it to happen quickly in the weeks to come. ♪ host: good morning. it is sunday, september 8, 2024. the country is preparing to hear from vice president kamala harris and president donald trump in the presidential debate on tuesday.

but in many ways, the fight for control of the white house will come down to the decisions of voters in a handful of swing states with the focus on arizona, georgia, michigan, nevada, north carolina, pennsylvania, and wisconsin. this morning, we want to hear from those of you in swing states about where you stand right now when it comes to your choice in campaign 2024. our number for democrats is (202) 748-8000. for republicans, (202) 748-8001. for independents, (202) 748-8002 . if you would like to text us, that number is (202) 748-8003. please be sure to include your name and where you are writing in from. we are also on social media at facebook.com/c-span and on x @cspanwj. once again, we are looking to hear from folks specifically in swing states about where you stand in campaign 2024. let's have a look at with a

swing state actually is. as it is listed here, right now the current swing states are again north carolina, over here which would to trump in the 2020 presidential election, georgia, pennsylvania, wisconsin, michigan, nevada, and arizona, which is here. and for a definition, swing states, also known as battleground states, are states that can swing to either democratic republican candidates depending on the election. because of their potential to be won by either candidate, political parties often spend a disproportionate amount of time and campaign resources winning the states. while there is no universal definition of what identifies as a swing state, they are characterized by having small vote margins that different political parties win over time. since 1992, 30 states have voted for the candidate of the opposite party from the previous

election at least once, and 26 states were won by less than three points in any presidential election since 1992. if we go over to vox.com, they have information about the state of the 2024 race explained in seven charts with some information about swing states in particular. if we scroll down a bit here, you can see the share of undecided voters in major battleground states. and in arizona, these are the shares of undecided voters. but they tend to have a few more in swing states than other states. in arizona, undecided, 1%. georgia, 2.1%. michigan, 2.4%. but you can also see the balance between support of the candidates in these battleground states and how close it is with harris at 47.3% in arizona compared to trump's 50.4%. even tighter margins in states

like nevada and north carolina. the candidates are taking a bit of a lighter schedule this weekend as they prepare for the upcoming presidential debate, but we have some clips of the candidates on the campaign trail. while campaigning yesterday in pittsburgh, vice president harris responded to a question about her endorsement by former vice president dick cheney and his daughter, former representatives liz cheney. she was also asked about this week's upcoming debate. [video clip] >> actually, i am honored to have their endorsement, and i think that what they vote as leaders who are well respected are making an important statement that it is ok and it is not important to put -- it is ok and it is important to put country above party. it is an important statement right now. a lot of what i think is happening, and i was just

talking to some fulton pittsburgh about it, is that people are exhausted about the division and the attempts to divide us as americans. that is stepping up to make this public statement, a courageous but also for the people like the folks i was just talking with, it reinforces for them that we love our country and we have more in common than what separates us. yes, i am. yes. i finally got to look these. that is part of my debate preparation right now. there is a lot, but look, it is time to turn the page on the divisiveness. it is time to bring our country together, chart a new way forward. host: that is -- asked for

former president trump to him he was campaigning in wisconsin, where he attacked governor tim walz and other democrats for their stance on abortion as well as praising the overturning of roe v. wade despite supporting some restrictions. [video clip] >> but tamp on tim even signed a law that allows abortion in the month and babies to be executed after birth. in other words, the baby is born and what do you do if the mother does not want a baby? that is execution. nobody wants that. there are six radical looked states that allow that, that nobody wants it to happen, nobody wants to see it happen, where they are allowed to execute a maybe after birth and nobody talks about it. we did a great thing when we got roe v. wade out of the federal government and got it back to the states now the states are all voting.

like ronald reagan, i happen to go with the exceptions. i think it is important. you have to go with your hearts 85% of republicans go with exceptions for rape, incest, life of the mother, but the three exceptions. but nobody wants it to happen eight months, seventh month, ninth, but you have after birth and more states are even planning on doing that. nobody wants that. now because of what we have done, they wanted -- all the great legal scholars wanted out of the government. democrats, republicans, liberals , conservatives, everybody wanted it out because it did not belong there. they wanted it to go back to the states and now the states are all voting and some of those votes are coming out looking liberal if you look at ohio and some of the states, but the people are voting. we put it in the hands of the people, and they are voting. that is the way people have

wanted for many, many years. i am just happy we had supreme court justices that had the courage to do that because that has torn our country apart for 52 years. and now the people have voted. host: we are wanting to hear from voters in swing states this morning. let's start with tavares in athens, georgia, on our land for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. first of all, it was such a shock with the announcement that he would not be coming into the office. we are grateful for the sunday program, but i went to facebook and got in the conversation. a lot of us had the same sentiment he really did the nation a great service and truly appreciated him. let's get right to it.

i love span. in is career politicians versus the will of the people. career politicians have sold out the people to gain material wealth the will of the people is adverse to the selling out of the people. donald trump is the force of the people while kamala harris, joe biden, tim walz, barack obama, they are career politicians. the ability to brainwash the people, to program, to propagandize people is a marketing strategy, a marketing and advertising campaign. the capability to do this has been weaponized on the subconscious level that people are unaware of this. host: i wonder how you have been experiencing this election and the swing state of georgia. have you been seeing a lot of ads and campaign events? caller: actually, i have seen a

lot of ads, kimberly, but the thing is i know it is all a marketing strategy they are selling it to the people and the people are unaware of this. if you vote for the harris-walz campaign, you are setting yourself up to be sold out to globalists. thank you so much. keep up the great work. host: ok. patrick is in grand rapids, michigan, on avalon for democrats. good morning, patrick. caller: hi. good morning. and thank you for taking my call. i guess i will briefly say i am supporting harris. my observations in the state right now in the area where i live, i see it pretty much heavily towards the harris-walz ticket. i am in grand rapids, michigan. but as you go into the more rural areas, you see a change. i have a summer home in northern michigan, and it is very much trump territory up there right now.

see definite divides within the state here as well, but again, i am pretty much for the harris-walz ticket myself for several reasons. host: ok. next up is richard and mount olive, north carolina, on our independents. good morning, richard. caller: yes, good morning. i am definitely for harris. there is a couple things i want to touch on. we heard vance talking about the cap ladies and they should not have a say in the projection of the future of our country. what has the but he asked them about men without children? do they not have a right to talk about the investment of our future -- the advancement of our future? what about trump? twice this week he admitted he lost the election. he says by a whiskered but it was really over 7 million votes, which is not a whisker. all of these people from january 6 have been in jail for months or years, he lied to them.

the woman who was shot in the white house on january 6. host: in the capitol building come another white house. caller: i am sorry, the capitol building. she was cool because she believed trump's lie. the police officers who died and were beaten by the crowd were because of trump's lie. why doesn't anybody talk about the stuff? they talked about harris and their children at school and a couple days later they come home with a sex change operation. who in their right mind thinks of such stuff, and who in their right mind believes such stuff? why does the media not covering this? if joe biden had said something so ridiculous or branded, the media would be talking nonstop about it. 80 is not doing their job trump lies and lies and gets away with it, and the media for some reason refuses to talk about it. it is just getting frustrating. everyone can see trump's brain is not right.

there will be construed have done what the democrats did with biden. biden's brain is not there. he is not capable of another four years. trump's brain is clearly not there and he is not capable for another four years. host: we got your point. let's go to darrell and columbus, georgia, on the lead for democrats. caller: hey, how are you doing, tkibuli? --, kimberly? host:oo thank you. caller: i am on the alabama line in columbus. savannah is ovthe coast everybody down here is fired up. we want harris inhe. if you are a man in this state, you don't want trump nowhere near your wife, your daughter, your mother, your aunt. this guy is trash. we will do everything we can to get him out of there.

especially in my case, i am a veteran. i definitely don't want him nowhere near me at all. my last point is, kimberly, i don't know if you know or not, but the epstein files. some of it has been released. i want to see the remainder of the epstein files. he was on the epstein plane seven times. he has been on jeffrey epstein's plane seven times. that information needs to come out. i think the bombshell will hit next month when the judge will finally release the remainder of the files. kimberly, thank you so much. and go, georgia bulldogs. host: georgia is one of the target markets for a new ad from the harris campaign. there is an article about this on nbc news. harris launches a new ad time trump to project 2025, targeting black voters on nfl sunday. the new 32nd spot comes as trump tries to distance himself from the playbook of the priorities

written by his key allies. and if you go down here a bit, in a press release the campaign said the ad will air at upcoming highview which of sporting events including saturday's college football match between michigan and tennessee and the nfl season opener for the atlanta falcons and pittsburgh steelers on sunday. the ad will appear on prominent daytime tv shows that over index with black americans like the jennifer hudson show. we actually have a bit of that ad that will begin airing, that is supposed to be airing this weekend and today aimed at black voters. [video clip] >> the project 2025 agenda will give him unchecked political power with no progress and will take back americans back. it will strip away our voting rights protection and eliminates the department of education and requires states to monitor women's pregnancy. it will ban abortion and rip away health coverage for millions. kamala harris will stand up to

trump and his dangerous plan to control our lives because trump is out for himself while kamala harris is out for the people. >> i'm kamala harris, and i approved this message. host: next up, let's hear from sarah in pennsylvania i never for independents. good morning, sir. caller: hi, good morning. i just have to ask a question because and put toledo we see a lot of trump signs where we are. i am kind of up in the air. . i was not until last night. somehow we came across this interview with judge joe brown. are you familiar with him? host: i'm not. caller: he was on tv and worked with harris all of those years. he is prominent. he is a judge. he is really good. like the man and watched them for years but i was shocked when he was on their describing working with kamala harris, and the things he said, i am surprised he is not sued for them he said she was horrible

and all the things she did and she was just a puppet and horrible. he said if she gets in, it is terrible. is this true? can people just up and say those things? if not, could you please tell he where that interview was, if it was on cable somewhere? my husband switched over to the football game so i did not get to hear the whole interview, but apparently he is out there saying what she was really like he worked with her for 20 years. host: so i am not familiar with that specific interview, but i wanted to look at article here from axios about pennsylvania, where sarah was coming in from, pointing out that trump and harris are going all in to make pennsylvania the new florida, the story focusing on political ad spending across swing states. in 2000, it was florida, florida, florida. in 2024, it is pennsylvania,

pennsylvania, pennsylvania. both sides are treating pennsylvania like the ohio or florida of old. that state's winter is likely the winner of the white house. the campaigns will spend more than double on advertising in pennsylvania than any of the other six swing states according to an axios analysis of ad impact data. it could help persuade vice president kamala harris, who at the time was still choosing vice president running mates, but this was back in august, showing that in pennsylvania they were spending on the democratic side $109 million. on the republican side, $102 million. all right. now then, let's hear from ron in michigan on our line for republicans. good morning, ron. hi there, ron. go ahead. caller: how can anybody believe

all of these false ads on tv? it is ridiculous. trump has nothing to do with 2025. january 6 was not a riot. people did not beat cops to death. one cop died of a heart attack the day after. it had nothing to do with january 6. it is just quite atrocious that people keep stealing lies that they see on news channels that do not verify anything he said. host: ok. anita is in hampstead, north carolina, on ever line for democrats. good morning, anita. caller: good morning. host: what is your -- 2024? caller: i will be voting for kamala harris. i will just say i would like to see more ads in north carolina, in my area for kabbalah, and not so many for trump.

