spread fear to drum up support for us. >> watch the cbs news vice presidential debate simulcast live tonight on c-span has minnesota governor tim walz and ohio senator jd vance take the debate stage and go head-to-head for the first time. coverage begins with a preview show at 8:00 p.m. eastern, followed by the debate at 9:00 p.m. the cbs news vice presidential debate simulcast live tonight on c-span. c-span. your unfiltered view of politics. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including buckeye broadband. ♪

>> buckeye broadband supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. joining us to talk about the role in history of vice presidential candidates and debates is joel goldstein, author of the book called "the white house presidency." he is also professor of law emeritus at the st. louis university school of law. welcome to the program. guest: thanks so much for having me. host: what does history tell us about how important and consequential vice presidential debates are? guest: it is a range of experience. generally speaking the vice presidential debate isn't decisive in a presidential campaign but it is an important

part of the introduction of vice presidential candidates to the american people, often times the candidates are people who are relatively new to the national scene. it is important both in terms of a discussion of the issues before the campaign and a chance to measure the people, one of whom will be a heartbeat away from the presidency and considering them in that context. host: let's go back to 1976. this would have been the first televised vice presidential debate between walter mondale and bob dole. i will play a portion and we will talk about it. [video clip] >> 10 days ago and senator mondale raise the watergate and nixon pardon, it started the campaign mudslinging. when you are running for senate two years ago, he said the pardon was prematurely granted

and that it was a mistake. you were quoted as saying you can't ignore our tradition of equal application of the law. did you approve of it when president ford granted it and do you approve now and if it was fair game in your campaign in kansas and why is it not appropriate now? >> it is an appropriate context for guests but it is not any more appropriate than world war ii for democrat words in this century. if we added up the killed and did, democrat words in this century will be 1.6 million americans, enough to fill the city of detroit. if we want to go back over and over that, we can do that. i assume senator mondale does not want to do that, but simply the pardon of richard nixon is behind us.

watergate is behind us. we have a vision for americans if they are concerned about the people and their problems, we are to be talking about education and jobs. i know it strikes a ford for some to kick nixon around. how long can you keep that up. so much can you fix the link around. his wife suffered a stroke and he has been out of office and he stepped down. i think after two years and some months it is probably a dead issue. but that is the only game they know. >> i think senator dole has richly earned his reputation as a hatchet man. by implying and stating that world war were democratic wars. does he really mean to suggest to the american people that there was a partisan difference over our involvement in the war

to fight nazi germany? i don't think any reasonable american would accept this. and he really mean to suggest it was only partisanship that got us into the war in korea? did he really mean to forget that part of the record where mr. nixon, and the republican party wanted us to get involved earlier in the war in vietnam? and long after mr. nixon and the republican party finished the war, they kept urging us forward. it was the democratic congress that passed law and the war in vietnam and preventing a new war in angola. on watergate, we are not charging him we know his involvement. we are saying the defendant, mr. nixon. >> "washington journal" continues. was that the first vice presidential bait in 1976? guest: -- vice presidential

debate in 1976? guest: the two men who had debated often in the senate both coming from farm states and both went on to become presidential nominees. senator goal did what candidates do so often in these debates is they answer the questions and want to talk about, not question that was asked but in doing so, he made a statement attributing the wars to the democratic party and senator mondale jumped on him for it. after this debate, then governor jimmy carter will eat started mentioning mondale more and more in his beaches and emphasizing him and suggesting that his first presidential decision was choosing mondale for his running mate and president ford had

chosen dole and was the reason why carter said the people should support him and not president ford. senator goal went on to be a revered national leader and statesman put in the 1976 campaign and in part because of that moment he was viewed as a controversial person and developed a reputation as a political hitman and some people blamed him in part for the loss of president ford in that election. host: why start only in 1976? there were presidential debates going way before that, 1960 was the televised debate. why start then? what was the thinking behind presidential debates. guest: there had been the famous

presidential debate between senator john kennedy and vice president richard nixon in 1960. within that had not been debates after that although the underdog was always pressing for debates in the candidate who was ahead was always resisting them. in 1968, the democrats wanted to have a debate between the candidates and the republicans wanted nothing to do with that idea. in 1976, president ford was 30 points behind coming out of the republican convention. he challenged governor carter to a debate which governor carter immediately accepted. he very much believed in the idea of polic discourse and enhancing democratic experience

and wanted to elevate the vice presidency so the four debates included one between the vice presidential candidates. host: you can start calling in now if you have a question and would like to join, republicans can call (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, an independents (202) 748-8002. i want to put up on the screen the most watch vice presidential debates in order of how many households were watching the debate in the most watch was 2008 with biden versus palin at 41.7% and goes from there. harris versus pence and biden versus ryan and goes down after that. let's talk about that one between then vice president biden and governor sarah palin.

