coverage on c-span surrounding the annirsary. 11:45 a.m.astern, president biden and first lady jill biden will take part in the candle lighting ceremony in the white house blue room. at 4:00 p.m. eastern, vice president kamala harris and the second gentleman will plant a memorial tree on the ground of their residence at the naval observatory. former president trump speaks at an event in miami marking the one-year anniversary of the attacks. you can watch these events live on c-span now, our free mobile app, or online at c-span.org. >> do you solemn swear that in the testimony you are about to give will behe truth, the whe truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> weeknights, watch our encore presentation of american htory tv's 10-part seriescongress

investigates."authors and historians will tell these stories, we will see historic footage, and examine the impact and legacy of key congressional hearin for the night, a joint committee hearing following a wave of violence against freed slaves a others. watch "congress investigates" tonight at 10:00 eastern on c-span. ♪ >> the book is titled "all the president's money." it's about how the men who govern america govern their own money, according to the subtitle on the cover. the author is the founding partner of checkers financial management, a san francisco- based firm specializing in tax and financial planning for high-net-worth individuals. she says the american presidents are a complex group to tackle. they live in a mudslinging

reality on the way to and through their presidency. the moment their term ends, they beco historical figures carved in stone. >> "all the president's money" on this episode of "bo oknotes+" with our host,rian lamb. available wherever you get your podcasts. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we areunded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a communit cenr? no, it's way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with 1000 community centers so students from low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-an as a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy. >> coming up, republican and

democratic strategists share their insights and analysis of u.s. politics and the upcoming elections. this discussion hosted bnew york university last about 90 minutes. >>elcome to all of you here at nyu, washington, d.c., and those of you watching at he for this conversation inside american politics. for those of you who are here in the audience, just a reminder

there wl be pizza and refreshments upstairs, so you can continue t conversation after the panel. i am the research director for the john brademas cenr. as our founder used say, bringing together thinkers and doers. tonight we have brought together some of the smartest thinkers and hardest working doers in politics, and they are here to tackle the biggest questio right now, what is the state of the eleion, and whereill it go in the next 32 days. if you are like me, you open th news each morning to follow every twist and turn of this race. each breaking story seems like it should be a game changer, and yet the polls barely budge.

in this age of polarization, it is easy to throw up ouhands and thinthat everything is important and nothing matters. but folks here can tell us what makes and eaks a campaign, and they will share with us thei inghts of what we should really focus on so we can make sense of this election season. an we couldn't have a better guide for these discussions than our moderator. steve got his start in politics working for senator ted kennedy. he's been a strategist for dozens of senate, gubernatorial, and mail campaigns across the country. anhe served in senior goals and three presidential campaigns, including the democratic national committee for barack obama's 2008 presidential campaign. he is cofounder and ceo of purple strategies , a firm which develops comprehensive reputation and advocacy campaigns for organizations and

industries operating in a challenging environments. many of you will know him from his on-air political commentary over the years on msnbc,, cnn and fox news. steve is one of the most thoughtful people you will find in the field. he understands not just the odds of the race, but the stakes involved. we are grateful to have him meeting tonight's conversation. thank you, c. steve: thank you, michael pitt es not sound like my mother wrote that -- do't that sod like my ther wrote that? [laughter] starting from when ts builng opened up and continuing until 20 i taught at n. one of the great joys of my life was teaching american public opinion and i hopeo get back to do that here. thank you, everybody, for coming. i want to give everybody on the panel, all these pple whcome out for these things foryu,

and we do it not just here, but we do it at political conferences at n facility, this year cohosted with oxford university and the u.k. the people are all, i'm proud to say, fries. but they are also some of the smartest and best people in politics. i wore them introduce themsees quickly and will graduate. >> thanks, steve, and happy n those who celebrate. we are a public affairs and political consulting firm. we do a lot of work with nonprofits, with brands, with foundations, and also candidates and committees. thisear we are working on a lot of different house races for the dccc for candidates involved in the arizona senate race. we are working on the presidential campaign. we are working on a number of independent expenditures.

so i'm excited to be here. is a great crew, i love these guys. we spe a lotf time together over the years. looking for to the conversation. --oking rward the conversation. >> i'm a career communications person who has spent most of my life working on democratic and moderate causes. spend most my time these days working with the democratic governors. i was a treasur for the democratic governors association, as well as supporting those involved in the democracy movement and buildup of moderates on both sides of the. >> hi ere. robollinscurreny ceo of coin, a conservative credit card i found it almost three years ago. what makes me somewhat qualified two guns, decided a lot of politics, randy national republican senatorial committee in 2014 come and have been involved i campaigns and super pac's, most recently when tim

scott ran for president, i was cochaing his super pac with senator cory gardner. >> i am a recovering politico. i have been in the private sector for a while, but i spent two and half years in the trump white house. i was viceresident mike pence's deputy chief of staff and communications director. before that, long career in politics various state races. i had worked for president bush in the state department and homeland security and got roped back into politics every now and thenbut happy to talk about it. that's more fun. steve: he's not really recoved, don't believe that. [laughter] can everybodhere ok? the microphones have dropped out

of it -- i assume the people at c-span -- one of thetories can tell about howardean i io -- >> let's not go there. [laughter] steve: i want to start with the question that i get asked a lot by people whoctually don't follow politics quite as much as some of us do and some of you may be due. my we and i were in italy last week where in fact we visited the nyu florence campus. anyone who hasn't ne it should really do it. but one of the things that sort of struck me is that have sometalian friends, they love politics but they don't follow it. their question for me was when i want to ask this group, which is when you have -- youook at it from the outside and from a distance and youonsider the history of american democracy, you have two candites for president now. one of whom is a convicted felon, energy could a kid -- and

adjudicated se offender, has cases pending against him all er the country, and he is in an absolute dead heat with tha the democratic nominee, who is trying to run a campaign about hope and change n which everybody says they want, but it is deadlocked basically. will use tonht polling from joel benenson, anotherne of our friends who attends the things, shows the race deadlock, which has been for a long time. to the uninitiated, how in the world could be this close, given that donald trump seems to have disqualified himself repeatedly? ybe i will start witrob and with jarro. what is the expedition for the fact that donald trump, in spite of the fact that too many he has disqualified himself repeatedly, has not disqualified himself in terms of 49% of the voters are concerned? what is it about trump that keeps these voters with him? >> i'll sta.

