly. but i'm going to play -- going back to the other side of that debate on new hampshire going first. i want to show you, this is from pew research. it is looking at the racial and ethnic composition of the various parties. this goes from -- democrats are in this middle column. in 2022, the demographics of democratic voters, 64% white,

17% black, 11% asian, 4% hispanic, 4% other. you see it has not changed much over the years. it is in contrast to much wider demographics for republican voters. now let me pull up the racial breakdown in new hampshire. you've got white voters almost 89% of the population. hispanic or latino, 4%. african, 20% -- african-americans, 2%. demographics in the democratic elected nationally, 17% but again, only 2% black population in new hampshire. biden and his folks are arguing new hampshire is not reflective of the party. my question for you is, why should new hampshire remain

first when it doesn't really look like the democratic party? why should it be this bellwether as a first in the nation primary? guest: thank you. it is a fair question and most certainly a reasonable and fair debate. there are a few things that can be said. first, james mccann, head of the new hampshire naacp is a leading conversation leader and thought leader, around racial related conversations in new hampshire. black lives matter and protests that happened around the country also happened here in new hampshire. i think it is important for folks outside of the granite state to understand that while the racial makeup could be very different from other states, new hampshire is still having these conversations. it is not devoid of the conversations completely, when

you're talking about matters of race and race relations which is obviously such an important conversation, not just in south carolina or new hampshire but nationwide. we are having those conversations and the numbers are different, but it is not devoid of that. procedurally, new hampshire's primary is structured in a way that is open, which is that you don't have to be a member of the republican party to vote in the republican primary. you don't have to be a member of the democrat party to vote in the democratic primary. if you are not affiliated, like what i am, i can go in and on tuesday decide whether i want to take a democratic ballot or republican ballot and participate. procedurally, this election, this primary vote in new hampshire is a lot more reflective of the bellwether of a general election. it is a great testing ground, a small state, affordable state for media, accessible state where a town hall meeting, where

our participation in conversations is very high. we are also a live free or die state. it does not matter if you're white, black, brown, green, gay, it doesn't matter. you can be a part of the conversations because we are live free or die. our streak of independent voters, meaning voters of all walks of life, like to say stay out of my back pocket, stay out of my bedroom, otherwise let's have a conversation. that type of bellwether starting point for conversations about everything from finances to race, opens the last point i would make is simply this. i know that the argument being put forward to put south carolina first is driven by the kinds of numbers that you just talked about, but i do not think that is a authentic motivation or reason that is actually going on. that is a very important conversation.

there is an inauthentic edge to this. we all know that joe biden did not do well here in the primary and went to south carolina, mr. clyburn endorsed him, the black vote really pushed joe biden into a successful outcome in the south carolina primary. we all know there is a lot of politics happening here where this is more about people saying thank you and rewarding a state for an outcome then this is about shifting a dialogue where you are talking about the order of states that shift in terms of days and weeks. the practical outcome is, do we have that many different conversations in south carolina and/or new hampshire's first or second when it comes to the racial conversations? i think on the new hampshire perspective, we feel that we offer a broad landscape for these conversations and an opportunity for people to come and talk about whatever they like. host: alrighty, with that let's go to the phone lines.

democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. new hampshire voters, call us at (202) 748-8003. let's start off with douglas in goffstown, new hampshire. independent line. caller: hi, i was wondering if biden wins the primary, is the democrat party going to change the rules and give him the delegates? guest: that is a really good question. i think it is not clear right now and that final decision can be made at the somers democratic national convention. this is a good question because i think it goes to the efforts to bring the party together going from primary data's in the 50 state strategy to the dinner will election status. i think new hampshire democratic party leaders are hoping that number one on tuesday, the right in effort is successful for joe

biden and he takes the state, even if it is not an accepted result from the dnc. when joe biden becomes the nominee for the election in 2024, there is a kumbaya moment at the convention where a motion is made and a vote to accept new hampshire back into the fold and allow the delegates to participate as they move forward to november happens. i do not know if they are banking on it, but i think they are hoping for it. i believe that is an open question and a very good one. host: next up is sandra in richmond, virginia on the democratic line. caller: i have a cold. excuse my voice. one thing that caught me off guard is they used the analogy of a battered spouse earlier. please, please, as somebody or 19 years as a battered spouse -- you can compare it to our relationship with the government, but not voting.