why do you think it was so widely watched? guest: i think largely it was because governor palin was viewed as intriguing and controversial. there were a lot of questions that developed before the debate as to whether she was really prepared to be a heartbeat away, although she had an impressive rollout when senator mccain made the surprise announcement that she would be his running mate and then made a dynamic speech at the republican convention. and she botched a few interviews once she started having interviews and said things that were then mocked on saturday night live and other places. i think there was a lot of interest as to whether she could handle herself and how was she

going to do, including in the mccain camp. so i think that made that presidential -- vice presidential debate the only time he drew a higher audience in the presidential debate that year. host: let's take a look at a portion of that debate. [video clip] >> all you have to do is go down union street or walk into home depot where i spend a lot of time in you ask anyone whether or not the economic and foreign-policy of this administration has made the better off in the last eight years and asked whether there was a single major initiative that john mccain differs with the president on, taxes, iraq, afghanistan, on the whole question of how to help education and on dealing with health care. the people in my neighborhood get it. they know they have been getting the short end of the stick. so go back to my old neighborhood.

go up to scranton with me. these people know the middle class has gotten the short end and the wealthy have done very well in corporate america has been rewarded. barack obama it will change it. >> so there you go pointing backwards again. now let's look ahead and tell americans will we have to plan to do for them in the future could you mentioned education and i'm glad you did. i know education you are passionate about and i say it with education, america needs to be putting a lot more focus on that in the schools have got to be ramped up in terms of the funding they are deserving. teachers needed to be paid more. i can -- come from a houseful of teachers. my grandparents and my brother who i think is the best school

teacher. and here is a shout out for all of the students watching. host: i just want to remind viewers that we have all of the vice presidential debates going back to the first one in 1976 and presidential debates going back to 1960 on our website. we have a special page set aside for you to peruse those. that is c-span.org/presidential -- debate. you can find it on our website and take a look. the choice of sarah palin and if that could have impacted the race, where you come down on that? guest: i think the choice of governor palin did end up hurting senator mccain a bit. it undercut his theme of putting america first when he chose

somebody who had less than two years of experience as a governor of the state and who i think came through too many as not ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. but that is certainly not the reason senator mccain loss. he entered a construct in which there were grave economic problems and people were unhappy with the war in iraq and inherited a lot of baggage from the bush administration. i think going into the race he was the underdog and that part accounted for his decision to choose governor palin as his running mate rather than somebody like senator joe lieberman who i think was his preferred choice but he concluded that ticket would not win against senator obama and senator biden. host: coming back to the present

day, how do you think that the two current vice presidential candidates are impacting their tickets? guest: i think they are playing different roles consistent with the reason for their selection. senator vance who was chosen first i think was chosen largely as an effort by former president trump to double down on energizing the base of the republican party and supporters and to emphasize the policies and approach that he himself had taken. senator van of those who he was considering was the one who he could rely upon to be most and most adhered to that message. i think governor walz was an

outreach selection for vice president harris, although they seem to be, a vice president and governor walz them to be positioned very similarly. their backgrounds are very different demographically in their life experiences are different and i think in part this selection seemed to reflect an effort to reach out and expand her base of support. host: let's bring callers in. walter in arizona, democrat. caller: good morning. professor goldstein, i want to tell you that i noticed earlier that you are in massachusetts and i grew up down there. so congratulations, one of the

nicest places in the world to me. i want to ask you about something i saw on a media clip from youtube where senator vance was on a podcast a few years ago talking about the need to eliminate universities in the united states. that is very disturbing to hear him say that and he is running as a national vice presidential candidate and went on further to say that we need to eradicate all of the leadership in government. what is your response to that? guest: i have not heard the whole clip. i think universities serve a tremendously important function, both in terms of educating

