ten, you guys, you're so out of touch in america. that voice will be missed in washington in america. that's arlen specter. "viewpoint" is next with eliot spitzer.

joy behar. show. watch as i join the women of reg on "say anything". only on current tv.

[ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> eliot: good evening i'm eliot spitzer and this is

"viewpoint." the stakes could not be higher for president obama heading into tuesday's second presidential debate. the president had maintained a narrow lead in the polls all summer, especially in the key swing states. but since the first presidential debate, more voters have been taking a second look at mitt romney. now the race is simply too close to call. let's go to the national numbers first. the president trails the former massachusetts governor by two points in the latest gallup tracking poll. mr. obama leads romney by a single point in the politico gwu poll and perhaps giving him solace, likely voters in the absence news "washington post" poll give mr. obama a three-point edge over governor romney. turning to 12 swing states that will almost certainly decide the election the aggregateed united states today gallup poll has the president trailing mitt romney 46-50%. and astonishing after all the

talk last summer of a gender gap women voters in those states split their preferences with 48% for each candidate. but the likely poll of candidates has a tie and the public polling shows the president trailing romney by two points in north carolina. president obama prepared for tomorrow's debate in williamsburg. he seemed confident when requested about it. >> how are things going. >> it is going great. >> eliot: of course he said the same thing before the first debate. while the president's poll numbers may be off campaign spokesperson claim democrats should not be too concerned telling reporters i quote we feel good where we are in the race. we'd rather be us than them because we're very confident in our ground game. really? from experience i can tell you that's a standard line from a campaign spokesperson when the

numbers are against you. meanwhile, obama campaign senior adviser david axelrod told fox news we see a different president obama than in the first debate. >> he's going to be aggressive in making the case of his view where we should go as a country. the other thing that he's certainly going to do we saw governor romney sort of walk away from his own proposals and certainly the president is going to be willing to challenge him on it. >> eliot: you mean the mitt romney we saw in the first debate changed from the far right positions shocking. they tried to run that past ed gillispie. he's here's what he got back. >> the real positions of governor romney. >> eliot: real, at least for the

moment. meanwhile, republicans try to make a campaign issue out of the attack in bengahzi, libya, that killed christopher stevens and three other americans. >> folks want to know two things. why wasn't the security there and why did the administration try so hard to create the wrong image as to what happened. >> eliot: south carolina republican senator said white house confusion reflected effort to hide the administration's failures in the middle east. >> when something goes bad, they deny, they deceive, they delay. the truth is we're not safer. al-qaeda is alive. >> the day after the attack called it an act of terror, and

charged every with the responsibility to get to the bottom of what happened. >> eliot: ambassador chris stevens father said, the security matters are being adequately investigated it would be really abhor rent to turn this into a campaign issue. joining us sam seder and alexis mcgill johnson. thank you for joining, both of you. sam, let me begin with you. this is a shocking turn of events with the president maintaining a solid lead completely collapsed after one debate why? >> i don't know. i think part of it is republicans basically saw mitt romney not as the ghoulish corporate bain raider. he was able to stand up at the podium with president obama and

their enthusiasm increased. also part of it, president obama did not remind the american people just who mitt romney was. i mean it was newt gringrich who said this is a vulture capitalist. there should be every license in the world at that point to reiterate that phrase. i think it's a combination of those two. >> eliot: i said to colleagues of mine who were lawyers if the first year associate stood up to argue a case and perform the way the president did he would have been fired on the spot. didn't know his facts. didn't know the arguments. did not pierce the veil that surrounded the opposing argument argument. simply a pathetic performance. will he change tomorrow? what will change his backbone and get him to act differently. >> this is it, do-or-die. if he doesn't do it, he knows the loses the election. i can't believe there is more pressure than that. >> eliot: this is all by design. he loves to be an extremist. this is the speech about race, which was one of the great

oratorical performances, beautifully written beautifully performance, he's putting himself in that position to seize victory from the jaws of defeat. >> i'm not sure about that, but i want to get to the poll for one second. >> eliot: what because it's so much fun. >> we see the race tightening, but i don't think the polls are capturing the intensity that people are experiencing on both sides, particularly on the left. when you look at what happened in ohio, 20% of voters have already voted and two-thirds of those votes went to obama. i don't think those polls are capturing the intensity-- >> if that's true that would convey a different sensibility than what they're capturing. i don't know how accurate the early exit polls can be, but i'll give a different reference pointed in terms of intensity other the weekend. my wife and my eldest daughter came home with their roommates.