i do not know how new hampshire is representative of the entire country that is mostly white with a sprinkle of brown. host: anything to respond to? guest: thank you. my apologies for that analogy, if it upset anyone. i was trying to get a sense of, trying to paint a picture of there is a close family relationship here among democrats, the dnc, the new hampshire democratic party have always worked close together. at this point now, new hampshire democrats are trying hard to stay super close to joe biden and the president and supporting the incumbent for a reelection effort in new hampshire, delegates are for electoral vote, really important in the general election because we are probably one of only maybe between eight and 10 states that

will be a factor in the election in november going forward because so any of the dates are either red or blue and productively so. it is very tough when the party status is essentially saying, this is a meaningless election. that is an insult to the new hampshire democratic party voters and those who will participate who are making their voice heard. it is tough and the party apparatus says it does not matter. they are having to walk that line between having to support the president, trying to defend the primary and maintain the relationship. it is very complicated and ethical. as far as the racial makeup, you are right, new hampshire has a much smaller proportion of other races in new hampshire than other states. at the same time, we have a very open conversation. many of the conversations about race relations have been happening. in fact, i do not know if the viewer noticed that not that long ago, when nikki haley was up here, there is a question

from a new hampshire voter about slavery, recognizing slavery, why the civil war happened. that conversation, that question happened in new hampshire. again, i would respectfully say these conversations are happening here, too. i support the party. i support the primary. i support keeping new hampshire first. i think it has proven itself as a wide open conversation ground for a variety of topics and a variety of candidates from a wide variety of backgrounds. i think it is a great melting pot place to start and a small, affordable state, which makes it a level playing field for candidates of all types of backgrounds. you can have small resources were big and still be able to connect with voters in the granite state. host: next up, we have charles in louisville, kentucky on the independent line. charles? caller: hello, can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead.

caller: yes. you know, a lot of this voting on abortion -- it seems like, anyway. the constitution, i hear some women that were talking earlier that it is constitutionally in their favor to have choice. i agree with that, but my point is, constitution. in that, i have never seen where we had a vote on changing the constitution where it used to be life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. now, it is liberty and the pursuit of happiness. the word life has been omitted.

every time you see -- every time, ever since kevin mccarthy became in the white house, it changed. host: all right, charles. we are going to stop you there. i do not think the constitution or the declaration of independence was changed, but anything else you want to respond to, scott? guest: thank you. the one thing this caller raised is the issue of abortion and life has been thrust to the forefront nationally and in many, if not all, states politically because of the supreme court decision from not that long ago. that conversation piece, especially for the general election, that topic will be a continued, hot topic. it is happening at multiple levels as we know. it is happening at the federal level as there are discussions and baits about potentially changing federal law. it is also because of the

supreme court decision, triggering debates on going in different states, including in new hampshire. there are bills being considered by the legislature in this session that have already begun up here in new hampshire. it is certainly a hot topic. it is a potential motivating issue for many, many voters around the country, including in new hampshire and it becomes an x factor in terms of the topics that could very well determine the outcome in november of the 24. host: alrighty. we are going to go to huntersville, north carolina now on the democratic line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i just wanted to say that mr. spradling is saying that new hampshire and i guess iowa, too, could have made a difference, or can make a difference in the democratic portion of the election.

but, joe biden, he got no numbers there in 2020. in fact, his political obituary was already being written. so, they did not give him the votes he needed to get going in 2020. south carolina did. he would have lost. he would have lost right there in iowa and new hampshire, for the most part, if he had not gotten all those votes in south carolina. so, i can understand the way he is seeing things. thank you. guest: very good point. i can understand the way he is seeing things, as well. you are right, joe biden has run for resident multiple times, has been in new hampshire multiple times and his results from the

granite state have never been all that good. i think the one perspective that i think is important is that no matter which party and whether you are the front runner, the one who is potentially with the highest upside, the most likely opportunity to win your party's nomination, one of the things about new hampshire is because it is accessible, because it is a bit of a high participation townhall meeting type of state, the one thing that new hampshire has been able to do for candidates across the board is to help prepare them. i think new hampshire's role is not to pick a president. new hampshire's role is to help refine and focus attention from a wide field of potential candidates, which is the norm except for this year we are seeing, and allow for a level playing field that is affordable market but at the same time, you have a lot of front runners who have stumbled on both sides of the party apparatus, republican and democrat.