i'm glad we have students he tonight, because i want you to always be curious, always ask a lot of questions, and always take someone's question and say "what are th actually getting?" both my parents were professors of child psychology. i have grown up in an environment where i would say that question was, i would say, biased against the former president of the united states. i guess my response is ts -- nine people went to a starting line about a year ago and said "i want to run for president and represent the republicans." over $100 million was spent to decide who that nominee was going to be. we had debes, we had press conferences, we had rallies, we had all kinds of stuff. millions of americans voted and they chose donald trump. and his record was well

known by the american peoe. "disqualified" is not a legal term -- steve is using it -- the american people, your fellow citizens went out in iowa, new hampshire, all the other states, voted, and he won. on the other set of the equation we have a candidate no one in this room voted for to be the democratic nomin. she was largely appointed by five, six people in washington, after months of saying she is unqualified, we sdenly have this option. there was no primary, there is no vote, there was no decision. i guess my question back would say how is she qualified to be a nominee when the was no process other than some appointment. so the question is how do we get to a deadlock position, which is that we have a candidate who is

basically like an incumbent for being a nonincumbent, one-term president running again for reelection, and he has done the whole process, talked about his vision for the future. and we have another candidate who was a largely unlikely vice president a candidate who is now the nominee and has been candidate for three months. i guess my question is, or my response would be we have a candidate who is imperfect, we could argue about the charges, we cld argue about many things. but he went through a process that the american people had a lot of say in. and we have another candidate who no o got to vote for. steve: jarrod, you have anything to add? jarrod: i wod say the cake is baked with trump. the people who would nod their head at your question had already decided a long time ago they weren't going vote for trump. the people like me and rob that would disagree with your question, they've may -- they

are open they have made t decision that they see something in trump, and that what is right ifront of them, either the economy, foreign policy, immigration, those things areore imrtant to them than the hits that you listed. and i do think the country is split on that. that is why the polling is the way it is. think this comes down to the fundentals vs. the technical aspects of elections. the fundamentals are in trump's favor. people don't have a general good feeling about the economy. we can debate over economic status, but people generally don't feel great about it people turn on their tv and they see violence and wars, and that does not make them feel grea and they want changed, and trump is that agent of change.

on the flip de of that, my democrat colleagues here are very good at turning out the vote. they are very good at driving people to theolls to vote against trump. and i think that is what this is going to come down to, and i think the fundamentals will gerally continue to slide towards trump, but wl that overcome the technical aspect of the machine of getting people to the polls? steve: go ahead, kiki. i think i know wt you're going to say, but go ahead. kiki: i want to point out that my two friends gave two different answers notecause they were avoiding it, but rob talked about the process of the nomination and election, and rrod talked about the larger psyche of american voters. i do want to clear up one thing. the vice president does

experience party rules in the democratic party, ithe same weight president trump experience party rules, and when unusual circumstances came to be, the party rules led her the nomination. president trump was nominated by delegates to his convention that pledged to vote based on a system of votes, and that is what happened in our unique circumstances. i don't want to take anything away of the lue of the vice president's nomination, as well as governor walz's nomination as her vice president running mate. but i think theres a question here that steve brings, and i would say that i ask myself with the relationships i have in my life, friends, family, we have be known to sit up late at night when we have traveled together -- rob and i are known for going off in a corner and i want to understand things and he is thoughtful and curious about why i asked the questions. i have a cousin -- i grew up in south texas. i look up and i say how did i grew up with the same vae system as someone else.

this election or another election lands i ntwo so very differenplaces when it comes to two very different candidates. what am i missing? it's important to understand that, number one, it is not unique from 2016 forward that people tend to vote on one or two things. that is not unique. that has gone on long befor donald trump hit the stage. it is also not unique that people may pick a dierent one or twohings. what has become uque since 2016 is the concept of are u voting on an issue or what some would now say they are voting -- the traditional issu of the economy, investment, foreign policy, we could name the five things that you prep somebody on

a debate on. but what has overtaken that are thcultur issues. onop of that, the question about personality used to be who you wanted to have a beerith. noit's an extraordinary demonstratn -- i would suggest that president trump demonstrates an extreme personality at the podiu and did as president. you can say that is his tv history, his new york style. i considered to be extreme and hate-filled. but peop are trying to settle into more issue areas he was ected in 20 because people wanted to blow the system up with an outside and the reality was at th point he carried very mainstream coervative pointof view on tax, on economy i totally understood whye got elected then. i've probably been more challenged by the question professionally andersonally in the later years. but what i would suggest to you, and i tnk the reason why the numbs have performed better for vice president harris than

they were for president biden is her campaign has bn focused on these issues. she is not talking by the economy in a way that has a functional grounding-- now talking about t economy in a way that has functional grounding for the middlwill she has gone to the border. she isalking about wha immigration policy means. it doesn'mean president biden didn't. she is having more success because she doesn't havehe challenges that were tossed at him. what you will see is a campan that is more like 54-42, with some independent stuff for third-party candidates, it is now a 50-50 race, and vice president harris has brought it up. thquestion steve asked -- i will give up the mic a a second -- is about the gap peop see because they are looking at the election through a different lens than we are us to. pre-2016 we agreed on what the outcome was. we were a democracy that

understood things in a certain y and be voted on things without as the -- with that as the understood goal. doug: i tend to agree with what kiki said, and i will, this from a different angle. you have a president trump who won in 2016. he has virtually 100% new -- 100% nam i.d. all of his personality tits are baked in. on the other hand you have a vice president harris, who even though she was vice president, relatively unknown. in three months she has had to put together a campaign, she has had to introduce herself, but the messaging together, pick a running mate, change the convention, do convention, prepare for a debate. all of these things happen in a

very short amount of time. she has also done something that is very extraordinary, she has ashley changeder image to the impact -- she has actually changed her image to the american people. she had unfavorable image with the american people before she became the nominee. now most aggregators, she actually has a positive favorable image with the american people, which tmp does not have. and so i think that we can't look at how is-- can look at how is trump here given l the problems that he has, and i asked that question myself a lot. but i actually think what is even more extraordinary is how well the vice president has done in a short amount ofime to t urn this campaign around and int it in a direction where in my opinion, she has a better than 50% chance of winning. that is not case three months ago --that was not the case

three months ago. democrats -- there was a lot of excitement when she got into the race. but donald trump is a formidable opponent. and for all of his weaknesses and character flaws and everything else, there are still people who believe he represents ' taking on the system that they don't like -- represents a posture of taking on the system the they don't like. someone mentioned, i think it was jarrod, trump being the change agent. i don't think he's a change agent -- i thinkou're going backwards with him. kamala harris has made a chamoli card meant that she is the change agent in this race. it is gointo be close in the presidential race, and races, house races. we are a divided country. that is something that i think we are -- it is hard to get away