people, making it possible for people to advance economically and to have opportunity in the united states. that is certainly with the experience of both senator vance and governor walz, their experience of going to university after coming from very modest upbringings has opened up new possibilities so getting ready to be on the stage tonight to run for the vice presidency, so at the university play an important right, -- important role giving people the opportunity to advance in an terms of the research they do in terms of searching for truth and exploring new areas of science, discoveries that help all of us with healthy lives. host: here is shown in florida,

independent line. caller: i was wondering if your guest might comment on the fact that abc maybe considering to replay the debates and former president trump's position that he won hands down. what would that do to the presidents situation? host: you are talking about replaying the presidential debate? caller: absolutely. host: do have a comment on that? guest: i think the overwhelming view of the whole and also the commentators across the spectrum was that vice president harris won the presidential debate that she had with mr. trump and so i wouldn't inc. replaying the debate would enhance your

trump's position. caller: i don't think it would enhance his position but he claims to have won the debate so if they replay it wouldn't that put him in a different light with his followers? guest: i would say that the vice president's campaign would be delighted to have that debate replayed again and again and in fact she has agreed to another debate and former president trump hasn't and i suspect that the democrats will suggest that's an indication of the trump campaign's view of who won the first debate. host: i want to ask you about this ap poll that came out about favorability of the vice presidential candidates. we will put it on the screen.

walz's fair ability -- favorability compared to vance. so if you could just talk abo those numbers and what you make of that. guest: there has been quite a lot of pulling of the favorability of the vice presidential candidates and consistently they have shown that both governor walz is viewed much more favorably than senator vance. but also senator vance's numbers started out historically at lower than vice presidential candidates in the past have and they have gone steadily downhill. the ap poll was one that showed

among the largest margins between favorability and on favorability. the overwhelming showing from the polls has been consistent with the idea that senator vance is viewed unfavorably overall and especially outside of the republican base. that presents a challenge for him and it suggests that governor walz may be better positioned to appeal to voters outside of his own base than senator van. his appeal is mostly to voters are firmly in the trump-vance ticket. host: we have a quest tax from kristin in portland, maine who says, jd vance andrumpad em in springfield yesterdaynst for their admitted lying against

you know of any other vps who have had criminal charges whi running for office, and you think this should be a topic of the debate tonight. i do. i will give some context about what she is talking about from the columbus dispatch, haitian nonprofit filed charges against vance and trump work springfield claims. it says that they are charging them for repeated claims without evidence about haitian immigrants in springfield eating pets. it vance posted claims about haitian immigrants adopting and eating pets and trump repeated them during the debate. the local and state officials of the claims are false. central ohio city of 60,000 has been plagued by bomb threats and poor school attendance as the situation gained national attention. professional goldstein?

-- faster goldstein? guest: to exit goldstein? -- professor goldstein? guest: to answer the question, i don't remember another vice president candidate being charged while running. i think this episode certainly will be one that will be discussed, in the sense that senator vance made the allegations, repeated allegations have been made against patients in springfield, ohio. it turned out they were said to be entirely false and after it was made clear by the wall street journal and others that these were untrue allegations,

he said something to the effect that he was going to continue to create stories in order to make the larger point with respect to immigration. i think it is a story in and of itself but it also relates to a larger question of proper behavior in political campaigns and also simply to what extent are candidates responsible for making certain things they are saying have some basis in truth before the air them. host: going back to the pull from the ap, one in foureople said they fe like they didn't know enough about the vice presidential debes. is that a typical number? do pple know more about the

candidates, less about the candidates at this point in the campaign? guest: i think that is a pretty typical number. it is not unusual for people not to know much about vice residential candidates at the time of the vice presidential debate. that was certainly reflected in polls for instance in 1976 debate which you showed between senator mondale and senator goal. both were in for a long time and yet a large number of people didn't have information about that. i think that was true in many of the debates. it is interesting. if you look at the vice presidential debate, often times the people who are on the stage in vice presidential debates go on to be presidential candidates, nominees. in two cases even presidents,