they stumbled in new hampshire, but learned from new hampshire. i give you another example, way back into thousand when john mccain defeated george w. bush in new hampshire by a sizable margin. both candidates and the rest of the field went to south carolina where there was a very different type of conversation and a different type of debate. i think again, because new hampshire has an open primary, because it is a relatively small population and geographically, we are accessible by road within a couple of hours in any direction you have covered, more than 80% of the states population because we side in a small geographic area in our state, it makes for a accessible way to get to voters and have a real, authentic conversations and q and a. the voters take it seriously. they have participated in this in many decades. we are used to having these conversations. i think we are good at it. it should not be a barometer that you should have to meet the

expectations as a front runner to win new hampshire in order to maintain the order of states, in order for new hampshire to stay first in the nation. that would make it a far more subjective exercise to have a consistent landscape, accessible to voters, affordable, those are the kinds of factors that are also important, especially if you can accept that we are having any of the same conversations and no state is having exactly the same conversations. i was caucus voters have a lot of focus on -- iowa'a caucus voters have a lot of focus on agricultural issues. a broad cross-section of views and geography in the early states themselves can still make sense. host: next on the republican line, john is in mechanicsburg pennsylvania. caller: good morning. scott -- since we have

republican and democrat private corporations deciding on these caucuses, i want to throw something out for your thoughts. don't you think it is generally offensive to the entire country, every one of the 50 states that a handful of tiny states decide who they are going to vet, educate and train and test to spend trillions of dollars in tax money? it seems to me the voters are left out of the process completely and the private, individual parties are republican and democrats, select people and throw them at the people and say, here is your choice. the democrats the last two elections for president have not had a primary. they knocked bernie sanders out because they did not want him. they are saying joe is not going to run against the candidates. my question to you as a political guy, don't you think it is offensive to all 50 states they do not get to vote, have a voting week instead of a day and

have a primary week and let the voters of the entire country although to and pick a candidate for their presidential choice as opposed to having tiny, little states with private parties selecting people? that is my thought, those are my comments. just curious about your feedback. guest: thank you very much. being from pennsylvania, you are from one of those general election bellwether states that has gone back and forth between two parties. it is a strategically important state. my initial thoughts to that are, i think that there are plenty of examples of winners and folks who have done very well on both sides of the aisle in new hampshire that were absolutely not the corporate, the establishment, the front runner, the leadership pick for what would have been the parties apparatus. we can go back to the 1990's and say pat buchanan in the era of bob dole was a nominee but pat

buchanan won the primary that year. the benefit of having the smaller states and the smaller exercise primaries and caucuses to start this kind of process is, it forces the localization of a national race. the downside to what you are suggesting where it is a one week and all 50 states go at once, that tends to nationalize an election and it will advantage those candidates who have vast resources and an opportunity to run a 50 state strategy versus a process that leans in on allowing someone that is willing to spend the time in new hampshire and iowa and south carolina and other states to start these kinds of conversations. i do not think new hampshire's role in the entire national process is to pick a president. it is not that way. i think what we do is, we are providing a snapshot based on living room conversations, townhall conversations, interactions with the candidates in small group settings,

accessible settings, the showcase, here is where we are right now. here is what is happening and maybe a field of candidates within a larger roof that need more attention that, perhaps, we are getting folks a place to focus their attention. there are, i think, valuable roles played by different states along the line because the conversation changes, as do the issues, over the course of a long campaign. super tuesday can be a important day because it now starts to showcase, can you go from a living room in des moines or a townhall in rochester, new hampshire and then have a multiple state strategy where the conversations apply to multiple states? i think there is value in starting with smaller states first, and allowing there to be a bit of a barometer. i think it is important to keep results of the early states in perspective and see how the candidates adjust their message, their strategy, their investments, the conversation, if you will, to the following states.

i think there is a smart order of things that by letting smaller states go first, you level the playing field for candidates that may not have the national recognition or dollars. host: all right. let's go to portland, oregon. stephen is on the independent line. caller: hello from moscow. this is portland, oregon. i am thinking that it is unfortunate that the democratic party wants to move their primary to south carolina first, rather than new hampshire. from that opinion, it is somewhat racist because what the democratic party is formulating out caucasians, and formulate their own opinions. they want to go to a state that is more friendly to them to start it out. screw precedent, right? to that woman in new hampshire -- new hampshire abolished slavery in 1857, but they also

joined the union and prosecuted a war to free slaves. thank you. guest: thanks very much. good early morning to you on the west coast. i think it is a complicated conversation. listen, i am a 30 year new hampshire resident. i covered for the local tv station and radio before that. i was on the air as a local reporter for a long time. i will admit out of the gate, i have a new hampshire bias myself. i have spent many years covering granite stater at the polls. one of the things i respect about the state of new hampshire is, they do not get too excited about the national press and national issues and national candidates descending on their home state. they do not get too fired up about too many of the different conversational issues. they take what i think is a very reasoned and accessible and accepting approach to issues.