that is all i had to say. thank you. host: ok. back to that article in vox about charts related to the election. they lay out how democrats have outspent republicans in the major battleground states, and anita was calling in from north carolina, where democrats have outspent republicans. 22 point $7 million on ads versus 17 $4 million from republicans. but it is much less then the numbers as you see here in pennsylvania, michigan, or the other battleground states. once again, we are looking to hear from folks in the battleground states. that number for democrats, (202) 748-8000. for republicans, (202) 748-8001. an independents, (202) 748-8002. you could also text us at (202) 748-8003. texted us and said the economy

and border were much better under trump, i will be voting for him. bill is in michigan on our line for republicans. good morning, bill. caller: good morning. firstly, i would rather say you got it right, brother. second, married for 48 years, one wife, one life. i would not vote for a woman kamala's age. host: ok. there is another text message that says, i am voting for harris. my wife was a longtime republican, but no more. she switched independent. she is voting for harris. who in their right mind would vote for him? i live in boone, north carolina, home of cap state university. donald is in raleigh, north

carolina, on our line for independents. good morning, donald. caller: good morning. i just have a couple things i wanted to say to the first guy that called in from georgia, tavares. he said that trump -- first of all, i want to say this election cycle i will be voting for harris. thing is, if kamala harris wins the presidential election in 2024, if you are dissatisfied with the performance, you can vote her out in four years. if donald trump wins, you don't get to vote him out. you don't even get to vote anymore. second thing i wanted to say to the guy who said trump was a voice of the people, tavares, i am happy to let him know i inducted him into my to say the 30 pieces of silver club. like jd vance, he turned his back on his heritage, his ancestors, and any offspring that may have.

like the bible says about, let his habitation be desolate and his position given to another. another thing is what i am hearing from trump is the same thing that he is spewing the same hatred that was viewed by people like kevin phillips who wrote the southern strategy. he simply said, find out who hates who and pit them against each other. i am telling you, where i go, the hatred that i hear some of the maga americans say in the people who sympathize with them is not true sometimes i will go to walmart, i will go to malls, and i see young kids. host: i think we got your idea. let's hear from horace in

philadelphia, pennsylvania, on our land for democrats. go ahead, horace. good morning. caller: good morning, my dear. how are you? host: i am good, thank you, but can you turn down your tv volume us? while you work on that, we would hear from stanley in middletown, pennsylvania, on our line for republicans good morning, stanley. caller: good morning. hello, america. trump is the voice of america. harris is the voice of the globalist elites, like the other fellow said. if you vote for harris, you are voting against the sovereignty of america, the american people. if you want to see with the illegal aliens had done by biden and harris letting our borders be wide open, go into any emergency room in america and try to get in there.

as an american, you are being displaced, black americans and white americans. the black americans of chicago, they woke up to because they were putting illegal aliens in their neighborhoods. now they have venezuelan gangs in chicago neighborhoods. thank god the black americans are finally waking up. it is a sad time for america. trump has nothing to do with project 2025. that is the heritage foundation. him and vance have disavowed that their agenda is not 2025. trump is the voice of america. they are spewing so many lies with harris, and i don't understand how they get away with it. host: stanley mentioned immigration there. one of the newest trump ads airing in battleground states is targeting harris on immigration and social security as well. we will play that ad.

[video clip] >> attention, seniors. kamala harris has promised to misty for the 10 million illegals she allowed in as border czar, making them eligible for social security. studies have shown this will lead to cuts in your social security benefits.president trump opposes amnesty and any cuts to your benefits and will eliminate taxes to social security because he is on your side. >> i am donald j. trump, and i approve this message. host: cnn did a fact-check of that particular ad and found that the ad used an edited quote to attack nonexistent harris immigration proposal. a new television ad from former president trump's campaign as cnn reports, piles deception on deception to attack vice president kamala harris on immigration. the ad uses an edited quote to attack harris over a supposed proposal that she has not

actually made. the ad's claims are false. harris has not made any promise to grant legal status to all the migrants who cross the border during her vice presidency, though she has expressed support for a pathway to citizenship for some unspecified group of undocumented people. she has never said that recent migrants should be included, and harris' name does not appear in the actual said different immigration studies quote about the likely cost of embassy to social security. this interest as it has not analyzed a specific 2024 amnesty proposal from harris because it has not seen her make a specific proposal. next up is barbara in pennsylvania on our land for democrats. good morning, barbara. caller: good morning. i am definitely voting for harris because of the environment and for reproductive rights. i live in a very republican area , and we have done democratic in the last elections.

so that is what i have to say. go, harris. host: next up is terry in kinston, north carolina, on our line public's. good morning, terry. caller: good morning, c-span. two quick things. j6 and covid. on j6, those people showed up not because of anything donald trump said. it is what they witnessed on november 3, 2020. and on covid, i would like to remind americans that we were told under the biden-harris administration we could not get a haircut by nancy pelosi could. you could not go out to eat but gavin newsom could. we had three other governors like anthony cuomo, gretchen whitmer, and tim walz that took covid patients and put them in nursing homes, killing thousands. so i will be voting for trump because trump is the man for the people.

he never even took a paycheck. he has not enriched himself over the last 50 years with taxpayer-funded money. it was not trump that left $85 billion of military equipment in afghanistan, showing who really cares about your taxpayer money. biden and cabal don't care about. they are funding illegal aliens to my giving them phones, giving them food, putting them up and some of the richest hotels in new york city. if you are ignorant of to vote for communism, you will get that. host: aaron is in philadelphia, pennsylvania, on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. so i live in the far northeast of philadelphia, which is up against the county that your former caller barbara mentioned, and that is one of the wealthiest counties in the state.

it is a very divided area around here. my neighborhood is very blue-collar, working-class. a lot of police, teachers, firemen, construction workers, that sort of thing. it is really split. there definitely is a lot of trump voters, but there is also a lot for harris as well. right now, my husband is a registered republican. he voted trump. i have a registered democrat. we both had signs up in the front garden for the last election. his kept mysteriously disappearing. i don't know anything about that. it is definitely very split around here. i received a ton of mailers from trump addressed to be, not to my husband -- to me, not to my husband. everyday we get mailers, cardboard little things in the mail. it is a very split area but i am definitely voting democratic, and that is primarily for my children's future. host: do you find there are a

lot of folks in your community who are still undecided, or are most people like you and your husband pretty set on xavier becerra to vote come november -- set on how they are going to vote come november? caller: there are two specific cams. i don't personally know anybody who is undecided. i have known a few people that have inched over to the democratic side after the last election and after all of the chaos that ensued. but currently, i don't personally know anybody that is decided. host: ok. next is david in wisconsin on our line for republicans. david, can you help me see the name of your town? caller: yeah, it is wisconsin. thank you for taking my call. i am going with trump mainly because i am a small business owner, and a couple of points to point out here. what the democrats say they will help out the small people, low

income, middle-class, it is a big farce. our small business loans went from 5.5% up to 11.25% in a matter of two years. i have a financial advisor is open i worked with the biggest companies in the country, and their loans are fixed 1%, 2%. they clutter rise their stock and i did that for my home but it treats differently and i got stuck at 11.25%, and it is decimating a lot of small businesses. likewise, the restaurant revitalization act, which was something to help out restaurants in our state of wisconsin, money was taken from that from governor e verse -- evers. but the point of that is what i want to apply for it because i am a white man and a male, i

cannot get a loan until everybody else gets a loan. so racism name from the first time from a government aid entity ever. so that was bad. lastly, the big key is the one woman out there that was asking about the joe brown interview, that was on fox news with brian and kelly. i cop parts of it. joe brown, i was surprised to hear all the stuff he said, but the one that really stood out was how he mentioned the interview was a black family because he is black as well, so for the black people listening out there, listen closely to this. she did a news op out there for sure it -- for truant children out there that they will go after the parents. a parent got arrested in front of a hospital because her daughter with sickle cell was in

the hospital and she thought it would be great to arrest this lady. joe was extremely angry about that, so this is the type of stuff you hear from the democrats. unfortunately, a lot of women. i don't get why they are so keen on kamala harris and the democrat party when the families are being torn apart, women being raped, little girls being raped where did the morals go? it is extremely sad to see women doing this to their own families. host: ok. tess is in pennsylvania on our land for democrats. good morning, tess. caller: yes, i am voting for harris. i can't understand how anyone could vote for anyone who cannot pass a background check. how do you let someone like this handle top secrets? the fact that he is a committed felon, i do think anyone would want him in their neighborhood. harris-walz is the ticket. and to all the women out there,

stick together. we will take care of this. host: donna is in pennsylvania on our line for democrats. good morning, donna. caller: good morning, kimberly. i just want to say i want to follow up on the guy that called in about trump. he was on fox news this week in the town hall, and he admitted that he lied. why isn't anybody talking about that? kimberly, you can show that take where he admitted. since you all believe so much in trump and have so much faith that he does not lie, is just the way he talks, for real, this man told somebody lives. kimberly, play that tape where he was on hannity and show the world how he sat there and said he lost by a whisker. and yet we had the insurrection, how he started the insurrection, and made the people go to the capitol to storm the capitol, tear it up, and he is

sitting there saying they are doing this for me. no, they are doing this for me. let's be for real. stop lying. stop lying, maga people. that is all you do is tell lies. that is what i have to say, cubberley. host: ok. earlier this week of a vice president harris spoke at a joint campaign appearance with president joe biden in the critical swing state of pennsylvania where our caller was just calling and, speaking about the importance of supporting american-made steel. here is a clip of both biden and harris speaking. [video clip] >> when you are in pittsburgh, you are standing with steelworkers. let's be clear. i believe in american steel companies, american owned and operated steel companies. it is not hyperbole. america has some of the best

steelworkers in the world i made it clear the last time i was in pittsburgh, united states steel, an iconic american company for more than a quarter-century, will remain an american company. >> the president mentioned it. u.s. steel is a historic american company. and it is vital for our nation to maintain strong american steel companies, and i could not we more with president biden. u.s. steel should remain american owned and american operated. and i will always have the backs of american steelworkers. and all of america's workers. host: just a reminder, we are heaving this hour from folks in swing states about their choice for campaign 2024. those are swing states in arizona, georgia, michigan, nevada, pennsylvania where the

camping event just was, and wisconsin. just a reminder that c-span will have full coverage of this coming tuesday's abne presidential debate between vice president harris aner president trump. our coilbegin at 8:00 p.m. eastern. at 9:00, the abc news debate simulcast will begin. following the debate, we will take calls and get y reactionyoe coverage on c-span2, c-span now, onle at c-span.org. we also want to know if you think debates matter. will it impact your vote this fall? you can vote on that question right now at span.org/poll, or you can you the qr code on your screen. we will be showing your results on this mission about whether debates matter throughout the week. we have our results for where we

are right now, the responses we have gotten so far. people who do believe debates matter, 80%. and those who think makes do not matter so much, 20%. you too can vote in that poll at c-span.org/poll or you can use the qr code on your screen. now let's get back to our callers from swing states about their choice in the presidential election. next up is george in michigan on our line for independents. good morning, george. caller: good morning. yeah. i would like to go to the article you referenced a few minutes ago from cnn. host: ok. caller: they fact-check everything they want to fact-check in a socialist way. everything that article said was wrong. how often do you ever see them fact-check kamala harris? you never see them fact-check in the socialist side of this political group. democrats are not democrats anymore.