from that fact. that is a reason why trump is still where he is in terms of this race and being competitive. but i also want to give credit to the vice president in how she and her team have been able to take advantage of what could haveeen an incredibly difficult -- it was a john drake situation that she walked into -- it was a challenging situation at she walked into -- and having to shift towards what i think is going to be a tough, close race, but if i was a tting person, i would bet on her. steve: ok, so i heard a number of things here, including an underhanded dig from my buddy rob, which we will take up over beers later. but one of the things i heard was divided country. jarrod says there are people who are sticking with him because they like what they got from him when he wapresident before and they agree with him on policy issues. but if we are as divided as we appear to be, is a really close

race inevitable? i'm going to put the democrats a little bit more on the spot. do you believe that if joe biden had stayed in, we would be looking at the same polling we are looking at now? i think president biden believes that. 'll throw it to the group. kiki and doug, who -- do you think that president biden would be sitting within the same poll numbers today- kiki: no, and here's why. before you g into whether you thought he was capable or not -- i love this president, by the way. i happ to think he was a patriot. in the third week before he agreed to the transition when everybody thought he w being stubborn, he negotiated the release of amecan hostages and he knew that if he gave up before he did that, he would have lost all of his political capital save those american lives. he's an american hero and a patriot. but the nature ofhe beast of change creates a forward mion in a dynamic. so just the eer nature of change in the race created a new

level of energy, regardless of who it was. whether under the arcane rules of a political party where the heads of two committees and the dga could've gone in an anointed somebody and not gone rough the process of reaching out to the delegates, just the sheer force of nature of change created new curiosity, created voters willing to look up, lifted the malaise of e base constituents of the democratic party to be excited. normally campaigns get tired -- very successful campaigns get tired as they go into the summer. you haveone to the primaries, people have been with you forever, they have slogged it out. what brings change? a vice president announcement, that is e new rush of energy. that alone help the dynamic change in the races. change t dynamics because you have a new age differential, you have a gder differential, you have a race differential.

all of these things have waked up different amecans for different reasons w are paying attention in different ways. steve: anying to add? doug: i think ittill would have been close, but i think right now the vice president has a slight lead in the national polls, and in the blue wall she has a couple-point leads based on fivethirtyeight an realclearpolitics. that was not sething we were seeing with vice president biden. i think the real difference was the injection of excitement into the democratic party. you saw almost immediately young voters, women, people of color, union folksyou saw a lot of the core components, african americans, who are so essential

to democrats winning races get an injection of energy when this happened. and so that to me is a key difference. but i do believe that if joe biden was in this race, i think it would still be close. i still believe we are divided country, and think a lot -- for the people who are on the fence three months ago, i think they probably would have come around. but i think that there was an impact, positive impact for democrats down ballot. looking at a lot of house races can the same with the senate races, where when kamala became the presumptive nominee and then the nominee, the numbers improved in a lot of these places. which is -- when you look at the whole picture, it's really important. i think it has been a net benefit for us certainly. i don't think that is even arguable.

but i think it would have bn close if joe biden was the nominee. kiki: at the risk of using a sports analogy, what happens when wildcard team goes all the way to the world series? there is a level of energy. steve: i know you guys are thinking why is he checking his email? i'm not. this is where the questions are written. [laughter] just so you know. did you guys have anything to add? >> what a time to study politics. when we got together last time it was like them all right, we are going to get a ratch, biden vs. trump. exciting as that was, it's a rematch. who would've thought we would've had a debate as early as we had it and it would've knocked out one of the candidates? last year when we got together it was a legal argument, and then that is not really, i don't think, going to be a determining factor that nobody is talking about that. i knew there was news today and everything. th is in the past. now we are talking about

something completely different. i talked to 10 people today, nobody could tell me who is going to win. all of us have different opinions of who is going to win. it is a fascinating period where not only do we have a completely different race than we thought we were going to get, but now a month out no one can definitively tell me which direction it is going to go. rob: if you are a polical science major, the last three month have been extraordinary. kiki: people write their phd theses on this in a hundred years. rob: it's been extraordinary, from the first of a to where we are today. the one interesting thing, even with however thing -- the un is for stability, a lot of -- unstability, the last four to five weeks have been relatively stable when you look at the polling, which i find is pretty interesting, even with the debas. there hasn't been a lot of

spikes up or down. that tells you that a lot of things are starting to bake and and the parties are really starting to focus on a smaller portion of the electorate who remain undecided. steve: so -- kiki: rob is making a face. rob: to the students the audience at home, question everything guy who ran for president four times suddenly walks in and says "i don't want to do it," and we don't have a conversation about it? and they put some one else in. to answer your question, you would be down, he would be down significantly, democrats would be running for the hills. they were after the debate. and the events of the last week show you what happened when you have a vacuum in the white house. unfortately mala harris is inheriting a l of that baggage. steve: that was your softball, rob.

now i will come to a couple of things happening in thnews right now. i nt to ask y two guys first, b everybodyventuay, there re two things. one is jack smith, his pleading yesterday was unsealed by the judge and we have already abt it. i don't know how muc is new, because people who follow it clely had heard st of that stuff befor and then tod melania trump put out her little video on choice, which is kind ofn interesting thing. i want to ask you guys, and then kiki and doug can pile in, or pilen, depending -- does the jack smith stuff change anything -- obviously not for a trump voter, but do you think it has an impact on the relatively few undecideds still out there? and what iact if any does melania trump -- do we know the video i'm talking about, the very very p-choic "absolutely no excuse for the governnt getting involved with woman' choice," does that have

any impact either on the race or on the campaign or on her marriage? what's going on there? kiki: why don't you guys talk about her marriage? let's hear about that. [laughter] jarrod: the jack smith stuff, no. steve: all baked i jarrod: we liv through the lawfar it was on tv evy single day. thated up to the debate, and trump wasn't a very powerful posion whethis was the biggest-- was in a very powerful positi when is was the big story every day. this is blip. i don't think it has a big effect. what i would say on choice and ortion, i tnk you he seen trump -- you sawith jd vance this past week and theilani video -- mania video, i think republicans realize thiss an

issue, it's a proble and i woulday that trump himsf -- and you saw that when j.d. back it up, they have been e most mmon sense andas moderate on this iue in talking about this issue than you have seenn any republican in an elecon cycle -- kiki: doesn't necessarily make it a moderate position,elative to where they had been. jarrod: what i'm saying is his position, certainly in his debate with biden, i thin trump won that issue. the fact that trump has been very car that this is a state issue and each state gets to decide is the ght position for an election. and so i think it is not out of the norm that the melania video came out tay because they have telegraphed that trump is going be different than you have heard from republicans -- steve: dyou think the melania video was part of a campan

strategy, or do you think the melania video was melania freelancing? jarrod: i think it fits to a campaign strategy. steve: rob, have anything to add? you don't have to. rob:o, real quick -- the jack smith think is irrelevant. in the last 10 days we have had israel attked civilian centers attacked by the inians come along -- longshoremen strike, hurricane where the federal response at best has beenixed. i ink those- economic new that is troublingintere ras have gone down, but a l ofther things argoing in the wrong rectio i think those will be the deciding issues. among basic democrat voters, abtion is a 48% issue compared to everything us. among conservatives, independents, moderates, it is not regisred as a top-five issue.