they like to do their homework and ask direct questions. i think new hampshire voters have helped provide important barometer feedback in election cycles every four years that help us all look in the mirror to say, ok, what are the candidates talking about? what kinds of connections are they making? what is the feedback the voters are giving back, and why are they giving that kind of feedback? i think there is more that unites us then divides us around the country. there are lots of different conversations that are regional, but there are some that overlap the entire country. i believe that there is a logical order to the states. i support new hampshire going first, because i have been able to witness the types of conversations that happened between candidates and voters that is very authentic. it is a wonderful, political science exercise to witness. i think new hampshire doesn't well. they participate in great numbers.

level playing field in terms of affordability for candidates on both sides of the aisle. host: our previous guest, andrew smith from the university of new hampshire, noted they have polling that is going to be released in conjunction with cnn. that polling is now out. i want to give you the latest and allow you to react, scott. the headline on the cnn article is, trumps lead over haley widens to double digits in new hampshire. i'm going to read the top line first for the republicans. it says, trump holds 50% support among likely republican primary voters in the granite state, while his closest competitor, former south carolina governor nick the haley, stands at 39%. let's start there. 50% for trump. 39% for haley, according to this latest poll. is that about where you think things are lining up going into

the primary? anything surprising there? guest: not terribly, tia. i think from the conventional wisdom perspective and andy having been on the show before, he is a great man and good friend of mine. i think these numbers are in line with a lot of the other polls we have seen to this point. yet, i will say that we are now entering into that window of time where new hampshire voters will make the final decisions. i know it might be hard for folks to believe given all of the advertising, all of the mailers, that there are a number of folks up here that have not made a final decision. quite frankly, the date -- they date until they have to be married. marriage date is tuesday. there is a lot of open-minded and a decent percent of voters, am i going to vote? if i am an independent, who am i going to support and what does my vote look like?

for the independent voters, there is a wide set of options. one of the things about these numbers is that, despite the conventional wisdom and that is where we are seeing this expectation of 50% trump, 40% haley, probably 5% desantis, that is what we are led to believe to come to fruition on tuesday. it seems that is very likely. there is still this window of opportunity when you look at the 2016 republican primary vote totals, you see some interesting numbers break down. if you start factoring in, there were roughly 287,000 ballots cast in 2016. the secretary of state is protecting 320,000 ballots will be cast in the republican primary on tuesday. some are saying it is going to be higher, lower, but that is your median estimation right now. if you look at the 2016 numbers,

those who voted for trump which was about 100000 and those who voted for the other candidates, and you start breaking down the independent vote number within the republican primary, you start looking at numbers that suggest that nikki haley could be within a few thousand votes of donald trump in terms of how it breaks down, if that is a decent apples to apples comparison. what i mean by that is, if there is a decent turnout among independent voters, 65% of which polls suggest are with nikki haley and that is a number that surges, that starts to tighten this race in ways that may be the polls will not necessarily capture. the polls are pretty consistent. it seems to suggest, 5040 will be the way it is going to break down between trump and haley between independent voters. what we have seen is the polls giving us a snapshot, but not

necessarily capturing that last surge of numbers and to be within eight to 12 points of donald trump, that is the kind of number that can change and heighten dramatically. from the last point about polls, strategically, you have the argument of, does nikki haley have to beat donald trump in new hampshire to claim victory? we remember back in 1992, bill clinton was the comeback kid. you can make this a tight outcome if you are nikki haley. you can make that argument the potential is there and maybe say, later night and a closer race than anticipated. if the expectation is 10 to 12 points, maybe you come in at 4, 5, 6? maybe nikki haley can take that as a victim from -- a victory from the podium on tuesday night. there is movement here that keeps this interesting. host: i want to quickly have you

respond to the democratic side of this latest unh and cnn polling. it says about two thirds of likely primary voters on the democratic side say they plan to write in president joe biden. that is 63%, and dean phillips, who is the minnesota congressman, he is polling at about 10%. marianne williamson, the author, about 9%. are you surprised that so many new hampshire voters, given their frustration with the change in the primary calendar, are still planning to say they are planning to write in biden? guest: so, i am not surprised. i give credit to congressman phillips for investing time and energy and trying to make the connection here with voters in new hampshire. he is covering a lot of ground and those poll numbers have remained reasonably consistent throughout the primary polling since congressman phillips got in. i am not terribly surprised by the numbers. i am not surprised by the

inability by new hampshire democrats -- by the ability of new hampshire democrats to balance the battle of the primary lineup in the battle for the white house. for democrats, i would assume they understand for them what is at stake is, potential disarray within the party if they do not align behind joe biden and help push him over the finish line in november, versus trying to defeat donald trump if he is the nominee. that is a partisan perspective. i am not that surprised new hampshire voters can set aside the battle of who goes first and focus in on who they believe will be the best for the next four years. i think it sends that message that for new hampshire, do not forget, we have an all democratic delegation in new hampshire. our senators and congressmen and women are all dems. we have a new hampshire house of 400 people that is almost a