that party has been corrupted by the socialist. you want to talk about people that have stories about political signs being stolen. i myself voted. i am 78 years old and probably voted democrat as many times as i have a republican but i will never vote democrat again. last election, i had trouble signs in my front yard. the signs disappear. i had a car sitting in front of my house that was burglarized 12 times. 12 times. i got up. there was tomato sauce and milk poured all over my car just because of the political signs i had in front of my house. i called the police. they came out and made two different police reports on it. the last time it was done, the two police officers showed up in front of my house that had been here before and one just looked at me and shook his head and said, again? i said yes, sir, again.

the other guy, the other police officer was a young black. he looked at me and my signs and said, you know why this is happening, don't you? i turned around and said yes, sir, because of the political signs i have in my yard. he says, if you want to stop but take the signs down. i said if i take the signs down, they went. host: ok. robin is in pennsylvania on our line for republicans. good morning, robin. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good, thank you. caller: listen.in my area , i am in northeastern pennsylvania. i go to the store. i travel around in this area between wilkes-barre and scranton. and i more trump -- matter-of-fact, i have only seen two houses in about 50 miles from where i am living that have biden signs. mostly it is all trump. and i love trump. and he has to win.

kamala is a very nice person. i am not going to make her out to be a monster like the democrats do to trump, but if you remember not too long ago, all of the people calling for joe biden, they would vote for him if he was in his grave. now all of a sudden kamala is so great, and she will not do good with the world leaders. she gets up and the speeches and talks in circles like the passage of time. she says incidents four times in a matter of 30 seconds. she is not for this job. she cannot do this job she will have our country bankrupt. host: ok. john is in north carolina on ever line for independents. good morning, john. caller: morning. yes. i agree with them people just got talking about -- i am a trump man, too. i always vote for what is right,

i think. an abortion is wrong if people will just vote for her for that, that is hard to believe. host: what are you seeing in terms of your own community? do you see a lot of people still undecided or folks pretty much know how they are going to vote in november? caller: i will tell you, where i am back about not too far from charlotte, north carolina, but i know there are a lot of trump supporters around here. i see one side that said christians for kamala harris. it had a big thing. that is the only one i have seen of her. god help us if she gets in because our nation is gone. thank you very much. host: ok. ralph is in murphy, north carolina. good morning, ralph, on our line for republicans. and can you turn down the volume on your tv, please? caller: ok, thank you.

yeah. just a second, here. ok. i think everybody deserves it. what i am getting it is you need to do your homework. i know kamala harris in california, there was over 1000 people that had been molested by priests out there, and she was in charge of that. and she never prosecuted one of them. one man was persistent that had been molested and she never did anything about it. i just want to say right now this is a country between god and evil, satan. you either believe in god and moral values or you will let the government you down the road. that is all i have to say. thank you. host: larry in michigan texted us t harris regime has damaged

the u.s. for almost four years. i voted for change and trump here in michigan. richard is in pittsburgh, pennsylvania, on our line for democrats. good morning, richard. caller: hi. hey, my first comment is, how come they don't do fact-checks on the kamala baby? host: i am sorry. one more time, richard? i guess we lost you. in north carolina on our line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. this is my 30 day call. like last time i called, i will vote for kamala harris because i will vote for joe biden and formaldehyde before i vote for donald trump. trump does not have any real policies. kamala does not have any real policies. both sides are protester votes.

my protest vote is for kamala harris even though i do not believe she has any policies. trump has less policies, so thank you. host: robert is in north carolina on ever line for independents. good morning, robert. caller: yes. i think i will vote for kamala harris. she is more of a fighter. she tries to work for the american people. just like i said trump was too old trump will be 84 or 83 if he stays there for four years. people will be tired of him anyway because he will be to old. why put another old person in there? it does not make sense. but kamala harris is a female pit bull, and donald trump is scared of her. she does not look like one, but she will bite like one, and donald trump scared, and she will win i think donald trump

knows in his heart she will win. kamala harris for president of the united states of america. that is who we are voting for. host: ok. grace is in north carolina on our line for democrats. good morning, grace. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: there are a few things that i would like to say. in one is i am a democrat, up and down. i have voted for republicans in the past some of them were a mistake, and some of them were not. but i do think people are not listening. they are closing their ears to things that are being said. yesterday, donald trump called us despicable people the words that he uses, and i am sitting here thinking if my grandchildren were sitting here with me, i would push them out of the room. i don't want my grandchildren to

hear that kind of language, and i can't understand how people are bringing their children to these rallies and listening to him talk like that. christians do not talk like that. i mean, my mother would wash my mouth out with soap. the other thing is i think kamala harris will do a good job if people would stop and think, who runs the country, really? women run the country. we take care of the children. we do the cooking. we do the shopping. we make decisions in the home. we take care of the home. who does the work in the united states? it is women. give her a chance. great dang, give her a chance. she will do a great job i don't think these foreign leaders will intimidate her at all. she has some guts in her. she will take care of it. i truly believe that if people

would open their ears and understand, do we want a president that talks like that? it is very embarrassing. and to be honest, he scares me. thank you. host: randy is in wisconsin on ever line for republicans. good morning, randy. caller: good morning. kamala harris is so good she went over to talk to putin. days later, he invaded you pain, so what does that tell. you? when you talk to these -- host: randy, you are line is a little difficult to hear. caller: how about that? host: go ahead. caller: better? host: i think so. caller: how about when people call it and they say they are voting for kamala harris? i have not heard anybody ask the

person that is voting for kamala harris say, what do you like about her policies? what do you like about her? what do you like about her policies? she doesn't tell us her policies. she doesn't talk about anything. she has not given -- one little 16 minute interview. we know what president trump says. he is out there every day telling us what he is going to do and what he has planned for the united states. he was a good president before. how do they think he will be such an animal this time? he is not. he is going to run this country great. he is going to quit all the wars. there will be no dead people, enemy or good. host: randy, speaking of trump's policies, yesterday president trump was campaigning where you are in wisconsin, explaining his policies supporting tariffs on china and other countries.

let's play this out. kamala >> and the words of a very big but highly underrated about william mckinley, i am a tariff man standing on a tariff platform. he said that throwing open our market without protection was " it destroys the dignity and independence of american labor, diminishes the pay and employment and decreases the capacity to byproducts of commodities of the merchant. it will bring widespread discontent. it will revolutionize values. it will take away more than half of our earning capacity. of brain and brawn. worse than that, it will take away from the this country who work for a living and a majority of them who live by the sweat of their faces. it will take from their heart and their home and it will take from their help. the final thing is there hope -- their hope.

it will be total self-destruction. this man wanted tariffs to be taken from foreign countries, and you listen to some stupid people and some of the stupid people in washington, d.c. we don't want to charge tariffs. that will increase inflation. china paid us hundreds of billions of dollars, and we had almost no inflation. this group that came in, they had the highest inflation in the history of our country we took in billions and billions of dollars from red countries in the form of tariffs and i had not even gotten started yet. we will be a rich nation again. we will be able to do what we want to do. we have to do the tariffs. we have been treated so badly mostly by allies if you want to know the truth. our allies treat us worse than our so-called enemies. we have been treated so bad on trade and our military. we protect them and they screw us on trade. we will not let it happen anymore. we will be a tariff nation.

it will not be a cost to you. it will be a cost to another country. i heard conrad kamala the other day say if you do that, he is raising your taxes. no, i am not raising your taxes. i am raising china and all of these countries in asia and all over the world, including the european union, by the way, which is one of the most egregious. they do not take our cars or our phone products, and we have a $300 billion trade deficit with. they will have to pay a price now because we have been supporting them for a long time and it is no longer sustainable, so i am a tariff president. i am not a tax increase president because we will lower your taxes when i am back in the white house. it pass large tax cuts for workers -- we will pass large tax cuts for workers and no tax on tips. no tax on tips. host: again, we are hearing from swing state voters this hour. another way of looking at which

states land in which columns is a report from the electoral college readings. is looking not so much at percentage of the voters that support one way or another but how the voters and slid electoral college about you go from the solid democratic states with california with 54 electoral college votes and all of these others, solid republican states like alabama with its 90 electoral college votes, but here in the process category, you have to swing states, it was, georgia, michigan, nevada, north carolina, pennsylvania, and wisconsin with their electoral college votes. that could make the difference in the november election. betty is in wisconsin on ever line for democrats. good morning, betty. caller: good morning. first-time caller, longtime listener. i guess what really concerns me

is every time i hear mr. trump make comments and exaggerate things, nobody fact-checks him on the spot. even the economic console that sat there and listened to his rhetoric about what he would do for child care, and he would write around in a circle and absolutely answered none of it and yet at the end, this body of people actually clapped for him. so my concern is with the debate that he will keep on saying what his rhetoric is, and kamala will not be able to fact-check him right at the point because those -- because their speakers are going to be mute. i am a 31 year person that gave

my entire career to headstart and i, keep on hearing the cuts that will be mad -- headstart, and iq. on the cuts that will be made. i am now 82 years old. to have a person in office that defies everything honest, everything good, everything equitable is not mr. trump. i refuse to even call him former president. and i hope when it finally comes to that he actually has to pay a penalty for everything he has disrupted in people's life. host: ok. let's hear it next from diane in pittsburgh, pennsylvania, on our line for independents. good morning, diane. caller: hello.

i am a democrat, and i am voting for kamala of course. i don't know how anyone -- how could christians support him? i am a roman catholic number which is also a question. can't people open up their eyes and see what is? i am disappointed in half of america. very disappointed kamala, give her a chance. let her try. you put trump in office, i will probably die on the street i am 76 years old, live on the social security. i try to have a real nice life, and i want to thank you for letting me speak. i watched you every day. this is the first time i called for the people who say they don't know kamala's policies, it is because they listen to fox. i take fox news -- i tape all fox news all day but i watch mr. bc. it is people that are entertainers. at five, they put on the show with the terrible people.

host: i think we've got your idea, diane. we want to get one more caller this hour. bill is in north carolina on our line for republicans. good morning, bill. caller: two things. first i want to say from the previous caller a few minutes ago who said women actually run the country, that is -- we know that women out populate men, but it takes both get a family and raise a world. my second thing is national elections sometimes do a disservice to america because often people as a whole know little about a candidate, such as the case in this one. heaving a lot of people calling from the deep south and the eastern seaboard states, and they know very little about kamala harris. especially black people in those states. it appears that from my

perspective, i grew up in california. i live in north carolina now, but from my perspective, the race game seems to be playing quite well at this time not so much the republicans but the democrats are playing the skin game. it is being targeted to a vast black voter block. i don't get why black people are just flocking without really knowing anything about this person as for marelli, -- person. as for morality, both candidates have none, but kamala harris laid her career to targeting black communities and incarcerated black men and women at an alarming rate. so hypocritical she would run in black churches and play the role of victim while funding community-based programs supposedly to help reentry. how will you reenter?