george bush and joe biden were later elected president. before the debates, often times 20% to 30% for even more feel they have a information about them. that is part of the importance of this evening's event. it gives people a chance to see the vice presidential debate and candidates and see them in a high-pressure, high-stakes event. host: here is will in in sturgeon bay, democrat. caller: i would like to ask you, kamala harris was tasked with tackling the immigration problem and a lot of people like my self leave the biden administration hung her out to dry, much like a

center to central america. immigration is one of the biggest issues going right now. is there another vice president you can think of who was tasked with such an important topic as immigration? guest: i think the point that will is raising is an important one. i think actually there really has been a lot of misstatement about exactly what was the nature of vice president harri'' assignment. she was never the border czar and never the person put in charge of immigration. what president biden assigned her to do was to look at the situation in three central american countries, el salvador, honduras and guatemala and to try and come to grips with what

were the structural causes in those countries of the fact that many were leaving those countries to try and come to the united states. what vice president harris did was try to address long-term problems in those countries like the presence of political corruption, and the lack of the existence of crime. all of this were matters that were really long-term problems that weren't going to be fixed overnight. actually in the second obama term, then vice president biden had a very similar assignment with respect to central america. i think there was nothing inappropriate about the assignment that vice president harris was given. it was an important and difficult assignment and an

assignment that cut across a lot of different departments and it was appropriate for a vice president but she was never the border czar and never in charge of immigration, and to the extent there has been a lot of rhetoric during the campaign to that effect, it is simply untrue. other vice presidents have at times been given important assignments. dan quayle was in charge of the competitiveness council which was an important way in which george h w bush administration tried to deal with regulations and al gore was in charge of reinventing government headed up some bilateral commissions with other countries including russia . a number of vice presidents have had challenging assignments. host: here is william in ohio, republican.

caller: i am kinda concerned about the way things are going right now. it looks like we are headed for a war and guys like you have on right now better get ready to pick up a gun. i am not protecting him. host: foreign policy, what are you seeing in the difference in the candidates? is that a fair question for vice presidential candidates about their position on foreign affairs? guest: sure. vice president, the vice presidency has developed from the carter mondale administration. in the model that has been followed by most administrations of both parties, the vice president is an across-the-board advisor and troubleshooter for the president and takes on assignments that need to be

handled at the highest level. so the president is an advisor to the president and not simply on domestic matters of personnel or its economic matters and also on foreign policy. as a member of the national security council by law, the vice president takes international trips. one of the things vice president harris did was take a number of high-profile missions that president biden assigned her to. she went and spoke at the munich national security conference and has been to asia and to europe each six or seven times. she went to represent the united states at the climate change conference in dubai when the war between israel and hamas was beginning.

vice presidents have to handle delicate matters of diplomacy as an agent for the president as well as give the president advice. so certainly an important area of discussion. host: and both men have midwestern roots with humble beginnings. how do you think their backgrounds have played out so far in the campaign? guest: i think some of the battleground states in the election are in the midwest and so i think part of the thinking was they could be helpful in terms of appealing to voters in the midwest as well as elsewhere. our campaigns have changed over time. it used to be they were much more national in scope but as campaigns have focused increasingly on battleground

states, candidates tend to spend more and more time in the contested states and certainly they have been spending time in states like michigan and wisconsin, among other states where presumably both parties hope their backgrounds will resonate with voters there. host: let's talk to monty in bend, oregon, republican line. caller: i was just curious, what do you see as the dangers to democracy by putting somebody up as a vice residential candidate who seems to be the mouthpiece for proven lies and his running mate, trump, who time and time again tend to lie in debates.

what are the dangers of democracy, why are we putting up someone who is just going to lie and when the debate is over both sides will claim that they won but really only one side, the trump in advance campaign have been proven to live? how does that affect our democracy now and in the future? host: professor goldstein? guest: i was recently at the gerald ford presidential museum in grand rapids, michigan, and president ford right after he was sworn in as president, one of the things he said that to some extent has been lost and i think was an important statement, was he said i believe the truth is the glue that holds government together.

not only our american government but civilization itself. it seems to me that really for our constitutional system is predicated to a great extent on the premise that people tell the truth, and that was really an idea that president ford reiterated again and again and made similar statements when he testified in the vice presidential hearing before the house and senate. but so much of our lives depends upon a reliance that the people were dealing with are telling the truth. so the idea that candidates for political office would not tell the truth is one that ultimately is destructive of democracy and is threatening to civilization.