50-50 split. the new hampshire democratic party is alive and well and a powerful engine in the granite state. back in 2000, while all of the focus was on the recount that was historic, new hampshire's four electoral votes, there was a narrow victory by george w. bush in new hampshire in 2000 that gave george bush the white house. if new hampshire had gone for al gore back then the weight all the other england states did, al gore would have been president in 2000 and the florida recount what not have mattered because it was that close four electoral. we are a purple state with a lot of active democrats. my hope is the dnc understands maintaining their relationship with the granite state is important. look at what granite state voters are still willing to do even as the dnc is trying to

take their leadoff spot. host: let's get to one more call. mount rainier, marilyn, independent line. marsha? oh. sorry. that was my fault. now we got you. caller: ok. i said thank you. as we know back in the day, it was the democrats that were the racist. it was the democrats that wanted to fight for slavery, and was probably the democrats that were the kkk. my point is, i'm going to vote for mrs. haley. i think that she would be a good president. the president that we have now and vice president, they messed up the country. i do not think trump is going to be good. my vote is for her. i want to let her know, ignore all those people. thank you for letting me make my

suggestion. bye-bye. host: scott, as we wrap up, any closing thoughts? guest: no. i just wanted to thank you and your viewers. having conversations like this, having a free exchange of ideas is what keeps us moving forward. i would like to say, i think there is a lot more that unites us in this country then divides us. we are dealing with tense times and somewhat controversial characters on the stage and issues that we talk about from time to time, but i think cooler heads prevail in this country. i am proud to be a part of this conversation and process. i encourage all granite staters to get out on tuesday and register their vote and participate. host: thanks so much. we have been speaking this morning with scott spradling, the former political director at wmur. thanks again for joining us. guest: thanks, tia. have a great day. host: we are going to take a quick break.

when we come back, we are going to go back to ou question where we started the show. this time, anyone can call in. go ahead and start now. how important is abortion in your 2024 vote? democrats, call us at (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will g to your calls after the break. ♪ ♪ >> watch c-span's campaign 2024 coverage of the new hampshire primary at the candidates make their final pitches to primary goers. we will feature campaign analysis with new hampshire political reporters. take your calls and get your reaction on social media, coverage of the new hampshire primaries now through primary night, tuesday on the c-span networks.

c-span now, our free mobile app or online at c-span.org/campaign 2024. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ ♪ >> it has been three years since the january 6 event at the u.s. capitol occurred. since that time, close to 300 individuals have been charged with a crime by the u.s. justice department. because of the sixth amendment in the u.s. constitution and subsequent supreme court decisions, defendants have a right to an attorney and when necessary, paid for by the taxpayers. cara and west has been one of those defense attorneys involved in the january 6 trials in the united states district port of the district of columbia. she is a graduate of drake law school in des moines, iowa. >> defense attorney cara ann west on this episode a book notes plus. book notes plus is available on

the c-span now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ ♪ >> discover the heartbeat of democracy with c-span's voices 2024 as we engage voters nationwide asking, what issue is most important to you in this election and why? >> these issues that need to be addressed in this election are the economy. we need to make sure the american people can afford a good, american dream life. additionally, we need to address the abortion laws as all life is precious. >> immigration is my number one issue. with the borders being open and my tax dollars paying to continue to feed people who are not americans. they come here illegally. it is crushing my pockets and other fellow americans. >> the most important for me is health care, have it to be free for everybody. ♪ >> c-span's voices 2024.

be a part of the conversation. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." we are going to return to the same question where we started the show. the question is, how important is abortion as you make your decision about who to support in this year's presidential election? the question is open to all. if you are a democrat, call us at (202) 748-8000, republicans, dial (202) 748-8001 . independents, (202) 748-8002. let's start with elaine in allen park, michigan on the democratic line. caller: hi, good morning. i wanted to say that i think abortion is the number one issue for me, personally. i have never had one, but my best friend did in high school.