under her, california went from 14 prisons to 38. you follow me? finally, if this was a truly country, how do we explain the vice president candidate being a hunter, soldier, coach, and talks about 10 pounds -- a bout tampons and asked boys in girls sports? it appears like he lost his parental rights and the likes of gender affirming treatment on minors. host: this hour. joe in michigan says i'm voting to preserve democracy, i'm voting against dollar trump. up next we are going to hear from george beebe who is going

to discuss russian efforts to implement the noted state election and what the u.s. is doing to counter those efforts. also generational politics in the united states and how that will impact this year's election. we will be right back. >> congress returns monday from a summer recess with it is a legislative floor sc ahead for the month. both the house and senate are facing a government f deadline and must pass additionalaling legislation by september 30 two a for a shutdown. the house will spend the majority of the wake -- week learning about legislation focusing on u.s. polic china. within the justi department to counter threats to u.s. national security andlectual property. the senatereturns monday at 3:00 p.m. eastern when new

jersey'st center will be sworn in. he will replace bob menendez who resigned last month. lawmakers will spend most of the week voting on several district cournations. watch liveage of the house on c-span, the senate on c-span two, and you can watch all of our congressional coverage on air free video app, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. watch the abc news presidential debate simulcast live tuesday on c-span two at the candidates go head-to-head on their first debate in securing their party -- since securing their party's nomination. the abc news presidential debate simulcast, live tuesday on c-span two. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics powered by cable.

friday night, watching c-span 2024 campaign trail, a weekly roundup of campaign coverage providing a one-stop shop to discover what the candidates across the country are saying to voters along with first-hand accounts from political reporters, updated poll numbers, fundraising data and campaign ads. watch 2024 campaign trail friday night at 7:30 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org or download as a podcast on c-span now, or wherever your podcasts. >> the house will be in order. >> c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979 we've been your primary source for capitol hill,

providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government, taking into her policy is debated and decided all with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting powered by cable. washington journal continues. >> welcome back. we are joined now by george beebe, director of strategy at the grand institute for responsible -- and a special advisor to vice president cheney on russia. welcome to washington journal. guest: thanks very much. host: can you talk a little bit about the quincy institute for responsible statecraft? guest: it is a relatively new think tank started about five years ago and it was attempting to fill a niche in air discourse on foreign policy.

that other thing thank shirley had not. it's attempting not to be partisan, not to be republican or democratic, but to advance a national interest based, restraint oriented policy that tries to avoid repeating the kinds of mistakes that we got into over the last several decades, these so-called forever wars that we could get into but not get out of and really not attempt to transform the world into some sort of major version of the united states, but to focus on what is most important for the u.s. people the secure and prosperous. host: so the big news this past week with that, and here's a headline from the new york times about it, russia secretly worms its way into american conservative media. federal prosecutors say russia paid american media companies push pro-kremlin messages from social media influencers including benny johnson, tim

poole, and david rubin. attorney general garland outlined a key element of russia's current maligned influence campaign earlier this week. >> in a separate enforcement action the justice department seizing 32 internet domains that the russian government and the russian sponsored actors have used to engage in a covert campaign to interfere and influence the outcome of our country selections. president vladimir putin's inner circle including --directed russian public relation companies as part of the program to influence the 2024 u.s. presidential election. internal planning document created by the kremlin states that a goal of the campaign is

securing russia's preferred outcome in the election. the online infrastructure used by the russian public relations company and related actors, these websites were designed to appear to american readers as if they were major u.s. news sites like the washington post or fox news. but in fact, they were fake sites. they were full of russian government propaganda created by the kremlin to reduce our national support for ukraine, ulster pro-russian policies and interests, and influence voters in the united states and in other countries. they described them as bogus stories disguised as newsworthy events. this maligned influence campaign has been referred to as

doppelganger. the russian public relations company drove viewers to these websites by deploying influencers and paid social media advertisements. they also created fake social media profiles posing as u.s. citizens to post comments on social media platforms with links to the sites. according to sta records, it actively sought to "eliminate the possibility of detection of the russian footprint." host: and in addition to those directions of no u.s. websites, here in the new york times there's also some examples of websites they created from scratch such as the chicago chronicle and the new york news daily his name is clearly meant to invoke the storied daily news tabloid created on january 18, according to these outlets that monitor such things, and these

were fake news sites that were also pushing the russian propaganda. george, what do you make of all of this news, this whole elaborate campaign? guest: it is not very surprising, this is something that governments do. they attempt to influence other countries, attempt to influence their policymakers or policy decisions. they attempt to affect public opinion. so to some degree, this is a dog is barking story, it is not surprising that the russians have this kind of effort going on. other countries do this as well, the russians are not the only ones who do this sort of thing. i think no one would be surprised if i would say that the u.s. government does this sort of thing as well and attempting to influence other countries in their decisions. the question really is not is the surprising that this is going on, the question is how

threatening is this? how concerned should americans be about this? and that is a larger question because putting all this in perspective is important. host: so how concerned should be be about all of this? guest: i think there are different levels of interference that one could postulate. the worst, of course, would be attempts to affect the actual voting process itself. the casting of votes, the tallying of votes, trying to penetrate websites with voter database information. that could actually affect how the election turns out. and it could also quite profoundly affect the degree to which americans trust the outcome of an election, and that is a very serious problem if there are real doubts about the integrity of the election process itself.

so far that is not what we are seeing. i think what we are seeing is attempts to affect thoughts. their opinions, how they are likely to vote. that is a lot harder to do. of course, the campaigns themselves here in this country are trying their best to do that. they're spending billions and billions of dollars trying to affect other people regarding the issues and how they are likely to vote. the russians ability really to affect public opinion in a profound way i think is quite limited. am i concerned that the russians are doing this? yes. should the u.s. government be attempting to limit russia's ability to do this sort of thing? absolutely, yes. do voters have a reasonable expectation that they are not going to be encountering expect -- information on the internet

that purports to be something it is not? yes, they should. but, i concerned that this is really going to sway large numbers of americans and their opinions? i'm not, at this point. host: how would you compare russia's interest and actions in the election this year compared to, say, 2016 or 2020 when russia also tried to influence the election? guest: at this point is hard to say. there's a lot we don't know. my guess is we will learn exactly what the russians are up to in the coming weeks. the 2016 election and russia's role in that received an enormous amount of attention. there were a lot of allegations about the degree to which russia " hacked" the election and meddled in ways that really affected the outcome. but in retrospect, the studies that were done about russian

involvement both by the u.s. government itself and by outside research organizations suggested that although russia certainly was involved to some degree, the degree of that involvement in the impact that it had was grossly exaggerated, and i think in retrospect the reaction that we had to that was grossly disproportionate to the actual impact of what the russians themselves did. and that points to a real question here. to what degree could a reaction to what the russians are doing actually accomplish some of the goals that the russians purportedly have, of sowing distrust, of casting doubt on the veracity of information? prior to 2016 you never heard the term fake news. this was relatively recent in a discourse. it has been accompanied by a

growing mistrust in media information. if our political system is going to work effectively, people have to trust the institutions, the integrity of the media, the integrity of the government. they can't proceed any of these institutions as biased, as politically partisan. that is i think is a danger in all of this. part of it is a reaction to what the russians are doing. host: an interesting part of this is the use of social media influencers in this campaign, the washington post has an article about the pro-trump supergroup allegedly funded by russia. even some of the groups wonder why it existed. the article goes on to lay out how even these influencers

including tim poole and benny johnson didn't even know and its role in it. and they wonder what you think about this particular strategy of using social media influencers, using americans themselves to push this propaganda. >> i think it makes sense. you're going to go with you have the most impact. it is a hard thing to do. it is much easier if you try to hit your efforts to people who already have established followers, who already have a large number of viewers. from russia's point of view, trying to work their pre-existing influences makes a lot of sense. the question is how effective can they be, and exposing this kind of campaign i think helps

because it sensitizes influencers to the possibility that they could unwittingly be used in all of this and brazing and alert to them i think is a good thing. it makes them extra cautious about feeling careful who they are dealing with. host: americans are generally concluding this particular influence campaigns designed to help republicans nominate donald trump. do you agree? guest: a couple of aspects to that. one is what is in russia's own interest in this election. my guess is that they are not particularly enthusiastic about either candidate. why is that? on the kamala harris side, they know what they've been dealing with with the biden

administration, they are not particularly happy about the policies the biden administration has adopted for russia. i don't think they want to see more of the same. on the other hand when donald trump was president, he talked about wanting a more constructive relationship with russia, but his ability to deliver that is extremely limited. he was not able to deliver the broader government behind the agenda that he had articulated. and i don't think the russians are particularly confident that he could do that, where he reelected. no question that they probably think is rhetoric about ending the war in ukraine, for example, that by itself would be positive. i think the russians go beyond that and say could he actually deliver something? i think they got real doubts.

the other question here is to what degree should the u.s. intelligence community be making public judgments about where the kremlin might favor in an election? i've been in the caa for starting with the cold war and during my time in government we were never asked once who does the kremlin favor in the u.s. presidential election. that's a pretty recent phenomenon. and by itself, it is an act. inevitably when you're making public judgments about intelligence based on, presumably confidential classified information, you're making a judgment about being a player in the domestic political event. and i think we ought to ask ourselves to what degree does it help us in our institutions, and

our governments when our intelligence committee is playing a role in that? host: guest: host: i do want to get to some callers who have questions. iran and china are also trying to influence our elections according to our own agencies. how do russian efforts compared to iran and china? guest: very hard to say, i think there's a lot we don't know. the allegations against the iranians were that they hacked into the trump campaign. there are also allegations that they either hacked into or attempted to hack into the harris campaign them way. the chinese, i'm not familiar with what exactly the allegations might the, but the fact that any of these states would attempt to play a role in our domestic politics is unsurprising. and i think the list goes well

beyond russia, iran and china. there are many other players that are not getting a lot of public attention, but nonetheless have a stake in what u.s. policy is going to be and are attempting, of course, to influence what those decisions might be. host: like who? guest: friends and allies as well as foes. there is a lot of money that its standby for entities here in washington, in the united states they think they are getting something for the money they are spending. so one of the things that i think is necessary for the u.s. government is truth in advertising, transparency. casting a light on these efforts so that americans know who is sponsoring the sort of stuff? when there is a study done by a think tank, was therefore in money that funded this? best thing that needs to be labeled the people understand

who it is that is the sum these efforts. same thing goes with social media campaigns. the russians were attempting to create through covert cutouts the impression that this was domestically produced, but in fact it is russian sponsorship. what americans look at that information different may they known russians were behind it? i think yes, they would. it is very much in interest of our country that there is a transparency behind all this. host: let's get to your calls with questions for george beebe. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will start with nick in florida on the line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question i want to give

, how much money has foreign countries invested in our elections? guest: well, i don't know the answer to that. in the case of the russians in the indictment that was unveiled two days ago, they were talking about $10 billion being spent. is that a significant amount of money? when you compare that to how much tens of billions are being spent in the campaigns, that's not a whole lot of money. probably not going to have a big impact. the mass of money that gets spent in the united states, i don't know, but my guess is a fairly large figure, but he can that i think is dwarfed by what the campaigns are spending. host: richard is on the line for republicans. caller: good morning.

first thing, the answer that you gave on who are the russians trying to help, i can tell right now where you stand because it definitely isn't trump. and with russian interference, is this the same interference as the laptop and the same interference of the dossier? and have you guys look into any of the interference that happened in the last election? i've never heard any answers to anything that happened in the last election. so i see where you're standing. host: i want to make sure we are understanding your question specifically. you are asking about how this compares to any interference in previous elections? caller: no man, he is sitting here talking about russian interference in this election. well, is this the same interference as hunter's laptop, or just the same interference as the dossier? host: ok.