they said, why should we vote for president obama. this was the demographic so completely enraptured by him four years ago. i'm not sure i agree with you about the intensity coursing through the entirety of the electorate. i hope you're right but i don't see it. >> there is a challenge for president obama to step up and offer some type of positive vision going forward. not necessarily talking about positive in terms of it being all cheery, but he needs to put out--romney showed that he's willing to say just about anything and disavow any proposal or plan he had over the last six to eight or 12 months. had the romney showed up two weeks ago in that debate showed up six to eight months ago president obama would be in serious trouble. president obama has to draw a very bright line. he needs to take a position, and he needing to a little bit further. it can't be that we agree on social security. >> eliot: the first debate was we agree we're not all that

different. that's the wrong argument. campaigns are about differences but i think the president is paying the price for four years for failing to explain to the public why we needed a stimulus. why we needed a healthcare bill. without that foundation under girds why he was doing what he was doing the public was quick to lapse back to the appealing rhetoric of what was reagan's argument, george bush's argument and like a genie good economic times emerged from the bottle even though it's not true. >> the president is making the more difficult. he is saying i'm only halfway done. give me another four years and we'll figure it out. whereas if you're fighting the incumbent and we're going to try something different, you have the advantage. >> i think there is a lack of overall vision, i think on some level that would be under girded had the stimulus been explained where there hadn't been as much

person playing defense. being aggressively going on offense. i think that leaves him open. who knows what mitt romney is going to suggest at this debate? i wouldn't be surprised to see mitt romney trying to outflank president obama in some way. >> he did it on do oodd-frank. >> and it was counter to the narrative that the obama campaign and frankly a lot of romney's opponents in the primary tried to establish. if the president had to go back to redefining and continuing that narrative about mitt romney but also needs to be giving a full-throated argument as to why his ideology or why his vision for the country is better. >> eliot: another concern romney and the president move forwards some grand bargain argument, they both seem to agree on that,

let's take romney who seems to be a better manager and more executive in his demeanor, and you pointed out and chuck schumer pointed out that is the wrong way to go. >> eliot: part of military mitt's argument, i've been governor in massachusetts i'll be able to execute this grand bargain. but chuck schumer said this whole notion that we'll drop rates and create it piece mile through these loopholes is not going to fly. >> eliot: the first argument against the romney-ryan plan is you can't--the arithmetic does not close up. you cannot close up loopholes to do it. but chuck schumer said, that's the wrong way to do. one step beyond the simple it doesn't work argument. >> he says we need to raise revenue. it's not that we can make this revenue neutral and this ol'

reaganomics-- >> eliot: i have to come back, the gender gap totally closed, does that make sense? if it's true does that create an opening for the president because ultimately it won't reemerge. >> where the president has been ahead in each of these swing states he has always had a double digit gender gap which has been crucial to him winning these states. we didn't hear him talk about the issues in the first debate. in the second debate, in the vice presidential debate it was focused around the topic of abortion as it relates to their sense of religion. i feel as the president talks more about gender issues and defunding planned parenthood and eliminating campaign spokesperson session to reproductive health and breast cancer services and all sorts of things, and making those issues economic issues as well. >> eliot: a way a president can make that relevant is towards