it was a matter of life and death. we had to hide it from her parents. it was a thing that, you hear stories of women that are bleeding out in their cars, that are going home and having miscarriages and getting sick or sepsis. this is not the way that we want to treat women. the issue for me is personal, but also, i am a woman. they are taking our rights away. we have no freedom. how do you have a government and a society where women are at risk? this is the most important thing. i will for sure be voting for joe biden. it is no question. thank you. host: appreciate your call this morning. earl is in new york, republican line. caller: thank you. host: yes, go ahead. caller: hello? host: go ahead. caller: ok. i have been a registered

republican since i turned 18 in 1974. i find that the -- what went down in texas, for women's health, it is very important and should be protected, not taken and abused by non-doctors like the state attorney general in texas and the male supreme court. so, please protect. host: i was asking lots of republicans this. how important is this to you as far as who you plan to support for president, knowing that generally speaking, the republican candidates for president have not expressed a willingness to protect access to abortion? caller: i really have not made

up my mind who i am going to vote for in november right now. i am really leaning towards -- definitely not a republican candidate, especially if it is trump. host: all right, thank you so much for calling us this morning. let's go back to the democratic line. ann is calling from wisconsin. caller: thank you. yeah, it is a very -- it is very important to me that abortion is legal for women and i support people who will give that right back to women. it is ridiculous that we are even talking about it. it is a health care decision. it is something that, it is

between a woman and a doctor. her health. why does her life -- why is her life not as important as the child's life? women are losing their ability to have more children because they are not treating them now, because of this. it is ridiculous. a lot of women, a lot of things are not found out until you are at the 20 week point, when there is issues, which happened to my daughter. it is not like you have all this time in the world to make a decision on what you are going to do, you know? you just have to, you only have so much time. this arbitrary 20 weeks, 14 weeks, it puts even more pressure on what you should do and how they want to treat you. so, i think politicians have nothing to do with, should have nothing to do with deciding about abortion. host: all right, ann.

next on the line, robert in arkansas, independent line. caller: hello, this is robert. host: go ahead, robert. caller: well, the issue of abortion is not a subject which is covered in the u.s. constitution. what it says is, things which are not enumerated like raising armies, providing for bankruptcies, commerce between the states. those are federal issues. abortion is not a federal issue. 100% of the mission should go in terms of abortion in terms of the law but the law would not be constitutional because the federal government has no place in this decision. it is between a man, a woman and in some cases, the state because some states feel that fetuses have to have a certain point, should be protected. other states do not.

so, whatever the federal government does, they are off-base. they have no voice in this particular decision. that is what most people, i think, are missing. host: all right, robert. debbie is next, calling from philadelphia, democratic line. caller: yes, good morning, tia. the reason why i am calling, i hear the "pro-lifers." they will say, except for. the minute you put in except for, you become pro-choice. what about that part? it is the definition. you can't be a pro-lifer and put except in there, whatever the reason. now, you are pro-choice. that part. thank you. host: ok, debbie. let's hear from arthur on the

independent line from arlington, tennessee. caller: yes, good morning, everyone. i feel this whole subject, both sides are playing the voters. like the guy said, this should not have any business, nowhere on the table as people voting for pro-life or be against it or for it because they are just using us for our vote. they are making us go against each other. that is why i am going to vote independent upcoming in this year's election. you guys have a great day. host: arthur, are you still with us? ok, he is gone. i was going to ask him who. kim is in prairie this sack, wisconsin, republican line. go ahead. caller: yes, i just wanted to

call because this is an issue as a multi-generation member of strong republicans. as a woman, i found myself struggling with this from the time i was 15, 16, trying to understand. my dad said something to me. he would never say that abortion was ok, ever. but, when i asked, what if i needed to choose? he could not answer that. that struck me as something that was odd. as i have gotten older, i look at politicians and the people that are either pro-life, pro-choice, they allow us to get comfortable with something. as soon as we can say, yes, pro-life or pro-choice is correct, they want to take it to an extreme. they keep pushing the envelope. for that reason, i will be voting pro-life with a

republican candidate because i believe that women have a right through the first trimester. i think even through mid of the second trimester. once you get to 18, 20 weeks, we are talking about a human life. for those pro-choice who keep saying it is a woman's right all the way to the end, that comes down to, frankly, murder at that point. i believe there has been choices for many weeks for women to have. once we start pushing the envelope, you are pushing me back to being pro-life all the way. i will vote for a candidate that supports that. host: i want to ask you, do not leave yet. are you there? caller: yes. host: so, you said you support abortion restrictions to a point, but you want it to be protected up to a certain point, as well?