response? guest: well, the hunter laptop story of course at the time it was alleged including by some former intelligence community officers that that was a russian influence operation. i think that incident was quite thoroughly investigated and i think in retrospect, it appears that was not a russian influence operation, despite what was alleged at the time. that laptop was in fact genuine and the content on it was in fact genuine. i think all the players at this point acknowledge that. i don't want to rehash what happened in 2016 and all the details, but suffice it to say that interference was extensively investigated and although there was a kernel of truth to russian involvement

then, the impact and the extent were grossly exaggerated of the time. >> ralph is in michigan on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: [indiscernible] host: your line is very difficult to understand. hopefully we can come back to you. andrew is on the line for independents. caller: yes, good morning. i just want to ask the guest what impact the buildup of the technological age is having on these elections. there is an inherent danger with the buildup of the technological age, and also, they're trying to track where this dark money is coming from. so if you can provide an answer i would appreciate it.

guest: i assume you're talking about information technology and the effect that is happening on all of this. i think that is having a big impact on the way that other countries including the russians attempt to spread information and air system. it's not particularly surprising. if you are trying to advance a disinformation campaign you have to go through newspaper editors, you had to go through producers on television and radio stations. to publish the information you wanted to see published. then you would attempt to use covert means to mask who you were. the age of the internet allows information to be posted directly.

you don't have to go through gatekeepers. you can put out information that can target particular audiences. if i want to target voters in pennsylvania who are single and college-educated, i can use social media to target that kind of audience and hopefully affect their thinking. so technology is changing how this is done. but the question remains how effective is all of this? can i move views? that is not an easy thing to do. and even the campaigns themselves struggle to do that. they are much more effective in getting people that already are inclined to vote for them to show up on election day and vote. that is what a lot of the campaign is about. to rally pre-existing supporters not to change democrats and

republicans and vice versa, which is hard to do. host: hawaii, line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning, nice to talk to you again. i find this a very interesting topic, very concerning, of course. there are two arms to this internet swaying votes. there is the direct which george talked about, and then there's the internet sites. the different misinformation sites that i don't look at any of them. i watch my news for you guys and from staples of news, but i fear there's so many people that i talked to that they actually get their news from these different websites. and i just go, anybody can put information on there and it is not verifiable. i was in the u.s. air force during the vietnam war, and i

know that we were taught because i was around b-52 bombers, loading then the jet fuel, gilbert taught how to not be influenced by outside sources. and i'm amazed that what i was taught as a sergeant, to be careful of potential communist people coming in, trying to sway me or get information from me, in any case, it's along the same theme is what you are speaking of. there's a lot of people who are very sway able and i think you shouldn't underestimate the people that are easily influenced by this that will put information out there. people just laugh it up like milk and that is concerning to me. i'd like to ask george what he thinks about what i just said. >> it is concerning and i think it is a function of a couple of things. one that the desire that i think we all have to consume

information that informs our pre-existing beliefs. it's a confirmation bias problem. a desire to see what you already believe. and disinformation campaigns pray on that, of course. we are also susceptible to it and it is true on both left and right. the other problem is trust in the media. his growing doubts that the information being provided by what you called i think stable media is actually trustworthy, unbiased, objective. conforming to ethical journalistic standards that we were taught back in the old days. i think there's growing concern on the part of a lot of americans that the media had not done their job in upholding

those old journalistic standards . those kinds of concerns i think lead people to seek out other sources. host: massachusetts, line for independence, good morning. caller: thanks for having me on. yes, i just like to bring up the fact that living in america, the number one influencer on elections, which we've already all witnessed, and you guys have just hit on, is our own government. and i will cite a specific law that i've mentioned on this program that many, many people, political professors, anyone you can think of says something that

was slipped into the 2012 national defense authorization act with something called the smith mundt modernization act. and i think this opens the floodgates for the government to push a narrative and have it spread domestically within our own borders to its own people. this unfortunately has taken hold and it has grasped a big part of the people you just have talked about who have a preconceived idea that everything is good. we have this constitution in the declaration of independence that enables us to question what is happening with the government

than afraid i government has acquired so many laws of the years -- host: let's let george respond to some of the points you've made. guest: i have to confess i'm not familiar with the particular accu are talking about. host: that is the smith mundt modernization act, it was a law that went into effect in july 2, 2013, amending the u.s. information educational exchange act of 1988. part of a strategic plan, and this allows people across america to see and hear the valuable news reported by the u.s. agency for global media. so basically the same organization that does the voice of america and things to allow that reported to be in the united states, whereas previously it was only for outside countries. guest: understood. well, i guess this is a general reaction to this.

but i would say is that is not at all unusual or in and of itself alarming that the u.s. government wants to spread information about what it is doing. that is a normal thing. what is concerning is when our media, which should be part of a check and balance system in the united states, that should be exercising and oversight rule on what the government is doing, so it is not simply echoing what the government line is, but is taking a skeptical view of it and looking at the claims that the u.s. government is making and saying ok, let's look at this in an impartial way, what we make of all of this, when the media don't play that role, i think it actually interferes

with this balance that we need. it means that the government is not as constrained, power can be more concentrated. but also i think americans grew more skeptical of what they are hearing. i think this comes down to what kind of role should the media play in this, which at think is a very important action. host: chris, democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. i just want you to know i'm listening on the c-span app and we are getting -- as well as the real-time stuff. the russians, the things he said were concerning is that the russians were undermining our confidence in the election system and undermining our confidence in the media. if we look at this, it is kind of a no-brainer. almost 50% of the country doubts

the election system right now because the conservative leader of the republican party every day of his life says that elections were stolen, they are going to be stolen, you can't trust them and that is exclusively conservative problem. you don't hear that on the left. the media, the leader of the republican party routinely says democrats of the enemy of the people, you can't trust them, it is all fake. go to fox news and look at their website. it just sounds like a trickle of russian disinformation. tucker carlson walking around the anti-russian grocery store. al gore was accused of inventing the internet, he didn't. john kerry was accused of being a war coward, not a war hero. with obama, sewing disinformation and distressed by

saying obama wasn't born in america. and this is exclusively conservative problem. so my question is why are conservatives so willing to lap up complete and utter bs? is there something wrong with their brains? guest: [laughter] host: there is some research showing folks that identify as republican tend to be a bit more targeted for misinformation, and even sometimes susceptible to it. do you see anything about either these current campaigns or even just the way the media landscape is that could tilt misinformation targeting or perceptiveness one way or the other? guest: i'm not aware of anything that indicates that conservatives are more credulous when it comes to these things than other people. i wish this were exclusively a right-wing problem.

unfortunately i don't think that is true. i think there is susceptibility to confirmation bias that is universal. there are false claims made on the left as well as the right to that's not to discount the impact that people on the right have had in creating this atmosphere of distrust that we have right now, but i don't think it is exclusively a problem on the right. i think there are people on the left that have contributed to this as well. can i think the answer is not to crack down on either side of the political spectrum. i think it is to invest in the integrity of the institutions that we need. government, media, the community organizations that are so critical to this country functioning.

the degree which we strengthen those i think will really insulate us against these kinds of disinformation campaigns, they will make us a lot more confident, less susceptible to this distrust. we are not doing enough, i don't think, to talk about how we treat these news institutions. host: arkansas, line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. host: do you have a question for george? caller: yes, how do you compare the u.s. elections as compared to israeli interference in u.s. elections and u.s. propaganda? guest: well, i'm not an expert on israel or what it is doing here in this country, but there

is no question that israel is a serious player in u.s. to politics. i don't think anyone would dispute that. probably far more influential and involved in the russians are. do i have figured on that? no, it is more of an impression, but there is no question that the israelis are playing out domestic politics and that is an issue that we don't want to talk about in our discourse. host: john is in florida on airline for independents. caller: good morning, a couple of questions for the guest. first one, he had mentioned that the media, we should try and have trust in the media, they should be the gatekeepers. the channels we had two for 50 cent walter cronkite have

actually gone completely overboard. 88%, 90% coverage for harris, with former president trump was negative. there's too much in there. as far as the question i have for you, this russian influence operation, i want to know the company who has been getting the money, giving it two johnson and these guys, but they have no control over the shows. what propaganda could they spread? they have no control over anything these guys said on the show, so that is what i want to know. guest: i don't know the answer to that and i'm not sure this

point there's any information in the public domain that provides the answer to that. i think what we've got so far on the indictment is money changing hands on the part of the russian sponsors of all this, but the degree to which they were able to influence what the influencer themselves were saying and posting, we don't know yet. host: i'm just looking through some of the reporting on this and it is unclear at this point how much direct interaction there was between the people who are funding the channels and these influences themselves. that's now hear from jerry in virginia on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: it sounds to me like

your guest this morning was attempting to mislead us. host: how so? caller: anybody who knows anything about foreign relations know that donald trump with the last person in the white house. donald trump with the toughest presidents of ronald reagan and a notice he doesn't want to talk about the russian collision of 2016. host: i'm a little unclear because our guests specifically didn't say that it was obvious that russia wanted trump in the white house or not. so how do you think our guest is misleading people? caller: well for one thing he doesn't want to speak a bit about the 2016 collusion between -- and russia, -- hillary clinton and russia, not donald trump. seems to me like you favored for the democrats. host: as a former advisor to

dick cheney, how would you like to respond to that? guest: if our audience listens to what i'm saying and is somewhat confused about what candidate i might be supporting at all, i take that as a win. host: mary in philadelphia on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, c-span. i'd like to know what existing, bipartisan laws are using to continue with these never-ending wars in other countries? and what constitutional laws are reusing to continue these programs? and what bipartisan laws are reusing to dismantle social services laws in this country? just based on not only what was

going on with roe v. wade. these existing laws to implement them, but yet we allowing the supreme court, which i feel as though they are overruling the jurisdiction of our state legislators. so what existing laws that we are using to continue these wars , these never-ending wars in all countries -- host: i'm going to stop you there and use this opportunity to point out an article you have, george, and responsible statecraft about the hazards of ukraine's encouragement into russia getting into some of the details about that conflict and whether or not ukraine taking the offenses there was a good idea or not. can you talk a bit about your assessment of the current

situation in ukraine as well as what mary was talking about, the ongoing involvement of the u.s. in conflicts like these? >> i think the war in ukraine is not going well for the ukrainians at this point. the russians have pursued a war of attrition strategy to try to wear down the ukrainians. reserves of manpower, of weaponry, ammunition. they are doing that fairly effectively. it is harder and harder for ukrainians to put enough well-trained, well-equipped forces in the field to prevent the russians from advancing in the pace of russia's advancement is intensifying. they are moving more rapidly toward complete control of the region which is one of their clear objectives in this war. in the ukrainian incursion into

kursk in russia itself i think was meant in part to force the russians to divert forces from their offenses in ukraine, to defend russian territory at home. the russians had not really diverted a significant number of forces in ukraine. >> this broader issue of so-called forever wars and what is behind all of that, what do we do about all of that, this is really a question of the degree to which american policy and getting involved in these wars reflects the will of the american people as expressed through congress, which constitutionally is supposed to provide its authorization with these sorts of things under the war powers act provision in the

constitution. that hasn't really happened. congress for the most part is not voting on getting involved in these wars, and that i think has to be tightened up. i think there's got to be a closer link between american military involvement overseas and russian authorization and the will of the people. i think there is a growing gap that needs to be addressed. host: thank you so much for your time, i really appreciate it this morning. george beebe, thank you very much. guest: thank you. host: coming up we are going to have more of your phone calls after the break and then later on, hamlin university professor david schultz will be here to discuss his about generational politics in the united states and how that will affect this year's elections. we will be right back.

♪ >> if you are advising kamala harris monday or tuesday, trump is not a fun or easy guide to debate, obviously. how do you think she should proceed? >> i think that every opportunity that donald trump gets to show the american people who he is, he pretty clearly -- and look, his running mate is doing this too, this is my diplomatic way of saying it, they are misogynistic pigs. [laughter] [applause]

>> comments from former january 6 committee vi chair liz cheney from the discussion hosted by e texas tribu on the topic including r recent endorsement of kamala hars and a decision to eorse democrat colin allred in the texas senate race. watch in full today at six: 20 5 p.m. eastern on c-span or c-span now, our free mobile video at or online at c-span.org. on monday, christopher murphy discusses geopolical challenges facing the u.s. an event hosted by the atlantic council. wanto live or online at c-span.org. on monday, a discussion with administration officials and experts on the center for global development and the university of chicago. watch live at 10:00 a.m. eastern

. c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington. live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, campaigns and more from the world politics all at your fingertips. advised scheduling information for c-span tv networks and radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store. c-span now, your front receipt to washington anytime, anywhere. washington journal continues. host: we are in open forum ready

to take your calls, comments, or other thoughts about news and politics of this week or in general. i (202) 748-8000 number for democrats (202) 748-8000,. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. and just a remder on tuesday, we do hat esidential debate coming upnd w are going to have full coverage of tuesday'wsresidential debate between vice president harris and former president p. 00 p.m. eastern and then atin a 9:00 ease bate simulcast will begin. af ware going to take your caletour reaction reand you can watch that ovage on c-span 2 c-span now, or online a c-span.org. and in the meantime we are continuing to run a poll about whether or not you think debates matter, and whether it will

impact your vote this fall. the poll is at c-span.org/polls, where there is a qr code on your screen that you can use your phone to scan to take you to the polls as well. and we are going to show you the result of that poll throughout the week including right now. pulling a showing that in terms of your assessment of whether or not debates matter, 81% of you say yes, 19% of you say no. now let's get your thoughts on the debate and other topics. we'll start with kurt and mulberry, florida on the line for independents. caller: good morning. i just wanted to go back and touch on something that your best said at the very beginning. this idea that the russians and other countries are doing things to us is not a new idea, and in fact they are doing nothing to

us that we haven't done to them in the past. i mean, all governments do this. this should not be surprising to people that we interfere with other countries. host: so what do you think most folks should be doing to make sure that the information they are getting and using to make their decisions isn't coming from an influence campaign? caller: i think that the first thing they should do is to go and look at all these places. all of these sites. take all of this information. we are not stupid. i think that most people can, if they want to, sit down and separate the what from the c hafe. host: next up is michael in new jersey on the line for democrats. good morning, michael. >> yes, good morning. here's what i feel, that they

government who are siding on certain sides, i don't think harris andwalz are really up to the job. they're not even serious. they don't even look like smart people on the tv. i think it is russian collusion. all on the side of a certain party called the democrats, thank you. host: gary is in texas on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: i think the guy a couple callers ago, when he was trying to ask, with those issues in the light, mainly the failure of our

institutions to give us accurate information, with the laptop a salad or not, that the dossier was authentic or not, why should the american people believe them now after they were so inaccurate in presenting -- preventing that attack and apparently they did it on purpose? why should the american people believe them now about this new russian allegation? thank you. host: kingsley is in jackson heights new york on the line for independent. caller: thank you for having me. i just wanted to make a comment. i saw some of the views of the callers, absolutely terrifying. you think about trump, one man has taken a demolition to a whole political system, and then

weathering whether that was percolating surface, but it seemed like trump has infected a whole political system and that the russians, they are glad he has come along because he is a conduit through which they can stoke all their misinformation or disinformation with respect to the american people. it amazes me how one guy. we've been having elections for 300 years. this camera has been on earth for whatever, we been a nation, we think your struggles. one man comes around and said 300 years of history out the door, don't care about that. that is false and wrong. and it seems crazy. as my comment, thank you for having me. host: north carolina, line for democrats. caller: yes. host: what is your,?

caller: yes. what republicans are doing is weaponizing lives. when they interviewed them and ask them whatever trump is doing, it is fake news or whatever, they know trump is lying and they know everything they do is lies, but they act like it is the democrats or it is just the news. in other words they are just going along with it just like the old saying. democrats fall in love, republicans fall in line. the nixon administration when he was lamenting the southern strategists, somebody told him if you can make for white people think of the problems they are having are because of the blacks, you can make them do anything you want them to do.

all they are doing is weaponizing lives to get that point across. host: richard is in indiana on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: i'm actually on the phone with you for the line for independents. i myself am a libertarian candidate for united states congressional district in indiana and they was going to speak with you in regards to debates. twice now here in indiana the debate commission, whether it is indiana, the league of women voters, university of southern indiana have attempted to host dates. ones that we haven't had for over 12 years. one thing i feel very strongly about the ability to have transparency, honesty and integrity in our elections. it is sad that we cannot have a debate with media coverage and

leadership groups -- host: why can't you have a debate? caller:: republican opponent is not incumbent, there is no incumbent this year. as backed up twice after saying up by local media saying all candidates agree. civics groups and leadership groups got together to organize one in his campaign said we do not want to participate. that is unfortunate because, no matter who someone chooses to vote for, all we can ask the american public, our constituents who we seek to serve as public servants, all we can ask is who they believe best represents their values and it is unfortunate that so often we see a number of candidates refused to participate in the democrat process that is

integral to educating voters. host: lucy is in pennsylvania on our line for independents. >> caller: i was wondering if you could answer a question for me. if you do not know it off the top of your head, maybe you could look on that computer you keep on your desk. i do not have a computer. anyhow, i was wondering about the kennedy guy that is running for president but now he says he only wants to be on the presidential ballot in some states but not in others. host: you're talking about robert f. kennedy, jr., who suspended his presidential campaign and his campaign is working on getting his name off the ballot in multiple states. caller: that is what i mean.

i could have sworn that not long ago the supreme court made a ruling that said a presidential candidate could not be on the ballot in some states but not in others, that it would create chaos, so then, if that is true, if that was the ruling and i remember it right, how can the kennedy guy who is running for president be on some ballots and some states and still remove his name on ballots in different states. do you know how that works? host: i am not an expert on that, but i will point out the case you are talking about with the supreme court was a colorado case about whether colorado could deny trump on the primary

ballot. in this case, it was a unanimous decision. they restored trump to the colorado ballot back in march of this year. the u.s. supreme court restored donald trump to the ballot, ruling the state lacked the authority to disqualify him after his actions during the siege of the u.s. capitol. that is a little different than the situation with robert f. kennedy, jr., who is actively requesting to be taken off the ballot in several states that still have him on their. did that answer your question? caller: you are sing the difference is the candidate himself requested? host: that seems to be the difference, but you would have to ask a lawyer for the specifics. let's go to fred in ohio on our line for democrats.

caller: our country will always be some kind of interference with the elections or attempt to interfere in our elections because this country is not -- it is not trustworthy, to be honest. i am talking about institutions, namely the supreme court. i do not know how the law came about where the sitting president has certain communities. people are of the opinion this man can do anything, including shoot somebody, and still not be held accountable. i love my country, but people do not have confidence and we need to get that confidence back, so we do not need to elect people like donald trump if we are going to try to get our confidence in our country back.

that is what i wanted to say. host: jonathan in ohio on our line for republicans. caller: i am a proud republican but i wanted to agree with the caller who talks about how we are picking one man cannot donald trump, as supreme. he is dangerous to our country and history will judge him like that someday. host: tony is in pennsylvania on our line for independents. caller: thank you for taking my call. it is strange to listen to these callers, democrats and republicans. they both seem to be a little silly, misinformed. i see it more like coke and pepsi. that is largely the choice in this country. it is not much of a choice.

both parties are run like monopolies. both have been supporting a genocide to the palestinian people. and both sides support that. one might fly a pride flag while it is supporting genocide. the other does not have a pride flag while they are supporting genocide. the media -- i really liked your last guest. his administration -- dick cheney -- it is amazing how we are sort of dusting them off and they are now supporting democrats. something is very wrong in this country. i am no fan of donald trump, but do not -- will not -- i live in pennsylvania, but i will not be supporting either candidate and will be voting third party. jill stein will get my vote. good luck to you. i hope, america, you wake up.

you are being fooled. have a nice day. host: rocky is in florida on our line for republicans. caller: thanks for taking my call. i think everybody's making a mistake. two wrongs do not make a right. the biden administration let all these people come over the border and never stop nothing. i am saying they could have stopped this a long time ago. letting all these people come over and start riots and protest on the streets -- if trump was elected they wouldn't have them because people would not come over the border. you want to take things for what is going on, trump is trying to make it safer us in the world. if harris gets elected, will be the end of the world. there will be wars all over the place. she has a smile all the time and

laughs. she is not going to do what she says. i guarantee that. with every thing going on, take it for granted. if somebody said vote to me if you are black -- is this like saying vote for me if you are white? it is the same thing. host: dwight is in dayton, ohio on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. host: go ahead. caller: i have been listening to you all day, everybody. i think america, far left and far right, are too intelligent to be foolish about -- as far as influence, election influence.

that is where we are at, russian, iranian, china. we are too intelligent for that. host: laura is in massachusetts on our line for independents. caller: basically i feel it is more the same with these elections. it is the same basically. you have your conservatives who say cut taxes for the rich and cut social programs and then you have the other side saying we care about workers, but when i hear the actual speeches i do not hear them talking about anything relevant as far as you need to look at social security and raising the social security

age. millions of americans were put in poverty. never addressed or talked about. you do not hear them -- you do hear the democrats talking about these union workers, but as far as businesses and profit-sharing, it is one of the biggest ways of putting america into poverty. these 401(k)s are a joke. they do not really give you anything to rely on to retire on . it is more the same talking points. the middle-class -- what is the middle class? i read one place where it said if you make $30,000 to $90,000. you are telling me a 30,000 dollars a year person is living like a $90,000 person? it is more the same. it is sad. i hope that kamala pulls it off

because i cannot believe that trump to run again after all of what he has done, but that is all i wanted to say. thank you. host: sherry -- jerry is in oregon on our line for republicans. caller: i would like to address kennedy and harris. kennedy harris has had years in office and she has not shown any confidence in any of her jobs. i have seen her from california where i lived before and according to my observations with kennedy walz, i saw him jerk his special needs sign around the stage at the dnc convention. that is enough to tell me i would not vote for him and i will not vote for harris for her incompetence in guarding us from the border. host: ed is in maryland on our

line for democrats. caller: good morning. first, trump was voted out for a reason. can you sometime today pull up the clip on april 23 of 2020 where he is telling the american people to inject themselves with some type of disinfectant or use ultraviolet light to flash into the body? this is the president of the united states. can you pull that clip up? maybe not right now. we have to remind people why this guy was voted out. goodbye. host: ray is in new york on our line for republicans. good morning. caller: i want to add to the

previous caller about rfk junior. what he is doing is, when he dropped out he also endorsed trump, so he is going around with trump. he is going to rallies and stuff , so he did not want his name on the ballot in states where it would matter, so that is what he is doing. he is taking his name off where trump could win or likely would win. host: next we have mike in massachusetts on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. it has been a while. my issue is this. even if it was a democrat, i feel exactly the same way. it is my argument is the name

calling. ever since he has been on the stage, all he does is call people names. i grew up as an army brat and realized what my father went through in world war ii coming home with the scars he brought home, including malaria. i feel when you have a commander-in-chief of the armed forces that refers to people who fought and died for this country as suckers and losers and does not have the courage to apologize for saying that even though he pulled off his visit to arlington national cemetery, i do not think he should be the leader of this country. if it was not for that, i would not have that many issues, but name-calling can psychologically cripple human being. it has been proven since the beginning of time, what it does

to people. i do not want to be repetitive. you cannot call people names and be the leader. it is going to come back. it has to. what goes around comes around on this earth. we have all been around to see it. that is about all i wanted to say. host: bob is in wisconsin on our line for republicans. caller: why are we in this mess? we have had three presidents. trump spent a trillion dollars. for chilean dollars was on covid. that leaves $19 trillion. democrats spent 15 trillion dollars since obama. trump spent $4 billion. where did all that money go?

our schools suck. our bridges are falling apart. we spent so much money and got nothing for it. everybody in government is rich. host: that is all the time we have for open forum this hour, but next we will be joined by hamline university professor david schultz to talk about his book on generational politics in united states and how it is going to impact this year's election. we will be right back. ♪ >>gress returns monday from a summer recess with busy legislative floor schedule had for the month. the house and senate are facing government funding deadline and must pass additional funding legislation by september 30 to avoid a shutdown. the house will spend the week work legislation focusing on u.s. policy on china. of the bills would

tablish the chinese communist party initiative in the judepartment to national security andina to u.s. intellectual propert the senate returns mon when the new senator will be sworn in. lawmakers will spend most of the week voting on several of pres biden's u.s. district court nominations. watch live coverage of the house on c-span and watch our congressional coverage on our free video app or online. >> watch the abc news presidential debate live tuesday as the candidates go head-to-head in their first debate since securing their parties' nomination. coverage begins with a preview show, followed by the debate.

the abc news presidential debate simulcast live tuesday. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics, powered by cable. >> attention, middle and high school students. it is time to make your voice heard. c-span's documentary contest is here, your chance to create a documentary that can inspire change, raise awareness, and make an impact. your documentary should answer this question. what issue is most important to you or your community? whether you are passionate about the environment or humidity stories, this is your platform to share your message with the world. including a grand prize of $5,000. this is your opportunity not only to make an impact but be

rewarded for your creativity and hard work. enter your submissioay. scan the code or visit for tails on how to enter. the deadline is january 20, 2025. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store, a collection of apparel, books, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. now we are joined by political science and legal studies professor at hamline university david schultz, who is also the coeditor of the new book "generational politics in the united states: from the silents to gen z and beyond."

welcome to the show. guest: thank you for having me today. host: let's talk about generations. i wanted to show a graphic of the five generations voting in this election and the ages of each. we are talking about the silent generation, folks who are 76 and above, baby boomers, generation x, millenials, gen z. your book examines the demographic and political differences of these generations. let's start with the demographic differences. what are some of the differences between the generations? >> a couple things are really significant when we think about demographic differences. if we were to start with the

silent generation and move to the youngest, what we find something interesting. the older generations are more white and caucasian and more nativeborn to the united states. by the time we get to the millenials, they are increasingly more racially diverse and at the same time we are looking at a high percentage , in fact some evidence suggests the highest percentage ever of those who are immigrants. that is one. a second thing in terms of demographics and what this means, if we go back to the bailey -- baby boomers, proximally 90% to 95% of them would still identify as being religious, christian. god is somewhere important in their life. by the time you get to the millenials, we are looking at

about 40% or so saying they identify as christian or religious or god is important in their life. if i'm doing a simple description here, as we are moving from the older generations to the newer generations we are going to a society -- and america with a newer generation among the most racially diverse and most secular that we have ever seen in american history. one of the things we are going to see from a demographic perspective in the next 10 to 15 years is the profile of america changes from what it has been throughout american history. what we are going to have is a majority of americans at some point to are going to be nonwhite caucasian. is going to be a majority nonwhite war majority minority society. we are going to get to a point where a majority of the u.s. population considers themselves

nonreligious or secular. so just on demographics this is enormous. one of the things i want to specify is demographics are not destiny. this used to be a belief for many democrats and writers. but demographics open possibilities. one of the things we are finding is across the generations by the time we get to the millenials and gen z, they do not necessarily identify with either of the two major parties. they are more agnostic toward both of them, but what they do vote -- when they do vote they are a little closer to the democrats. more importantly, they are the most liberal cut most progressive of all the generations. i will pull out one statistic that i think should be interesting. by the time you get down to the millenials and gen z, about 45%

of them have faith in capitalism but 45% of them have faith in socialism. so they are different politically on a lot of issues and in a lot of dimensions compared to older generations. host: here is some research finding that about two thirds of voters age 18 to 24 associate with the democratic party compared to 34% who align with the gop. there is a similar gaffe in affiliation of voters 25 to 29 with 64% of them leading democrat. voters in their 30's also leaning democratic and younger generations do seem to lean more democratic than republicans. this chart here, the older you get, the more the truck shifts to the right.

what are the political and policy differences that show up as these generations have this divide? guest: first, some people may say this is a consequence of people getting older. the reality is that, for generations, the views that you formed in your adolescence largely stay with you for the rest of your life. it is not you are a liberal when you are young and become conservative when you're older. a few people do. there is a generational aspect to this and it is important. as these millenials continue to age, they will hold these views for the rest of their lives and look at the world through the perspective they form. the phrase i use is to say that how they are going to view the world politically, their perspective is what i call the

microscope or telescope of how to look at the world on a range of issues. the younger generation is more supportive of changing immigration laws to make it easier for immigration. school violence and gun regulation is high up the list. at the top of the list is climate change and addressing climate problems and then there are issues such as greater support for social welfare programs, helping the poor, providing assistance for people to go to school. on a range of issues including the other one that is a big issue in politics, on reproductive rights. there is a gap. when you get to the millenials, the percentages that support abortion rights and reproductive rights and lgbtq issues is different.

this ties into a point i made where i mentioned that the new generations are more secular. research indicates the united states is one of the most rapidly secularizing countries in the world. if that is true, think about how many of our issues right now in american politics have religious undertones. as we become more secular and new generations take over, this is going to potentially transform the debate on american politics. the gap between the silents and baby boomers, millenials and gen z, is pretty significant in terms of a whole range of political issues. host: you co-authored a piece that polarization may fade out of american politics as the younger generations shift into

power. why would that be the case? guest: a lot of what we are finding right now is that a lot of the polarization being driven in american politics now is about party differences, but it is also about generational differences. it is about the fact that baby boomers and to some extent jen at hold one set of political views compared to millenials and those range of issues -- they are at odds with one another. as the older generations exit out of the political system and are replaced by millenials but there will be some issues for which we may not fight over anymore. look at something like recreational use of marijuana. for the most part, that is an issue that has faded from the scene. for most people now, even issues

about marriage equality are starting to fade from the scene as a new consensus is emerging. one of the things we have evidence on suggests in a decade , as the older generation takes up a political system, a certain range of issues, there is more consensus. the question becomes, at this point, is the new center of american politics owing to be more urban focused or suburban? the evidence seems to suggest where we are going to see a new local center is around suburban america. over the -- 50 years ago, american public opinion formed a bell curve. most of the voters were in the

center, some far left and some far-right. we have gone from a bell curve to a bimodal curve. there is evidence that will shift to something that looks like a bell curve again in terms of public opinion in about 10 years. mostly due to the generational shift that is going on in american politics. host: we are going to have special phone lines the segment. we broke this down by generation. if you are under 30, you can call in at (202) 748-8000. if you are age 30 to 60, (202) 748-8001. if you are over 60, (202) 748-8002 we would love to hear your perspective and your questions for professor schultz. you also say that this election features the lastgasp of the

silent generation in terms of influence in american politics. what do you mean by that? guest: i would say the lastgasp for the silent generation and last election where baby boomers have a love influence and we have to look at semple numbers here. going back to the chart before come and terms of age, we are looking after the most part the silent generation being those voters who are over 75, if not older, and aging out of the political system. at the same point, the baby boomers, some of them are also aging out. in 2020, four years ago was the first election in nearly 30 years where the baby boomers were not the majority voting block. what we are now going to see in

2024 is the millenials and gen z will be about 40% of the voting constituency on potential voters, so we are seeing this shifting and waning of influence for the baby boomers and that has lots of repercussions in terms of what i suggested before , the demographic shifts and clinical shifts, but also in terms of thinking about the parties because what we have also reached conclusions based on the data here is that there is an existential problem for both the democratic and republican parties. for the republicans, clearly a lot of the older voters have been voting republican and they are exiting out. for the democrats, even though many of the younger voters identify the democratic party what the younger voters think of

in terms of issues that the democratic party should be supporting are not necessarily the same as the older baby boomers, so what is happening in this election now is that, if we went back to when it was biden versus trump, it was basically an intra-dish -- intragenerational con -- conflict between two candidates of roughly the same generation and a lot of young people felt alienated from the political process. with biden out, it is more of an intergenerational conflict and we have seen in the news the extent to which harris has invigorated young voters and how she is running on generational feed, so this election transformed itself in the course of a couple months. now i think it is an election that is ushering in or continuing this generational shift that has been going on for a few years. obama was maybe the prelude for

it, but certainly harris is bringing this generational shift to the forefront. host: we ha seone on x who says about not buying it. turbulent9's was supposed to be transformional antiwar protests, yet baby boomers are just as divided politically as where their parents and grandparents then. guest: first, we should point out when we talk about generational influences is certainly not saying that everybody of any particular generation believes, y, or z. we need to think about generations. generations along with religion, these are what i say are different points of conflict in american politics. just because two people are baby

boomers does not necessarily mean they agree on everything. the caller is correct in the sense of saying not everybody, but in general we can see generational influences. we can see how the baby boom generation were brought up with defining moments in their life, the jfk assassination. maybe it was the vietnam war versus later generations, it is about 9/11 and school shootings. we do see generational influences, but what people are missing in the 1960's is the people who were on campus protesting were only one segment of the baby boom population. they did not represent everybody. someone once said the people protesting on campuses were also guarded by people who were of the same age, so we did see differences then and the

evidence suggests overall that more baby boomers, and our data points to this, actually identify as conservative as opposed to liberal, especially in comparison to millenials. on one level, i do not disagree with the caller. the data has to be interpreted differently than i think that person is suggesting. host: richard is in new jersey on our line for folks over 60. >> i wanted to ask you because i have a theory, as you mentioned bell curve and left and right and how the younger generation was more empathetic -- i call them empiopaths. the opposite is a social path --

sociopath, people who do not care about anyone else. i think power in the west is based on the personality of people. again, it is a bell curve, so basically when you think about it the republicans are people who generally are more sociopathic and democrats are people who are more empathetic and that is true of all western democracies that split left and right. host: i want to make sure we are understanding your point. you are saying because the younger generations are more empathetic -- caller: i'm not saying that. i am saying you can figure out all politics but can -- considering the social paths and the left tens to be (202) 748-8003 -- the left tends to be empiopath.