the supreme court. the supreme court that has balanced as bizarre as it may be be chief justice roberts as the swing vote, that's where we are. the president said this is what hangs in the balance, the gender gap reemerges. >> exactly. >> i thought vice president joe biden did a good job of tying mitt romney to paul ryan and tying them to congress. >> a legitimate race. >> we know what happens when republicans are in office. mitt romney has to own that. >> eliot: the complete lack of fact underlying the argument. sam seder and alexis mcgill johnson, thank you for being on the program. join us for coverage of the second presidential debate. i'll be here with with governor

granholm and john fugelsang. that's only on current tv. coming up, the romney tax plan so riddled with holes that even fox news is not buying it. the ugly truth ahead on "viewpoint." >> eliot: withwith fewer than 24 hours for the next presidential debate, president obama supporters are desperate to see him bounce back from his dismal

performance in round one. here is our number of the day 58. that's how many town hall meetings that the president has taken part of since he took office according to cbs news. that's the format of tomorrow's debate. so the president won't have experience to fall back on as an ex-beans. but oftentimes real people can be harsher than the so-called professional media. remember this two years ago. >> quite frankly i'm exhausted. i'm exhausts of you the administration, the change of the man that i voted for and deeply disappointed with where we are right now. i have been told i voted for a man who said he was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class. i'm one of those people, and i'm waiting, sir. >> eliot: wow, how do you possibly respond to that? and meanwhile, mitt romney who has been practicing town hall meetings this presents him in his greatest challenge

appearing human. he has not gotten that down yet. all in all it should be good tv if nothing else.

just tacos. yeah, it's our job to make you want it. but honestly... it's not that hard. old el paso. when you gotta have mexican. [ woman ] ring. ring. progresso. in what world do potatoes, bacon and cheese add up to 100 calories? your world. ♪ ♪ [ whispers ] real bacon... creamy cheese... 100 calories... [ chef ] ma'am [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. >> eliot: the romney surrogates were at it again this weekend talking up the romney tax plan that purports to cut tax rates 20% across the board in a magically revenue-neutral way. i've said it many times before and vice president biden said it the other night in the debate. facts matter.

and also what matters are the specifics. when the republican vice president nominee paul ryan was asked to provide specifics thursday night's debate and he was unable to explain how these tax cuts would be paid for. >> let's talk about the 20%. you have refused yet again to offer specifics on how you pay for that 20% across the board tax cut. do you actually have the specifics, or are you still working on it, and that's why you won't tell voters. >> different than this administration we actually want to have big bipartisan agreements. >> do you have the specifics? >> i want to have time to respond. >> you'll get time. >> we want to work with congress in how to chief this. >> no specifics again. >> eliot: when asked recently by chris wallace to explain the specifics of the plan, ryan claim he simply didn't have time. >> the cut in tax rates is lower all americans tax rates by 20%-- >> how much does that cost?

>> it's revenue neutral. >> it's not revenue neutral unless you take away the deductions. >> right. >> we're going to get to that in the second--the first half, lowering the tax rates. does that cost 5 trillion-dollar. >> no, no. >> you haven't given me the math. >> it would give me too long to go through all the math. >> ridiculous if i ever heard it. in all the weeks that they've been talking about the tax plan they still haven't provided all the specifics. joining me now to break down the fallacy of the could said romney tax plan is rolling stone contributing editor matt taibbi. is this crazy. >> i've been watching with fascination this entire election season after romney and ryan trotted out this idea across the board 20% tax cut. they haven't explained how they're going to pay for it. yet some how it's been treated with validity by the press core as though it's a real plan.

which to me is amazing. it's amazing that the wallace is the only guy who is really aggressively gone after them on this. >> eliot: you almost have to believe in unicorns to believe that they have a plan that makes sense. you've rightly pointed out in this blog on rolling stone where has the media been. let's talk substance. they want to cut 5 trillion-dollar, say its revenue neutral. say the middle class is not going to be hurt and close all the loophole closings that would permit you to do any of the above, it doesn't add up. >> i don't think there is any way they can possibly achieve what they say they're going to achieve unless they eliminate the mortgage deduction or health insurance deduction. there is no possible way they can do it. yet no one has pressed them on the specifics. they've given no answer. they've been able allowed to get away