part of the function of debates and campaigns is to call out the misstatements that are made and to try and correct the record. host: who do you think should do that? abc came under criticism for the moderators fact checking former president trump. cvs has said the moderators will not be fact checking what you make of all that? guest: it seems -- cbs has said the moderators will not be fact checking what do you think of all of that? guest: what is been most effective is where the journalists have really performed the role of journalists and have pushed candidates when they do make misstatements. things are moving fast and you can't always fact check everything in real time but there are some statements that are so clearly untrue that it

does seem to me that it is unfair to viewers not to point them out in that case and it does seem to me that part of the role or should be part of the role of the journalist as well as the opposing candidate. one of the most dramatic moments in vice presidential debate history was the exchange between the 1988 debate of senator quayle's experience. but that only happened and senator quayle did not make any misstatements but that was an instance where that only happened was because in advance the members of the panel had agreed they would follow up on each other's questions and some of the journalists felt senator quayle was not giving a complete answer and that kept coming back

to it and that is how the whole movement emerged. i think the role of the journalist is an important one during the vice presidential debate as well. host: diane in huntingburg indiana, independent line. caller: i have been watching your show. i loved it. i love the open forms in hearings and rallies. i am so excited about the debate tonight. i have question. they need to answer about the tan france invoice bathrooms, kids -- the tam ponds in boys bathrooms -- tampons in boys bathrooms, kids with changing their sex and who is going to pay for housing for 70 countries of refugees.

harris and biden and close the borders now and the hr to bill secured the border and chuck schumer has it and is sitting on his desk. the border bill harris wants does not stop illegals from coming in. she wants amnesty. host: are you making the comment or do you have a question? caller: i have a question. i have tried it channels for over eight years c-span and foxbusiness and fox news are the only two that will tell you the truth on the borders. msnbc is the most hate trump news i have ever seen in my life. they won't tell the truth. nobody knows the truth about the

borders and the hr to bill the house passed is sitting on schumer's desk and secures the border. host: this is from sue in new become the norm in a political debate to moear, insult and talk over your opponent? are these considered acceptable maneuvers to score points? and i would just add to that, the trend and how debates have? guest: that is a wonderful question. there have been some vice presidential debate when you go back and watch them or read them, they were extraordinarily civil. the 1990 six debate between vice president al gore and former country of housing and representative jack kemp was one

that fits that description, as was the 2000 debate between former secretary of defense dick cheney and senator joe lieberman . both instances where the candidates talked about respect for each other and were very civil in nature. to some extent, the behavior turns up on the format and whether it is supposed to be an open ended discussion where people try to barge in on each other or where it is understood that one party gets to speak for two minutes and then the other for two minutes. but i think that it also speaks to a decline in the level of civil discourse in our country, the fact that less and less we tend to each other and fairly

engaged with each other and more and more people tend to listen to one side or the other than to really question as much as we should whether the statements that are being made are based on fear or another point of view into talk to each other in a way that we are not simply talking to each other but listening to each other. and i think that has been requested from some of the candidates in the debates as well. in some of the debates, past experiences, one of the reasons they meet in the microphones is because a candidate would continue talking when it was his rival's turn. host: joel goldstein, his book is called "the white house vice presidency."

is also a of law emeritus at the saint university announcer: iran fired at least 200 ballistic missiles at israel today. the attack marks a sharp escalation of long simmering conflict between israel and iran and could tip the region into full-blown war. iran's revolutionary guard corps said in a statement the missile attack had been in retaliation for the assassinations of hezbollah's leader, hamas's political leader, and an iranian commander. iran would launch more missiles if they are attacked. president biden and vice president harris are monitoring the iranian attack against israel from the situation room and receiving regular updates from their national security team. president biden directed the u.s. military to aid israel's offense against iranian and

shoot down missiles targeting israel. we are standing by for briefings from the white house and the state department. when they get underway we will have them for you here on c-span. announcer: c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more. including sparklight. >> what is great internet? is it strong? is it fast? is it reliable? at sparklight, we know connection goes way beyond -- and everything in between. but the best connections are always there, right when you need them. so how do you know it is great internet? because it works. we're sparklight, and we're always working for you. announcer: sparklighsupports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.