guest: i'm not a psychologist by trade. for me, venturing into that personality distinction, i do not know. on a different score, we do see generational differences in terms of younger generations, much more supportive of social welfare programs and of addressing the gap between the rich and poor. i do not know whether i want to call those generational differences sociopathic versus empathetic. i would be willing to say there is more support among the younger generations for the use of government resources and use of support for government in terms of trying to address pressing social issues as opposed to some of the older generations, which seem less supportive.

there clearly is a distinction. host: we have a text that says, what about anecdotal evidence that the young gerations speak out but do not vote? >> that has been an issue. go back to them bernie sanders ran for president in 2016. he would turn out enormous numbers of individuals for rallies, but not a lot of people for voting. this is not just a problem for the current generation. this has been a problem dating back to when the baby boomers got the right to vote in the 1970's. what we see is, for people under the age of 30 the voter turnout is often dramatically lowered with a variety of explanations. one is that for younger people

there are difficulties in terms of being able to register to vote. many states have rules about early registration, which often impacted students. students will say they do not know how to go about voting. i talked to my students and they say the candidates do not speak to me. think about when it was biden versus trump. we had an 82-year-old running against a 70-year-old. young people were saying i do not see these people in me. i do not see how they understand who i am. so the variety of issues out there but also my favorite chapter in the book is by a woman who talked about the civil rights movement versus the climate change movement and she points out first that the baby

boomers were active in many ways and so are millenials, but how they organize and engage has differed over time. we are still a kinetic society -- connected society and this issue about turnout for voting has remade a problem for 50 years. host: joel in arkansas on our line for folks in the 30 to 60 range, good morning. caller: good morning. i am not well educated, but i think some of the problems are older people, we work for everything we got. we paid our bills. we did not have credit cards. we did not want credit cards. and the schools are having a big impression, influence on these

young students. they come to the schools at an early age, just like in the service they came in about 17, 18, 19. the schools are being indoctrinated and they are being told how to vote. that is up to them. one thing before i'm cut off, this is the devil's playground. i go to church, monday and wednesday night. this is the devil's playground. he was an angel. he was kicked out of heaven. these young students do not know that and they do not want to learn about it. host: i think he is getting to a couple of the points you mentioned about the declining religiosity among younger generations, but what about the different financial and economic outlooks across generations.

guest: there is no question there a difference here. if we think about the circumstances under which some of the baby boomers came up and the silents, they came up in the 1950's and may be early 1970's when job production in united states was greater than in later decades. america was at its peak. at one point its gross to master product was half the worlds -- half the world's. our economy was revolving around manufacturing. you could go to a car company with a high school degree or without a high school degree and do really well. if we had in place at that point the new deal, we had the great society programs, people were able to afford a house. right now, the economic situation is different for our students. for many baby boomers, the

amount of money available for financial aid to go to school was quite sufficient. now we are looking at, in the last few years, the debt for students going to college is greater then the debt people have in credit cards. we have evidence that suggests across the country students have about 1.8 trillion dollars in student loan debt and the average family income now in terms of what they make is insufficient in most places of the country to be able to afford a house. many of the people who are millenials saw their parents in the crash of 2008 and the reason they lose their job -- the reason why pointed at it is the economic circumstances that these younger people and younger voters are seeing now is so vastly different than in general

the economic circumstances of those who were older. i go back to a point earlier. for many of my younger people here, american capitalism has not done them well. has not done their parents well. when they are asked a question, what are your thoughts on socialism and capitalism, for those of us who are older we grew up during the cold war and phrases like socialism and communism were dirty words. but for people who are now seeing the situation where, as i mentioned, credit card debt for paying for school, housing costs are so high cut medical bills or even higher then we saw when we were younger, these are people saying my circumstances are different and may i view the world differently than the older generations who had in some ways a different set of experiences

and different economic context in which they formed their views. host: catherine is in ohio on our line for folks over 60. >> you finally hit the nail on the head when you said what reagan told us, if we would be patient, it would finally trickle down to us. i am 75. i am still waiting for that. it has never happened. now the republican party is trying to tell our young generation again and i would tell them do not listen. they want to keep people in power that are male, white, and rich. they do not want to see a woman with multiple heritages in the white house. that makes them deathly ill. we have to stop telling each other that if you come back from

war that you do not count, that he -- if you are a child and your school gets shot up just get over it. it is not easily done. we need politicians who stand up for the needs of our people today. we need to take automatic weapons out of the hands of the people, just like in the wild west. you came into town and took the guns and give them to the sheriff. when you left town, you got your guns back. there is no reason in the united states of america that we should have a gun problem. we have rules and laws. host: i want to give david a chance to respond to these points you have raised. guest: let me go a couple directions. one of them i think she is

hinting at here is the demographic shift going on. think about where we are at this point. for the last 250 years since our independence, we have been mostly a white, anglo-saxon, caucasian, christian society in terms of a majority of the voters. we are on the cusp now of becoming a country that will be a majority nonwhite and majority that describe themselves as secular and non-christian. what we are on the verge of now is one of the most profound changes ever in american history. with that shift, even though demographics are not destiny, the world that younger people are coming into now is so different than the world we have seen for two years ago or throughout american history that

, if we think in terms of the first three words of the constitution, if what democracy is about is letting people have their say, there is a shift occurring that is going to bring with it pretty dramatic shifts in public policy. i am not going to get into a discussion in terms of what is right policy and what is wrong policy. that is not my role here, but our data from our research is telling us we are going to see profound shifts in policy and part of the conflict in america now is generational but is also in the sense of there are some generations fearful of the demographic changes that are coming and of the possible policy changes occurring and we

are almost getting this reaction and counter reaction in american politics now. to some extent, i would argue the trump versus harris campaigns is the personification of so many of these generational conflicts going on now. host: we have a question from annette, w as, how will the age differences affect the vote inhe heavily weighted electoral college this season? to some states have more young voters than other states? guest: this is a great question and i will even twist it a little better. first, we do not elect a president by straight popular vote. i always tell my students ignore national polls. it is about the race to 270 electoral votes. there are about half a dozen or so swing states that are going

to be critical in this election. we have heard about them already. and what this is about is how particular candidates, harris versus trump, understand swing state strategy and how well do they play the generational politics in terms of attracting as many voters as possible across generations but at the same time speaking to particular ones. i think the challenge is interesting for harris because when it was still biden as candidate biden was not bringing in younger voters. the democrats needed those younger voters in this critical swing states. harris is doing what appears to be for now a better job, so i think the caller is on score

with this one here, that the democrats come especially harris, if they can turn out younger voters especially in those states, pennsylvania, wisconsin, and michigan, they will do well, but in those three states generally the voters are a little older than they are for the average national population. but also, slightly off my discussion of generational politics, i have written on swing states and argued this election will come down to 150,000 to 200,000 voters in five or six swing states. within those voters are going to be what those young voters do. think about this election year. we are down to such few numbers

of voters and potentially just a few young voters are going to vote. that speaks to polarization of this election. host: dennis is in virginia. >> my problem is lion -- caller: my problem is lying. 20 years ago the candidates were on the stand, they would be telling the truth or we were led to believe they are telling the truth. today, i am so confused. i do not know who to believe. harris says the border is open. harris says the border is closed. host: i'm wondering if you have any questions for david regarding the generational politics in particular. caller: like i said, the lion --

lying. why do the candidates lie and not get fined or put on the block for? -- for it? guest: that is a great topic for a different show here, but in general what the supreme court has said is for the most part lion -- lying is protected under the first amendment. i'm also a law professor. i do not agree with that position. i think people ought to be held to standards of truth and that the law should not protect lies, but also there is an issue here in which on one level the american public have grown to expect that politicians are not want to tell the truth and have sort of put that into their

framework of how they think about things. this is a different discussion for a different day. i do not know what the generational differences are in terms of toleration for candidates who do not tell the truth or so forth, but it clearly speaks to something about the american public where we do not seem to be punishing candidates who lie and i'm not necessarily just talking about trump or harris. we have a lot of other candidates running for office out there and there seems to be a cultural more tolerance in terms of letting candidates get away with falsehoods. host: paul is in massachusetts on our line for folks over 60. caller: good morning. i had a question about what happens when the generations

become established and own property and wealth. it seems to me -- as every generation obtains wealth, they become more conservative. i wonder if that is something you look at. guest: lots of people have been attributed to this phrase but someone once said something like if you're not a socialist at age 18 you have no heart. if you are not a conservative at age 40 have no brains. supposedly what this idea of saying that, as you become older you become more conservative. again, what our research indicates, it builds upon development of psychology, is in our adolescence we view a plug light entity. we experience clinical events that fuse -- political events that fuse our political

consciousness. not that we do not evolve, but it becomes a kaleidoscope or magnifying glass to which we interpret the world. what happens as people form political identities, they do not have a lot of power or influence, but as american politics changes one of the big drivers of political change is, as the millenials and the gen z get older, they will still bring with them political views. they will now become property owners and business owners. they will become candidates for office. and they are going to have a different set of views. are they going to be radically different from before? no. but certainly they bring a different perspective. we know that is part of what we look to see over the next few years, shifts on a variety of

issues. in terms of the baby boomers, you hit at something interesting. the earlier baby boomers born from 19 46 to 1955 generally in research turn out to be more liberal as opposed to the younger ones, so we are seeing almost this sub generational divide even within the baby boomers in terms of how they look at the world. in general, we do see in so many things in life the views that we form in our adolescence, our sense of awareness and who we are and our personal identity cannot carry with us for the rest of our life and the same happens with our political attitudes and beliefs. host: we are going to get in one last caller before we have to let you go. russ is in new york caller:.

i asking about the shift in trust in institutions. i was born in 1956 and we did not trust institutions but now i feel the shift has gone to where republicans do not have any faith in the fbi or cdc and we see the trust people put in the democrat national committee to select biden and harris -- trump has brought this out and i'm one of the few people for trump but i see that is what has happened. i have heard 50% of people function at a sixth grade level. our people becoming less informed? guest: let me go to the second question first. one of my teachers years ago wrote a book called what

americans do not know about politics and why it matters and pointing to the fact that most of us -- most americans are not that well-informed about the basics of american politics. we also find in our research vast differences in terms of what people now and on some levels that is important. on some levels we should not expect people to know all the intricacies or details of everyday politics. but for most americans, most of the media, if you look at newspapers and television news, it is geared and has been for years to people roughly with a seventh or eighth grade education in terms of trying to maximize insights. on that level, nothing has shifted. in terms of the trust issue here, think about the people who are trump supporters. at one point for older people

they were working at factories and in manufacturing and the world was working to their advantage. they could get a job without a college degree. manufacturing left and a lot of things crashed in terms of the world. a lot of levels, they are worse off than they were a few years ago. i can understand -- their skepticism. they voted for democrats and jobs go away. they voted for republicans and saw jobs go away. a person comes by and says only i can fix were problems. i could understand why some people might put faith in donald trump. the circumstances under which they were socialized. host: thank you. david schultz is a political science and legal studies professor at hamlin university and co-editor of the new book "generational politics in the united states: from the silents to gen z and beyond." thank you for your time this

morning. guest: my pleasure. thank you for having me. host: thank you to everyone who called in with questions and comments. we will be back tomorrow morning with nothing addition of "washington journal." -- with another edition of "washington journal." hope everyone has a great rest of their 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]