with no answer. >> eliot: you rightly say they would have to close loopholes to make it revenue neutral. the reason why they can't close those is because it would clobber the middle class. >> absolutely. if you reduce the class rates over all and go over dehe discussiondisproportionately it will effect middle class and lower class people because of people who earn the upper tax brackets are going to be paying dramatically less income tax but the deductions will not add up the same. it's got to be an awful plan for the middle class. but they haven't been force to the give those answers. >> eliot: when the brookings institute who did the analysis said this is $2,000 household increase for middle class they just brushed it aside. they haven't produced the numbers or explained how the arithmetic would get them to where they are. are. >> the amazing thing is, the press--it should be that joke,

francisco franco is still dead. it should be the romney ryan tax plan still makes no sense. they should be hammered every day for doing this. it's an incredibly cynical thing. they're making making an extravagant promise, and yet they're being treated as if it's a serious political campaign. they should be slaughtered by the press. >> cenk: this goes back through the past year to paul ryan was viewed by the washington intelligentsia as fallly a policy wonk who can talk numbers even though from day one did he not provide a balanced budget until 2003. it was completely ridiculous economics. >> that's because paul ryan serves his purpose to the main treatment media without making sense. we have this tendency in the press towards the caricaturizing

so we have this policy wonk on the right and on the left and they play these roles. if they make sense does not matter. they just have to walk the walk to make it on tv. >> cenk: and then saying wait a minute. name the loophole. >> and in the debate. >> eliot: now, did joe biden properly and effectively highlight the lack of arithmetic that under lies what they're claiming here. >> he got heavily criticized for laughing and bringing this mocking tone to ryan's whole presentation but i think that's what has been missing all along from the coverage of this campaign. you should bring contemptuous laughter to this whole thing because it is not serious. that's the problem with it. it's not only that it's cynical and nefarious, it's not serious. it's not big-league politics. >> eliot: now they do pretend to

have historical metaphors. they talk about the kennedy tax rates. why is that historically not relevant? >> first of all, i think a lot of people, if the move was to make the top tax rate 71%, which is what happened after kennedy cut taxes, i think it would an big surprise if romney went in that direction. but also the main thing the comparison does not hold is what they're doing here kennedy and reagan never said we have this magical plan, and hid from everybody how they're going to pay for it, and then suddenly produce it later on. that's the big difference here. i think plans are substantively different because we live in different times. the upper class has a disproportionately large amount of income compared to the kennedy era. >> eliot: which is why arithmeticcally, you cannot do

this unless you find it in the middle class, that's why the romney-ryan plan simply won't work. >> kennedy cut taxes 30% for people in the bottom bracket and 23% for people in the middle and around 20% for people in the top, but romney wants to do the opposite--well not the opposite but across across the board. >> eliot: and if unicorns were real we would be happy. matt taibbi piercing the veil of the ridiculous arguments from the other side. viewfinder is coming up next.

>> eliot: still to come, are there any good answers to the situation in syria. but first, boil moyers take on o'reilly and when it doesn't fit anywhere else, we put it in the viewfinder. >> first of all i want to thank senator college for hosting us this evening. >> oh, boy, here we go. >> i did not evaluate joe biden but if someone said to me, listen, we want you to do what is really required to know what happened there, you have to put dementia on the diagnosis. speaking as a psychiatrist. you would want his alcohol level. >> and it's a three-course lunch everybody with wine. >> how much is it. >> just $29 and she'll sign

whatever part of you're anatomy you wish her to. >> with all due respect, this is a bunch of malarky. >> a bunch of malarky? what does that mean? >> um, it's irish. >> no, no, irish is when i come over there and smack that dumb look off your face. >> during thursday's debate vice president biden repeatedly criticized senator ryan's debate calling it a bunch of stuff. that's their economic plan. >> we're going to close loopholes, bring down tax rates and erase the deficit. >> can you be more specific? >> no. >> that was the best interview that was the best one in the campaign. >> their own univision bill, not telemundo those two are competitors. suppose i mixed up fox news channel with the cartoon network. >> there are two things that

democrats are saying, unemployment is going down and consumer confidence is going up. how would donald trump answer that. >> they're not real answers. >> we have the opportunity to send president obama back to chicago or kenya. >> that concludes tonight's debate. >> martha, can i ask you one last thing. >> sure. >> here we go. all right, that was driving me crazy. >> eliot: the fight in syria if we send weapons would it fall in the hands of extremists. more "viewpoint" coming up next.