which candidate for president you think best reflects your views on abortion, if any? caller: that is the hard part. for that reason, i think it was robert that said i do not think it should be a federal decision. i do not think it has a place. i think it should be put to the states to determine if they are going to allow abortions were not. and then, i can choose to live in that state or not. but, i think it is a political topic that if i vote for donald trump, it is going to be, nope, abortion is not allowed. that said, if i vote for a democratic candidate, it is going to be, have an abortion up to 40 weeks and i do not want that, either. at the end of the day, i will stand with the republican party because of the way they are pushing the envelope with this issue. host: all right, appreciate your

call, kim. let's hear from harry in charleston, west virginia. republican line. caller: good morning from wild, wonderful, west virginia. two points. if a candidate cannot get lifeline, it doesn't make a difference how liberal or conservative they are. two, character counts. with president biden, in the law school i attended, if anybody in that law school under the honor code piled away to someone who cheated, you both got kicked out. there were no exceptions. period. in this case, president biden's case, he said it was just a silly mistake, that he was

caught plagiarizing. so, my point is, to summarize -- character counts. we have a president that does not have character any more than ted kennedy, when he drove off the bridge. host: all right, harry. we appreciate your call this morning. we are going to move on to darren in colorado springs, colorado, democratic line. caller: good morning, tia. i am truly flabbergasted that this is still a topic these days, like the woman called earlier said a woman should have a right to choose whatever she wants to do with her body. earlier this morning, you had people calling in quoting the bible. give me a break. the god of the bible killed more innocent life than hitler.

he told them to go ahead and rap e their women, save the virgins. he killed kids for making fun of a bald person. this christian nationalism needs to be stopped. thank you, have a good day. host: let's hear from dorothy in grand island, new york on the republican line. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i just want to say that i am 100% pro-life. we are all children of god. god created all of us. he never dreamed for anyone to kill anybody. thou shalt not kill. jesus also said that in the bible, and he is the word of god. choose life, he said it himself. i put before you life and death. choose life, then. host: dorothy, who is the most

pro-life, presidential candidate in your opinion? caller: i was thinking of ron desantis. host: all right. we appreciate your call this morning. steve is next in ohio, democratic line. caller: yeah, good morning. my point is that the abortion question belongs to the women, and her family, her doctor and her faith. this is where it belongs. the question about a life is very precious, but it also means life after you are born. the republicans are all saying that this issue should be something that -- they do not

want to provide any childcare, any maturity time, where the woman is having her baby at home. they do not want to provide any of that care. the people have to make decisions, hard incisions. that is not an easy thing to do. it belongs with the women. the next thing is that trump caused 500,000 people to perish during the covid situation. who is talking about those people's lives? if president trump would have followed the cdc guidance, 500,000 people would have been alive today. what about those lives? thank you very much. host: all right, steve. before we get tomorrow your calls, i want to show this chart

by the washington post. it is mapping states where abortion access ballot measures could be on the ballot this year. the orange is the only state so far, iowa, where there could be a measure on the ballot to restrict abortion. all of the blue are measured on the ballot that could allow for more abortion access, or at least protect access to abortion. new york and maryland in the dark blue are definite on the ballot this year. the light blue states are the ones where it is possible. i want to point out, there are a few swing states on here. we have got nevada, arizona that are considered swing states where an abortion measure could be on the ballot. florida is not considered a swing state, although it once was. it also could have an abortion referendum on the ballot. as we talk to you, the question

is, how important is abortion as you decide who to support in 2024? democrats, call us at (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. gloria in north dakota on the republican line. what are your thoughts this morning? caller: stop sex altogether. as a 12-year-old girl, would she rather go to a game, a movie or bingo or church supper then change dirty diapers every day? host: ok. all right, gloria. that is her idea. lewis in oakland, new york, independent line. caller: good morning. i just want to state that it is a woman's right. period. nobody else's.

host: all right, lewis. appreciate that this morning. let's hear from richard in california, independent line. caller: yes, hello. thank you for taking my call. i am kind of in the middle of all three. [laughter] republican, democrat, independent. actually, i have believes in the true god. i do not want to get religious or anything, some are doing that. god really is in control, putting in position who is going to be elected. i try not to get into politics too much myself. four abortion, i am in the middle of both because as a christian, the republicans think

we should be pro-life. democrats are protecting the women that have situations where they have to have an abortion because of emergency measures, a girl possibly dying because she has a child and there was complications sometimes. i wanted to bring up these spiritual -- the spiritual aspect of it i'm a that god is really in control. i am not going to worry who gets to become president, because god is going to put in position. even if it is not a christian president, we still need to concentrate on following god, not people of this world. host: do you think any of the candidates on the ballot most align with your views of abortion, a more middle of the road view? do any of the candidates mirror that, richard?