that i kd of the challenge the democratic party finds itself. 've seen in other races before where sometimes it has rked for the like in 2022 when they went all in on heah re and they were able to have a lot more victories than people predicted. but other times it just hasn't worked f them, like in 2014 they went war on womennd it didn'resonate with ters becauswe had significant health issues -- kiki: we still had roe v. wade in 2014. the dtrust ctor imuch higher now on that. rob: yeah, but after a big government action, obamacare, roe v. wade, the first federal election after that is the slap your hand eleion, and then it loses its efficacy. it is still a motivating issue, i'm not going to hide that. your base at the margins can swing purple states if they get motivated enough, you can get low-propensity voters out on an issue.

their vote counts as much as someone who cares about 10 issues. it's definitely driving fundraising. i'm just saying if you are looking for a late swing in wisconsin, i don't believe it is going to be on melania's video and everything. doug: i really hope republica operatives take that view, because you will lose. and i am seeing this in-house races across -- in house ces across the country -- no, i love rob collins. but there are some -- i think there are republicans who believe this is a base motivator, aundraising tactic. it is having incredible impact in a lot of these competitive use districts. democrats are now in the lead in ples like iowa. is it a number one issue?

no, the number one issue in the country's economy, number two is inflation. and then you probably have immigration and crime somewhere in there but when you match -- when we test negatives agast republican the top two hits on republicans are the position on abortion and then the position on this like social security and medicare. it is an argument that doesn't move votes. i am -- that does move votes. am seeing it movvotes. is it the oy conversation happening in these races? no, absolutelnot. most of these ces the democrats are talking about their health care position, taing by the economy, talking out costs. but the biggest vulnerability that either the republican or democrat has is on the choice issue. and i just -- you know, i can't

say that enough. that is just what we are seeing in all of -- and i think that his wife donald trump and -- that is why donald trump and jd vance and a lot of other people are trying to sugarcoat or manipulate their position on this issue because the know it is very bad for them. rob: i'm not saying it's not a potent issue. i'm just also saying i don't think it is a closing argument. kiki: so here's the crazy thing, i ink i probably did say in thisoom at some point before 2016, not in that cycle, but somewhere in years before, everybody in this room, raise your hand if you do not have a point of vieon abortion. i'll said here. everybody raise your hand in this room if you do not have a pition abortion. i'm not asking what your position is good if you don't have a point of view on abortion. ok, nobody raised their hand. before 2016 i would say that is

why we don't run campaigns on abortion, because everybody has a point of view. it's different now in the campaign world. the reality is the country has settled into an agreed-upon policy that didn't force anyone to do anything, and it didn't spread out into other women's health care issues, like contraception, like ivf. so it was a nonissue. now it's an issue because it is a complete threat has been framed by the vice president and others before her as a revocation of freedom and government interference, which is a very conservative point of view -- >> there we go. kiki: well, it's true, you would agree with me -- jarrod: when we get it back to the states -- kiki: i'm talking about the general concept, less government interference believe it or not, i am a voter. it'a big issue for me.

22 years ago i hemorrhaged in the middle of the night and had emergency surgery. i had an abortion to save my life i had money, i had insurance, i had the law on my side, i had a doctors who had been trained and been to medical school. i can't promise that will happen from a 20-year-old daughter, -- fomy 20-year-old daughr, who lives in memphis, teessee. i bring that back ta strategy function which set i tnk the trump-vance team is tripped up abortion, they have tripped up on health care and repealing the aca, most of thishe doing of the president, getting cross eyed with vance on the trail. i thinkhat you are seeing is an attempt in the las33 -- hm, make it 40 days, pre-debate, try to clean up those tactical issues. he got too far afield to hold ontohat is a more narrow coest. doug: they are trying to muddy

up the issues so people don't fully understand what trump's position is. first he was opposed to the florida referendum, and that he supported it, and thebecause he got flak from the right -- kiki: political errors is what i'm talking about. doug: and jd vance had what he put out there a few days ago. i think for a lot of people who aren't paying attenon to the stuff like we are everything they, it would be hard to nailed -- like we are every single day, it would be hard to nail down what his position is. we know what his position is trump appointed the supreme court justices who overturned roe and he has made a point to take credit for it. that's the game there. it's not a moderate position. and to me it is like, own it. you guys have been calling for ending abortion for years and years and years, and how it is like you were try to have it both ways, where you are trying

to confuse folks on what your position is. an respect that you can be pro-life. but now this oth position which is blurry, trying to have it both ways, i think that is totally insincere and quite frankly raises questions on where do you stand on these issues if you're going to change something you believed in your entire life. jarrod: well, to be fair, i would say immigration might be an issue like this for the democrats. to that same point, the vice president just went to the border recently and is trying to do what you e accusing trump of on the issue of immigrati. kiki: these are just political questions. and she's gaining on him on migration. jarrod: if trump realizes, hey, i need to stake out a position on this, and he did it long ago -- he came o with this

stes-rights positiowell early into his campaign -- i see that being more genuine tha an 11th-hour trip to the border. kiki: students of political science here, on the tactical ements -- one of the things to think about for th campaign in thlast 32 days -- is a 32? i feel like they are running together. 30ish,ast month of the mpaign. think about this right now, when you lookt the polling numbers -- we could ve a whole 'nother class about polling numbers d what we believe and not believe this but you have a lookbout trends. have you caught up yet? that may not be the answer. the questions where are you trending. what is really interesting ouof hte trump-hars

debate is where the numbers -- not that it change the dynamic of all the stateaces, but peopleelt like they knew more about vice president harris. what came out of what we saw out of the vice presidential debate is that jd vance is still underwater, but he closed the gap, and you saw walz go even more positive, his numbers oh so high you hit a ceiling like ted kennedy used to in massachusetts. when you look at things like the economy -- >> [indiscernible] [laughter] kiki: no, flash polls say the debate was 50-50 is my point. the big issues, immigration, the economy, health care, just straight policy issues, i encourage you to watch those numbers. the gap is still there for harris to catch up on immigration and economy, but she has cut into it a litt bit. the question i don't know yet, i haven't seen numbers, is with

the movement of vance in the debate. will they cut into it on abortion and health care? that's a hint for you guys to tracthose numbers. steve: speaking of hints, the cook political report -- for those of us who do politics all the time, it is something we read all the time -- they came out two daysgo with battleground states set of surveys, and senate and house surveys, in terms of where the race is going, to kiki'point, where it is and where the momentum is headed, i highly recommend that. there's a lot of stuff we would be talking about tonight if we had more time. if you just read that, you will learn an enormous amount of where this thing is, and it will also give you cues as to what to look for. the cook political report. i want to draw a line on one thing, because i think it is fair can even though we might

quibble, to suggest that abortion is a problem for republicans and immigration is a problem for democrats -- kiki: two political challenges in the campaign. steve: let's just agree those are out there. let's al agree there is an effort to fuzzy them both up. mala was at the border, which she should be and needs to be for good reasons. trump is doing his thing to fuzzy up the abortion thing, notwithstanding what h crazy wife is doing -- sorry. people aren't going to be voting in nevada and arizona, two battleground states, on the issue of immigration. they are going to be voting on ballot initiatives on abortion. evy ball initiive has been abortion-related that has come up in republican states with democratic states have overwhelmingly gone the pro-choice w. if i'm a campaign manager or strategist, in arizona the senate race is +13 for the

democrats right now. in nevada it is +13 for the democrats. this is according to the benenson research -- i don't know the gs strategy, but they did a poll for the cook political report. democrats are13 in the senate race in neva, +13 in the arizona senate race, there are ballot isss in bh thos states. if you are the trump campaign, how worried are you about those two dynamics? jarrod: just wit -- doug: just with all due respect, we are not up 13 in arizona and nevada. we are not going to win by -- steve: it is a big lead outside the margin of error -- kiki: the senate candidates are leading the presidential. doug: look, nevada has gotten better for democrats, arizona

has gotten a ltle bit better. ruben gallego is a client of ours and he is doing a great job. those races in those states will be very close at the end of the day, i believe, just because they are very close at the presidential level. kikithese issues are coming up in the gubernatorial races, too. don't forget north carolina and new hampshire -- steve: we e going to ask aut north carolina separately. let's assume that the ballot issues in arizona and nevada, the choice initiatives, are going to carry by the same kind of margin they carried iother places. rob, you run campaigns. jarrod, you have been involved in campaignsif you look at that, what do you do? rob: i will take to put your questions -- two parts of your question and answer them separately. from 2014 to 2022 they rent marijuana legalization ballot

measures that helped their candidates because people would come out because they want to smoke weed and then te for the democrat as happenstance of being in the ballot box. this is kind of the same thi. with regards to how the candidates who lost statewide initiatives, the problems of republicans are having, conservatives are having is they cannot get a unified position. some would argue trump was the most moderate on life in the prary for president. that has continued. as jarrod said, he laid down his line on abortion. but it's hard for the republicans to coalesce behind a yes-no measure because it is six weeks, 15 weeks, this or that, where the democratic position is unified. in the blot initiative we were outspent 22-1. our forces are scattered all over t place and a lot of the folks who funded these things

think the battle is over and they never treated or gone to other causes. the democratic funders who fund these things are red hot and ready to winhese. i'll jt say, and iill try to be brief, structurally it is harder to run 8 points ahead the national nominee or 8 points below. people have done it. in the last 60 years, there has en 1 -- last 16 years compare habeen one campaign for senate that has just the opposite party has -- the opposite pty has won -- steve: tester? rob: no, susan collins, and was the one candidate where biden won it and she was the republican and won it as well. this is why i believe democrats are functionally get outf montana very soon because tter is down outside the margin, he is down six, an trump is gog to win it by more than 10, and

you look at that delta and say it ireally hard to run more than 8 points ahead of a presidenti candidate, or underneath it. i've seen people do both, but it is really hard. the search you are going to see is going to go in ohio and n in montana, because that state is gone. steve: anything? jarrod: no, to your question, i do think that they know that abortion is an issue, which is why these positions -- why you saw trump take the positions he has taken and why jd vance said what he said thathe debate and why the video, the melania video came out. i don't think this is missed by anybody there, and think there has been a concerted effort for several months to address it. steve: kiki mentioned north carolina, where there is a gornors race. i don't know of anybody in the room, folks who have been following what is happening there, but the republican

nominee has had, let's just say, a lot of problems. [laughte he's about 60 or 18 points behind them -- 16 or 18 points behind the democratic nominee, but trump and harris are neck and neck in north carolina. if you are the democrats and you have got a republican candidate who is flailing, president trump has not withdrawn his support of robinson, as far as i know, as recently as a couple days ago. what do you doo get over the hump in nortcarolina, and how do you bring that home if u are the kamala harris campaign? doug: well, look, i think they are investing a lot of resources north carolina right now. i thk we are seeing -- if you want to take a positive view on some of these senate races for democrats, when you look at the -- when you look at michigan, when you look at pennsylvania,

and when you look at wisconsin, i actually think the vice president has room to grow, because in those states the democrats at the senate level are actually performing better than she is. a a lot of that has to do with these folks are ry well known. senator casey, tammy baldwin, elissa slotkin is somewhat new but has been running for a while. i think there is an opportunity -- steve:orry to interrupt you, but is not also true in arizona andevada, where t senate candidates -- doug: yeah, absolutely, ruben gallego and jacky rosen. i actually think that assuming -- there is a longer conversation we should have that we don't have time to have about the end of split-ticket voters. they have gone away in many ways. but if kamala can perform as

though senate democrats are, she will do very well there. the benefit in north carolina is we are goingo win the governor's race there. there is a lot of resources being pumped into that race. it is still very hard. barack obama did not win it in 2012 even though he won a fairly convincing victory. i think north carolina is going to be a very, very close estate for us. i think she can still win it, but i don't think the robinson thing -- certainly it definitely is -- i d't think it really hurts trump, but if they had a strongerepublin there it would help him. kiki: i want to talk about governors for a second. steve: just for a second, because nobody here cares about them. i'm kidding, kiki, sort of. kiki: stop that. governors have played a dynic role in setting the stage this year. out of the six to eight states and play, your democratic

governors in pencil when you, in michigan -- in pennsylvania, in michigan. you go across the blue wall, arizona. it's crazy the way governors are leading millions of americans. it's important to recognize that, knock on wood, if vice president harris and governor walz succeed in this election, the reelection will go right through the wall of democratic governors in 2026. at dga we already think about 2026. all of those states that have democratic governors by now are up for reelection or have open races. all of the big-play states will change. political infrastructure comes from governors. we are talking about north carolina like helene didn't happen. nudefrica happened and then helene happen. where are the ballots? are a lot of them white in the

river -- wet in the river? i don't know. i believe our democratic nominee there is going to win. i don't know what impact helene is going to have in georgia or north carolina on the presidential race. but i would also point you to the new entry governors race, which is very tough -- new hampshire governors race, which is very tight. a long-standing, well-liked woman in replican circles, kelly ayotte, is in the fight of her life running for governor against joyce craig, democratic nominee. and then in a wild turn of events, indiana's kind of in play in the governors race. it's a long shot, but the numbers have begun to close. my point is you have natural disaster in north carolina and georgia. we have a race in indiana that is not in play on the presidential level but it is on the governors level, and that represents an example where democratic governors have won and it helps build

frastructure. steve: i didn't mean to say because about governors, buin the contt of ts conversation, governors is not quite as interesting athe other thin we've been talking about, which is probably fair. i do know we promised the studts, everybody here, they have a chance to ask some questions. if anybody has -- 're going to give you a microphone so that c-span can hear you, right. and small for your mother because you are on "candid came." probably don't even remember what -- kiki: god. exclamation pnt. steve: go ahead. >> thank you. hello, i'm a student. hi to fellowexan, represented. kiki: hook 'em. >> i want to focus on jarrod -- you said you were mike pence's deputy chi of staff.

he was a figure like mitt romney, sn't afraid t skew from party lines to do what he deemed patriotic or what he deemed better for the american people. and i wanted to ask, one, for jarrod specifically, how was that experience as a staffer, especially in the context of january 6 an pence's response to that, and for the panel, how do y'all evaluate the political climate nsidering the overwhelming republican endorsements, ex-trumpet staffers' endorsements of harris? jarrod: i wasn't there -- my timi was impeccable, i left in late 2019, so i missed covid and i misted the election cycle and january 6 -- missed the ection cycle and january 6. it is odd for me because president trump and mike pence were very close they would have lunch onca

week and they'd talk every morning and they were very much aligned my entire tenure there. so it is odd for me to see him and others who i worked with at the white house who have come out against president trump. i would say i think it goes back to that first qution that steve ask. i think a lot ofhe folks who made tir determination years ago to be agast him after january 6, i don't think that anything, you know, campaigning in the final months here really is going to matter basedn what former republicans or never trump repuicans say. i think as kiki hit a huge point here, north carolina is a

battleground state and it was just tragically hit with a massive hurricane. life happens and i do think that you can't fault people in north carolina who may have been on the fencend then ts tragic eventappens and now they have a different opinion i do think u can never underestimate a recency bias for a lot of peopl so i think that probably will carry the day of a lot of these swing voters who haven't madep their mind yet. >> that was really well done. >> that was a trickier question than you thought. you know these people personally. does it -- does it make any difference? you'veot liz cheney. i don't think a lot of people were surprised. you have dick cney and a lot of people are speculating that maybe george w. bush follows. >> he is already on the record

saying he will not do anything. >> ok, but there are a lot of people that are getting -- trying to get him to reconsider. hypothetically if gege w. bush, dick cheney, liz cheney, a lot of these folks that were there that day, does that make any difference to anybody? it's all baked in. >> i me, i will say structurally, this is a really exciting time to study politic because when iirst ce to d., mitt romney was the republic party and people who acted and spe like he did. he became our nominee. john mccain, and in the last 10 years, there has really been a change in the parties where you have me republican voting strictn the use onood stamps than youave democtic. theop 15ealthit districts in america are represented exclusively by democrats. of the next 65 or the next 75 wealthiest districts, 65 of those are reprented by

democrats. you look and you see you now have a -- i don't know if it's how he would characterize it but a very prunion senator from missouri, hawley, saying remarkable things and you have the democratic party because of a.c.a. set to give $22 trillion to health insurance companies over the next 10 yea. so the elites a moving and gravitating, college educated elites are moving toward t democrat party, where high hool or less educated folks have been moving to the republican party. it has fundamentally changed our politics. so when you see kind of older elites siding againstrump, part is personal, they don't like him, whaver, politics, but also you see these fissures where the republican part that

ey were -- i mean, do you know w many cold warriors are still in the sene and russia hasn't been around since 1987 but that's why they overindex on russia-ukraine and kind of ignore the china threat. you have all the younger members saying china, china, and tt's where trump is. so it's kind of fascating to watch from my perspecve. i come out of new york. always weird republican in the d.c. rublican party because i am a northerner, but it has been fascinating to watch these changes. it's not stopping. it's actually the parties are getting more -- they're seeing more change rather than less. >> any other -- most questions we ever had. >> my question is about the electoral college, disenfranchising the majority of american voters. the last 25 years, two races where the popular vote winner has not been the electoral vote

winner. only a handful of states were discussed so my question is given your experience advising candidates on t trail what has that taught you about the potential need for reform inhe electoral colge? >> i was on bothf those campaigns where we won bu were never sworn in. my bosses were not sworn in. we lost one in a lawsuit. the ectoral college is a complicated concept. it's a challenge to us as a country to look at the constitution and the rules that we put in place and said how do we apply that to a modern united states and one of the things we don't have time to get into but i encourage all of you to study is really is it a republican-democratic divide or rural-urban dide? when you look at where the towns and the -- you all know what i

mean. i am not prepared today to say that i believe that we should do away with the electoral college, but i am -- >> you are now officially my favorite demrat. that was an honest answer. >> you told me before that i was. this is what we mean about the republicans of today. you have to ask if they really mean it. i am not prepared to say we should officially do away with it but i am prepared to say it ought to be on the table for a real conversation because of where the divides are happening and what is happening with geography. this is a question i have posed before at n.y.u. events. are we a country that's too big to govern now? are we too big to gorn? is it ok that one woman can have access to safe health care in one state and another in another can't? is that the same american experience? i don't know and i think that's a big question. >> that's beyond the scope of our conversation. thank you. >> good moderator. other questions

for the record i am prepared to say abolish the electoral college. put age limits on federal offe holders staing with the supreme court. let's move where the country is going. one man, one vote. one person, one vote. sorry, next question. >> hello. thanyou all f coming out here. my name is chloe. i am a student at n.y.u. my question kind of involves rob's point about democrats leing stes when it comes to the politics not aligning with elected official's positions. this past summer, i spent my time at the new n.y.u. site in oklahoma and also in michigan suburbs where i was canvassing in both places and however the support i saw more in michigan suburbs for harris really seemed toverwhelmingly diminish the support i saw in tulsa, and i understand we probably won't see oklahoma turn blue anytime in the next few election cycles, but i also wonder how much it

has to do with super p.a.c.'s and funding in battleground states. my question is what role do these super p.a.c.'s play in political parties and if we will see a shift in battlegrou states in the future. >> rob, mr. super-p.a.c. himself, and doug? >> there's a cple things i would love to unpack but we don't have time. first off, the electoral college is brilliant and we should not tinker with it because -- >> at least not this cycle. >>ever, never, never. if we want to lose this country, we start to tinker with these things because it was a perfect solution to protect small states. >> like roev. wade. >> we have to have certain protections. lo at this, california. to you questio i think -- i

hate super p.a.c.'s even though i volunteer, i help. i do stuff. i think this was another tinkering where we said we have to get money out of politics, and republicans and democrats got together and said we are going to get this money out of politics and we are going to free it up and ever since barack obama got out of public financing of campaigns in 2008, the money going into potics has been geometric year after year. john ter -- kerry spent $2 million. hillary clinton spent $2 billion. i am a big fan of campaign spending. i think putting a few billion dollars into who runs this country is worth it. i like the virginia system which is you can take money from anybody you want, but you have to put your name next to it. here you can get supported by anyone but the money comes from we don't know where.

it's supposedly disclosed, but it's as leaky as heck. foreign money is coming into our elections. they'll say it's not but it is. there's proof of it. and i am not talking about the russians spending a few hundred thousand dollars on facebook. i saying committed voters spending millions to elect people. a terrible precedent. i would love to get rid of all this. i would love for the candidates to be responsible for 100% of the campaign spending. but that really wasn't your question but i did want to go on a diatribe. superp.a.c.'s matter because they have replacedded parties at the state level. with governor desantis they were the campaign. so you know, i kind of love online fundraising. i hate it when oligarchs get to put their thumb on the scale, go

become a governor or go become a president. it's a terrible system. and it has noalue in the sense of you know the hardest thing in campaign is getting someone to give you money. when seone writes a huge check as outside influencef tirir candidate or outsi of what that sit is zen can do, it's a really bad system. i hate it. >> i think one of the challenges that super-p.a.c.'s pose is that candidates become overly reliant on them and so you can't coordinate with super-p.a.c.'s. legally under the law you are not allowed to work with their super-p.a.c. on messaging on anything. so what has happened and i think we saw this in like with scott

walker and to some degree jeb bush, they raised a ton of money into their super p.a.c. and it was running their campaign, doing their thing. but the ability to coordinate around message is so important and that isn't always what happens, and so i think when you are running a campaign, you know, if you become too reliant on that super-p.a.c. for them to raise money, you lose control of your message and strategy. that's a real -- that can be a real problem especially in senate races and at the presidential level. now there's ways to signal to the super-p.a.c. what you want to have on the air and things like that, but i am a big believer in cal pains -- campaigns building up from scratc having their message, doing their polling, running

their race. if they can be supportive of that, ok, but when you become overly reliant on it, you tend to lose. so that's a big -- that's one of those things that you are to manage -- you have to manage around if you are working for a candidate, just becoming too dependent on these outside forces which you can't control to win a race that ultimately 's your resnsibility to win the re. >> i want to awer because you were asking ifhat would change the dynamic of battleground states. the answer is no. battlegroundtates are determined by the electoral college where the numbers add up to the math and in states where it's competitive. so actually voters and the electoral college definwhat battleground states a presidential campaign are. super-p.a.c.'so in to influence the race. >> that's a good point, but this goes back to my point which is when you have a very strong campaign in a state, whether it's you are running for tulsa mayor or you are running for the

senate, wherever, typically those people stay around. you have built an infrastructure. maybe you've help build up a party there. there is some lasting benefits there. so that's what i -- >> intentional efforts by some super-p.a.c.'s to do that. >> i think that is an important thing when you are running a campaign is that you are actually making these investments andot being so dependent on outside group that you can control to wia race that ultimately is your responsibility to win. >> i think we have time for one more question. is that right? >> thank you. therwas a comment before that the democrats are thinking until 2026 and perhapsven beyond. is there -- is the republican party thinking beyond and can it think post-trump future and who would be the face of that? is it j.d. vance? desantis or is there anything --

>> great question. i want to just give everybody a little pie of infortion. so the governor of north dakota, who ran a surprisingly strong race for president and then kind of came out of nowhere to be one of the two falistsor v.p. is mebody that jarrod has been working with ever since he decided he wanted to get in the v.p. consideration. soet's.him start with that because burghum could be a fees of the party. >> yeah, i think he certainly can. >> but j.d., i think we all would agree, had a pretty good debate. >> he did. i think that's one of the reasons that trump picked j.d. he was very much able to take the make ameca great again mantle. trump puts a high premium on people who are very good on television and very comfortable

delivering his message, and i think that was a determining factor of who post-trump could continue with that movement and i think based on how close this election is and will be how j.d. has performedver the past several weeks but certainly this past week, he is a very good mmunicator and i think the republican party is well served when it has an excellent communicator at the top of it and i think j.d. is definitely in the forefront for that right now. >> what about nikki haley? she's not going to go away. has eheppedr -- helped or hurt hself in the last two year >> well, i definitely tnk she is also a great communitor. you kn, trum and herun hot and cold. i dohink no matter what happens in this election trump

will still have a say in who takes on the maga mane and if they ce together, maybe that's an option, but i think right now it's very clear he is very happ with j.d. >> rob, do you have anything to add? i will say real quick, parties in general aren't very good at really thinking about the future. i mean, we represent collective $18 bilon of spendi or more that will happen this year. we have no h.r. departments. there's n training. so parties are kind of haphazard. so there is a thought that there is a plan or some kind of -- it's always tricky because you know, who would have guessed bill clinton, this noame governor wou come out of nowhere. >> i did. >> not when h.w. had a 92% approval. there is a saying, these things work because they're true, which is you know, politics abhora

vacuum. post-trump it could be the people we are talking about todabut there was a time we said cis christie, jeb bh. you never can predict. t the larr questiois what is the leader of the republican party look like? does it go back to the mitt roey, business fit, or does it stay in thi really populace, not fixed on the debt tariffs, ere is a shift going o i can't tell y where it's going. >> do you guys he anytng to ss on? >> i would s on the democratic side, one of the reasons i spend my time there as a volunteer is we do have training and we do have a bench of talent moving forward and they're democratic

governors. one of the reasons i spend my time on governors is governors traditionally represent the middle. they're c.e.o.'s. i hava bracelet here that says g.s.d. they have to fix highways. that's why you saw with also great consideration for some candidates out of the senate to the vice president's running mate, you saw the depth of democratic governors she was considering. that's the anchor to the talent and that's a place where gifted leaders can prove themselves and present a record. to rob's point, these daywhere either party sits as a party versus a movement, to and four and six years from now could b dramatically different. >> i would say the future is really bright for democrats. we saw a lot of names who were looked at for v.p. i think that when you look at whether it's wes moore in

maryland, josh shapiro, you know, tim walz, if kamala does not win, there is a host of really strong democrats who are -- mark kelly, who are out there, that are -- that i actually can't rember in terms of my time in politics, a period of time where democrats have had so many think talented politicians and so that's something that -- it's not going to really matter in 2028 if kamala wins. it's going to be a longer term thing, but the bench there is really strong. >> i probably should have warned you guys about this last question i am going to ask, but i didn't. >> are you coming -- paying for drinks tonight? >> someone is paying for drinks tonight. so what do you think will be the biggest surprise that we see on election night? and i probably should have given

you a little time to think about this, but is there anything that you think people are missing or not talking about or not seeing that is going to materialize on election night? i for instance think that -- i believe it's not going to be as close as the polling today suggests. i think james carville said the other day that you have seven battleground states. they all look really close. the least likely outcome is that it's going to split 4- i think that's probably right. i think personally the momentum is on one side. >> you mean electorally it won't be close? >> yeah. >> i think -- >> one thing you will b watching on election night me than anything as the precursor to what is going to ultimately be the rest. >> so i am curious about florida because there haven't been a ton of resources spent by the presidential candidates there.

there is a competitive senate race there, rick scott is probably ahead by some -- several points, but i believe there is an abortion ballot initiative in floda. and i just am thinking to myself about ok, if you start -- if that is -- turnout is going to be high this election anyway across the board, republicans and democratic side. but i have been thinking about if the senate -- if our candidate for senate there can have the -- raise enough resources in the next two, three weeks, make a compelling case on tv, can that be that race that we are looking at and thinking this is a little closer than we thout? i don't think rick scott is a particularly popular person in florida and neither is ted cruz in texas, but so i have sort of gotten to the point where i think anything can happen the presidential, so there is not a ton right there that's going to

surprise me. but it's like those state races, that's one that i am interested in looking at. >> for my own emotional health, i quit trying to figure out the surprises. i mean -- >> that's fair. >> i literally -- i think we spent our careers crunching numbers, looking at models, using anecdotal evidence and then i've looked up and said, the pollsterare doing their best, but i don't know how you poll in north carolina between now and the election day after the hurricane. i don't know about the georgia numbers. it's not any person's fault. having stood outside t door while vice president called george w. bush back, i can't make a prediction. >> real quick as students of politics, i will tell you about north carolina. we have been talking about it. i was a part of a campaign where it snowed the friday night before the election in the wrong part of the state f the

democrats and that was the difference. that's how tight these races are. >> which state? >> north carolina. i won't tell you the year. >> now we are going to look at the weather pterns. look it up at na which by the way uld be gone with bro ject- project 25 -- 2025. >> he has not ad it. more big media myths. all right. so surprise on election night is trump is performing better than he did ainst biden and clint pennsylvania, michiga and wisconsin. if you look at the real clear polics average, so i think there was a prediction -- >> wins? >> he will win and he will win i believe early and what i am going to look at as turnout numbers. i think trump has the most talented campaign team he has had around him. they understand the mechani of

campaign. trump was an outsider in 2016 so he wasn't raised at the governor, state legislature where you are running your own campaigns out of your garage. so a lot of candidates like the bush team really understood mechanical turnout, showing up, mike pence, governor. trump never -- and his closest advisors never went through that, but this election cycle you have seen the most stability in leadership and long range planning. i will be curious, i hi if -- think if pennsylvaniaoes early for trump, it's probly ove >> can it go early because of the mail-in ballots? >> know. well -- >> he will declare victory whether he winor not. >> i wish my docratic friends wod agreehat every fst world country has outlad ma-in voting and that it's a teible way to govern. you have an election, you are sayingwo wee of delay. the turnout question is how many briefs are filed by 7:00 a.m.

legal briefs. >> lawyers will -- we will call this a two lexus election. >> i am with rob. theris a lot of talk about pennsylvania. i lived and worked in michigan. i think michigan will surprise. i don't think enough people are talking about michin and i do think it's very, very close. the races i have done there, i've nev seen it this close. trump has done this where he has overperformed the public polls and so we will see if he pulls it off again. but i am looking at michigan more than probably most people. >> ok. we areunkies. we could do this all night, but you guys i am sure have a lot of home work to do, right? i know you are anxious to get to that. so i want to thank all of you for coming out. they do this all the time for n.y.u. they're great friends, great professionals and i hope y'all feel like it was worth your while tonight. thank you guys.

>> thank you. >> thank you. [applause] [captis copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] >> todayarks one year since the octob 7 hamas terrorist attack on israel. re is a look at our live coverage on c-span surroundg the anniversary. at 11:45 eastern, president biden and first lady jill biden will take part in a

candlelighting ceremony the white house blue room. and then at 4:00 p.m. eastern, vice president kamala harr and the second gentleman will plan a memorial tree on the grounds of their residence at the u.s navalbservatory. at 6:00 p.m.astern, former president trump speaks at an event in miami marking the one year anniversary of the terrorist attacks. u can also watch these events liven c-span now, our free mobile app, or online at c-span.org. >> do you solnly swear that in the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> weeknights watch our encore presentation of american history tv's 10 part series congress investigates as explore major versions by the u.s. house and senate. historians will tell these stories. we will exine the impact and lecy of key congressional hearings.

tonight a joint house senate committee in 1871 investigated conditions in the southern states following a wave of violence against freed slaves and others. watch congress investigates, tonight at 10:00 eastern on c-span. >> on tuesday the u.s. supreme court hears e first oral argument of the 2024 term in a case that examines the regulation of ghost guns which are firearms sold in parts as ready to assemble kits and whether the government can require background checks and age limits to purchase them. watch the oral argument live on c-span. also on c-span now, our free mobi app, and online at c-span.org. >> c-span is yun unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including charter communications. >> charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best

internet providers and we are just getting started, building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most. >> charter communications supports c-span as the public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> here are some headlines this octor 7, 24, from u.s. newspapers, from "the whingto times" today, israel uses october 7 to fortify its footing in the region. hamas, hezbollah, iran, our reeling world prares to mark a year of blood shed. this from "the new york post," the head line there, bring them home. remember the hostages still held a year afterctober 7. and this from the front page of "the new york times," a year old war endures and threatens to spread. the story -- lead ory in "the

new york times"