announcer: former president jimmy carter is celebrating his 100th birthday today. american history tv is featuring programming relating to his life and legacy all day on c-span 2. here is a message from former president obama on the birthday milestone. >> i have always admired president carter for many things. his accomplishments in the white house. his incredible impact leaving office. his fundamental decency. jimmy, thank you for your friendship, your example, and for always finding new ways to remind us that we are all created in god's image. happy birthday. announcer: you can watch c-span's american history tv programming relating to the 39th president's life and legacy all day on c-span 2. among the programs you will see are then-governor jimmy carter's

speech at the 1976 democratic convention accepting his party's non-asian. and a lecture by a political science professor. that is all day today on c-span 2. >> he said we shouldn't allow weapons that i used in war to be on america's streets. i woner, one world -- what was this weapon you carried into war, giving you abandoned your unit and he has not spent a day in a combat zone? >> senator vance got called out about telling vicious, hurtful lies about immigrants. they asked him if he didn't mean it and it was an accident. he said no, i am willing to create stories to create fear. announcer: watch the cbs news vice presidential debate simulcast live tonight on c-span, as minnesota governor tim walz and ohio senator j.d.

vance take the debate stage and go head to head for the first time. coverage begins with a preview show at 8:00 p.m. followed by the debate at 9:00 p.m. the vice presidential debate simulcast live tonight on c-span. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. announcer: a live picture this afternoon from the white house briefing room where we are expecting remarks to reporters on the situation in israel this afternoon, where about 200 missiles have been fired on the country from iran. the white house says president biden and vice president harris are monitoring the iranian attack and receiving regular updates on the national security team. we should let you know we are also expecting briefings today from the state department and the pentagon. we will bring those to you as they become available here on c-span.

>> thank you for your show. sorry i missed your last guest. but mark twain famously said once, any idiot can recognize the wrong answer. it takes a genius to recognize the wrong question. i would suggest the moderators

in the debates i have watched are so highly partisan and quite frankly as a debater myself, i can't see how they don't challenge these questions. lincoln and douglas debated and traveled on the same train across america. that was when debating was truly debating. what we have now is a seemingly guiltless media, biased in an attempt to sway an election. as far as i am concerned, the republicans, trump most glaringly, fall into that trap of not recognizing a wrong question.

they should be rephrasing these questions so they are not partisan and so they are not biased. host: randy in michigan, line for democrats. caller: i am calling for a comments. i wonder if trump is going to get on truth social or x and call for the firing of all these workers on the docks. host: the strike of the workers? caller: yes, that's what he said, you can just fire them all. and the thing fox news going to eric trump in georgia lying about the white house calling governors. that is all i have. host: let me get you an article about that as well. here is phyllis schenectady, new york, independent.

caller: hello. i am calling because i seem to get the impression when people are calling in and complaining about the debate and a lot of people calling are, i am guessing trump supporters, but they become very irate and if something isn't going the way they feel it should go during a debate or after the debate has happened, they jump right on the moderators who were conducting the debate and they blame them, which seems to be typical for trump supporters. when they are questioned as to why they have these complaints

about the moderators, they seem to be very angry and become irate. especially against the media. but this started with donald trump. donald trump, one of the first things he did was to criticize the media, not that they are always right, but he put so much attention on them and he caused quite a bit of chaos, especially at his rallies. he would point out the media at the back of his halls, and he accused them of being the enemies of the people. just the rhetoric that he spewed. then he accused the democrats of causing the second assassination on his life. but the rhetoric this man spews is so hateful, and i just think that it is dangerous. just the other day he said that his opponent was deranged, was

born deranged, and is stupid. his rhetoric has caused loss of many lives in this country, because his followers will go and try to intimidate people. there are so many people going around now that have to have security if they can afford it. and some of them can't afford it. but the anger and the rhetoric that he spews has caused the lives of many people. >> good afternoon, everyone. going to be really quick here. i have the national security advisor jake sullivan to talk about the latest in the middle east. mr. sullivan: good afternoon. i am here to provide a grief report on the iranian ballistic missile attack against israel that occurred earlier today. i can take just a few questions because this