>> eliot: 30 thoughts people dead, hundreds of people displaced from their homes. civil war had destroyed syria. but as reports continue to surface about russia and iran supporting the assad regime, is anyone helping the rebels? the leaders of the syrian rebels

have begun to express their frustration with what they see as the west's abandonment of the rebel cause. as come ab ab commander of the free syrian army told clarissa ward on "60 minutes"." >> i get angry when i see civilians killed on the street, and no one will in the world is helping the syrian people. the syrian people will never forgive the international community for failing to stop the assad regime. >> but when the weapons are sent to the syrian rebels, they don't always go where we would want them to. all too often it goes to those who wish to empose sharia law in syria. but as dr. mahernana with close ties to the u.s. government who is trying to arm the free syrian army. >> when you fight for your life, ask for help. when good people don't help you you go to ask for help for

else. >> let's bring in president of ploughshares fund, a member of secretary of state hillary clinton international security advisory board and the council on foreign relations. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> are you arguably created by our failure to step in and help the free syrian army. is that a fair critique of what happened. >> it is grim and it will get worse. it might get worse for several more months. or even a year or so. there is not a good solution out there. for those who thought the solution was to heavily army the rebels, this report in "the new york times" should be sobering news, indeed. it turns out that our allies in saudi arabia and qatar are funneling some of these weapons

to extremely islamic groups. groups that they hope to seek favor with. you might think of this as hedging their bet. they're trying to arm groups that they believe they might be able to control, but this is not a prospect that the united states a wants to see at all. >> eliot: the question that the article raised with me and the legitimate fear that the arms funneling into syria would end up in the wrong hands would it be different if we had been charge of transmitting the arms and if we had a physical presence there and control to some greater extent the creation of alternative presence to assad, would we have been able to do that? >> well, the they have the humanitarian aid programs, and we're on the ground trying to get aid to the groups. there are rumors that we're supplying light arms to the rebel forces, but the idea that we can control different shipments of arms that's not in the arms. we don't have the connections inside syria or outside of

syria. the people that we're trying to work with, saudi arabia qatar they're the ones we've been helping get the arms, and they've been funding their favored groups and not necessarily the groups we would like. the presence on the ground, inside the border of syria would have made a difference here. >> eliot: i accept that we have covert that we're not reading about, and actually give really the capacity to pick who is going to come out on top of this yet, but there have been intermediate steps along the way. the no-fly zone, the more aggressive effort to organize the free syrian army and impose some sort of order on its own decision making. those steps we maybe should have participated in. >> i do agree the administration should have done more, but giving heavy arms to the rebels is not one of the options. i think we're seeing as more arms

flow into this conflict the death follow is going up, not down. that should tell us something about the military solution here. you have the u.n. mediator in the region today trying to appeal to all sides to call for a cease-fire by the end of the month. the u.s. at this point has got to be leaning on saudi arabia and qatar and try to isolate assad himself. assad will never give up but you can peel away his supporters. the only way you'll end this is by a political solution with the parties involved. there will not be a military victory with the syrian army. >> cenk: there have been models that emerge over the arab spring. we were able to defeat gadhafi's powerful military forces. in egyptian, they turned against

mubarak, i have a hard time seeing that the tide will turn against assad, and i don't see an end to the brutality. >> just as saudi arabia are hedging their bets, you can see groups jockeying for the day after. what happens the day after assad falls. you want to appeal deals to countries that offer a solution to this, a way out of this quagmire so you can increase the pressure isolate assad not militaryily but politically. >> eliot: but is that happening? if you were to compare the situation today versus two months ago. two months ago there was a palpable fence there were defections that he was losing control of the country. maybe i'm wrong but judging from the public information i see, it's not clear to me that assad is in a losing posture right now as opposed to where he might have been even two months ago.

>> i would say you see the ebbs and flows. i would say that we're at a stalemate. assad is not in control. he's not winning. he's losing, and at some point people will want to cut their losses. russia will want to cut its loss. iran will want to cut its loss. there is no scenario that you see assad will prevail. in months when assad falls this, country will fall apart. it's not like you can skin the potato and put another political skin on top of it. the whole thing is crumbling in our hands. >> eliot: chaos awaits. joe cirincione, author of "bomb scare." thank you. >> my pleasure. >> eliot: in the debates will the format favor the president or mitt romney. that's coming up next.

view now the koch brothers are warning their employees about the obama election.

but first here in studio, the one and only governor jennifer granholm, welcome to new york. enough of your detroit tigers mugs on your set. >> it's dangerous to be here in new york. >> eliot: we have plenty to talk about. what do you have coming up on the show. >> you've been talking about the debate. i have michael tomaskci who is talking about how the president has to fight for people. remember what he's doing. he's fighting for people. it's not about him but those who he's fighting for. we have an interesting story. do you remember nathan school who was hired by the g.o.p. to do voter registration and was now under investigation in a number of states. turns out guess who else hired him, karl rove. >> eliot: really crossroads. >> eliot: voter fraud has only been supported with the

republican party and disenfranchised tens of millions of good voters. >> that's the concern. >> eliot: we look forward to watching at 10:00 p.m. eastern and the new york yankees they better start hitting the baseball. we'll both be back here tomorrow night along with cenk uygur and john fugelsang. >> eliot: last week it was david segel whining about his taxes and threatening employees to down size potentially costing them their jobs in president obama was re-elected. grow up. now the koch brothers following suit sending letters to all 45,000 employees of the koch-owned paper company listing the parade of horribles that will descend on them if the president remains in offense in office.

i don't begrudge them their full-throated exercise of their first amendment rights, even in the form of letters to their employees. but it would be nice if the wild claims of the koch brothers were tethered to facts because facts do batter. the sad reality that the wild assertions of those who seem to have a deep-seated amneistanimus for the president are reverberating those long debunked birther claims. thank jack welch and thinks conspiracy theory about the latest job numbers. here are is support warnings detailed by the coke brothers. they claim that the president wants to subsidize a few favored

cronies. maybe it's the fact that the oil and gas industry in which the koch brothers are major players did not receive the same federal assistance given to the auto sector. here is another so-called warning. they say the president is placing, i quote unprecedented regulatory burdens on business. such as what exactly. dodd-frank? some simple principles to prevent another cataclysm such as the one we lived through. how about the claim that the president is again i quote excessively hindering free trade. hindering free trade by doing what romney has been calling for for years? bringing unfair trade charges against china? again, what is their evidence or proof? none. not even a scintilla. finally they raise the specter of runaway inflation. really? interest rates are at an historic lows because there is insufficient demand within the

system. and many economists are asking the fed to ignite inflation on the theory that it might spark consumption. the simple fact there is no meaningful evidence of inflation on the horizon, none whatsoever. i wish the koch brothers would pay attention to what the great senator daniel patrick moynahan so wisely once said. we are all entitledded to our own opinions but not our own facts. that's my view.

but when joint pain and stiffness from psoriatic arthritis hit even the smallest things became difficult. i finally understood what serious joint pain is like. i talked to my rheumatologist and he prescribed enbrel. enbrel can help relieve pain, stiffness, and stop joint damage. because enbrel, etanercept suppresses your immune system, it may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections tuberculosis lymphoma, other cancers, and nervous system and blood disorders have occurred. before starting enbrel your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu.

tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores have had hepatitis b have been treated for heart failure, or if, while on enbrel, you experience persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. [ phil ] get back to the things that matter most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine prescribed by rheumatologists. >> eliot: with cnn candy crowly moderating tomorrow night they will decide what gets asked which may prove to be a challenge for both candidates. the town hall setting begs the question, how can there be 80 undecided voters out there to fill the seats. here with me now to preview the

town hall style debate is imogen lloyd webber coauthor of "the twitter diaries," and tina dupuy, thank you for joining me. imogen i haven't found anyone who pays attention to the world who has a confirmed idea one way or another. >> you're a big time tv host, but the 49-51% country at the end of the day. i love america. they like to think that they're on the winning team. moderate mitt has momentum, and they might be inclined to vote for the winner. >> eliot: wait, i want to understand this. you come over here from great britain and you're saying that we have no convictions. >> you're more moderate than many republicans and democrats would have us believe. >> eliot: there is a rational segment in the middle.

dubai that? >> no, i'm very skeptical. >> why? >> people who say they're undecided at this point they're low information. i think if at this point you say, oh, i don't know about romney and his tax plan, then i think you haven't been paying attention. i did speak to a high school lose week, and--the civics teacher asked me where romney stood on issues. i was, like, well, it was trying to decipher to high school students. >> mitt romney doesn't know where he stands so you can be excused from not answering. >> it's low-information voters and not knowing enough about mitt romney. >> eliot: people don't pay attention. no, sir isdemocracy is the greatest system on earth but you put your hand

in the hand of the low information people. >> those who say they're going to weigh all the evidence. most people at this point if they say they're not decided. >> eliot: tomorrow how does either governor romney or mitt romney, either one of them are terribly good. mitt wants to be ceo consultant, and the president wants to be a professor. how do you be more of yourself overnight. >> it's going to be probably a little bit easier for president obama. at the end of the day i am praying that the women's question comes up. biden owned ryan on the women question. it's absolutely key. you're all talking about this, the supreme court, all this and so forth that will be key. romney has a massive opportunity. if he appears relatable to middle class voters, that could be a moment where he cements that poll bump he got after the debate in the last time around.

>> cenk: you agree with that? mitt romney who can crystallize what he created last time. >> it's always mitt's to lose. he's also not one of those people--he doesn't connect with the average voter. if there any kind of test, he's not going to do well. obama is a little bit better. he's not clintonian by any stretch of the imagination when he says, i feel your pain. but this format was better for him four years ago when mccain looked weird, he was walking in front of cameras, and obama was running against someone whose hair was on fire. now you have this opponent who is hedging his bets more than mccain was, so this is--it's very challenging for obama. >> eliot: barack obama needs to reclaim the simple mantle of hope and change. he went from being hope and change to the status quo. how does he communicate to the audience not only those in the auditorium but the 70 million or

plus who are watching. that he has a plan for hope and change, none of which has come through with his communication in the public. >> this is my greatest problem with obama. if he cannot defend his record, how can he expect anybody else to. >> he needs to be proud of his record at the end of the day. i come home and let me tell you how well america is doing right now. no county apart from canada has done better than america economically since the crisis of 2008. in great britain we have the lowest unemployment rate in four years. we have the lowest mother foreclosure rate in five years. he has to own that. >> he hasn't stood up and said it has worked. be proud of it. instead he has been shying away as you just did trumpeting the success us of a government program that did some good. >> romney brought up death

panels and obama was no, no, it's not true. no you pound his head into the floor for saying that. you have to correct the record. romney has been doing all sorts of--he has been getting away with lots of lies. my problem was not that he wasn't lively, but that he didn't defend himself. >> eliot: tomorrow night, at the same time you want him to project the sense of confidencers you have to be empathetic. he will be in front of people who are dying for the i feel your pain answer, and then yes this is how far we have to go. >> at the convention there was a big bump in the polls for the democrats, look, you did the right thing by voting for me in 2008. we're on the right path. we're not there yet and i do feel your pain. >> eliot: will the president pull it off. >> i hope so.