caller: do any of the candidates what? host: do any of the candidates that you have heard from running for president mirror your thoughts on abortion, taking a middle-of-the-road approach, not too extreme on either side? caller: i do not really think so, but i kind of like haley. she kind of made the mistake of answering that question about the slaves and what happened way back when. i feel bad that she did not answer the way i think that she should have. she had to backpedal and say, oh, yeah, definitely slaves. i am leaning toward haley. i like some of her views a little bit. thank you. host: thank you. up next, we have charlie in connecticut, democratic line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a question -- i am a

christian. because i am a christian, it is my choice. many religions -- we have many religions in america and we choose which religion we want to worship god in. i believe god gives us a choice of how we are. my concern is that to have taken choice away from people when they make laws to say we do not want you to do something that you need to do for your health and for your life. i believe that because i am pro-choice, i am not against anyone else having a choice. it is a personal choice, so it should not be in the government at all. my concern is that, i am annoyed about all of the people who think that they should have a choice over my body and my life. i do not want to have a choice

over your body and your life. in america, we are supposed to be free to make free choice. i believe in free choice for everyone. i agree with the other caller that said, once a life is forced upon a person to have, the government do not want to help that person in rearing that life or give any aid to any women that need help. my thought is that it is against our personal choices. host: thanks for your call this morning. let's go to the republican line now. arthur is calling from utica, michigan. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: how are you doing? listen, my opinion on abortion. i am a christian and i believe like other christians, thou shalt not kill. i can see in certain cases --

host: keep going, arthur. caller: yes. i believe the lady should have choice, like incest, rape and that. i always hear about abortion and they never talk about the husband's. don't they have a choice, too, and a decision in raising the family? host: all right, arthur. paul is next in fresh meadows, new york, independent line. caller: how are you? thank you so much for this station. it is so when lightning. as to the abortion question, unfortunately, it has become a political and religious question. it should just be a choice question. neither group should influence

what a woman once to do. that should be between her and her doctor. as to which candidate i would choose, i would choose the candidate that i want my daughter to be proud to bring home and no that person they are dating would protect their interests. we have a lot of petitions -- a lot of politicians that do not seem to be in that realm. thank you very much for c-span. host: thank you, paul. let's hear from margaret now in santa maria, california, democratic line. caller: thank you. this is the second most important issue for me after climate change. in the 1990's, the march on washington was now. we have been fighting for this for years. we came from all over the country to d.c. for the day.

this was a very important issue and it has been that way all of these years. we are still fighting for it. at that time, i was living in new york. so. i do not know how long we have to keep fighting for it if this keeps going on and on. thank you. host: all right, margaret. we thank you for your call. that is going to do it for us for today's "washington journa " ." we appreciate your calls. we appreciate the discussion. "washington journal" will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. thank you and have a great day. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

announcer: c-span's washington journal, elite forum to discuss the latest issues in government, politics and public policy from washington, d.c. and a quest. coming up monday morning, a syndicated talkshow host and hostess of "attitude" discusses the 2024 new hampshire primary and issues important to democratic voters. then the publisher and managing editor of "inside sources" talks about the issues important to republicans. join the conversation live at 7:00 eastern monday morning on c-span, c-span now our free mobile app, or online at

c-span.org. announcer: c-span campaign for 24 coverage continues today with a pair of live events from the hampshire. at 4:00 p.m., former republican congressman matt gaetz will be stumping for donna trump campaign will have coverage of his remarks. then latern e afternoon, nikki haley makes one of her final appearances before tuesd's voting. she will be joined by t.v.'s judge judy at the event which you can see starting at 7:00 p.m. eastern also here on c-span. and a reminder to watch all r campaign coverage on the go with c-span now, our free mobile video app, or online at c-span.org. ♪ announcer: watch c-span's campaign 2024 coverage of the new hampshire primary as the candidates make their final pitches to primary goers before the granite states's first an ignition contest.

we will also feature camping analysis with political reporters, take your calls and get your reaction on social media. coverage of the new hampshire primary now through primary net tuesday on the c-span networks, c-span now, our free mobile app, or online at c-span.org/ campaign/2024. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ announcer: c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> go, you think this is just a community center? no, it's way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with 1,000 community centers to create wi-fi enabled listings so students from low income families can get the tools they need to get them ready for anything. announcer: comcast supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy. ♪ announcer: