>> i will be with you in spirit. thanks for joining us. >> "outnumbered" starts right now. to speed on this is a fox news alert. president of trump is looking ahead to more legislative victories. he is meeting with mitch mcconnell and paul ran early in the new year, as republicans have a lot on their to-do list. this is "outnumbered." i am kennedy, and here today, we have a republican strategist lisa boothe. the editor of townhall.com, katie pavlich is here, and marie harf, and are joining us on the couch, the opinion editor of the washington times, a fox news contributor and #oneluckyguy, charles hurt is here, and he is outnumbered. welcome to the couch. may this encourage your cerebral output. >> lisa: do you feel lucky? >> charles: extremely lucky. >> kennedy: let's continue the

good fortune and like i had at 201818, where the president is reportedly planning to host paul ryan and mitch mcconnell at camp david, starting january 5th. they have a lot on their agenda. at the present visited first responders and west palm beach, touting the passage of the tax bill and what he has already done. watch. >> we have a lot of the rules and regulations done. in all fairness, but a lot of the regulations -- >> kennedy: live out from west palm beach. it tell us all about it, rich. >> well, they are looking at infrastructure, and we believe that is may be coming out in the early part of next year. exactly how the federal government may find that, republicans are still trying to find out how to fund about, how much money they are going to spend, what kind of regulatory issues will be there.

there is also a question about whether republicans will sign off on it and whether democrats are going to want to help the republicans with a legislative victories, and what is an election year. they say that they do want to get these issues done. the president has already task congress, requiring nearly every american to have health insurance, but there are still issues with the exchanges, and republicans have still been trying to repeal and replace obamacare. that's effort that they unsuccessfully tried earlier last year. there is also immigration. the congress also has been trying to find a wheel to deal with that the dreamers, those who were brought to the u.s. as children, and whether there could be a larger immigration package as well as that. so there is plenty to deal with,

and then there is the regular housekeeping that congress still has to deal with. they have to fund the government, raise the debt ceiling, and then that this internationally of iran, that the president no longer certifying that they are complying with the nuclear agreement, but asking congress to figure out what kind of a policy we are going to have towards iran. those details are still outstanding. so it is fairly compressed, and fairly aggressive, and that is what we are looking forward to in 2018. >> kennedy: compressed and aggressive. that is our motto. thank you very much. so, let's talk a little bit about this legislative agenda. the president has already tasted victory with the passage of the tax cut package. he has got to bring these two people on board who have very different ideas or how to advance their separate agendas between paul ryan and mitch mcconnell, so what is the president put forth? >> charles: i think we are

probably going to be looking at a major effort on infrastructure, if you are conservatives in washington, it is a concern. because that is a very fluid definition and nowadays. >> charles: it is messed up, but if you are conservative, then you believe in limited spending, it can be a little bit worrisome in terms of spending, and democrats of course are going to be trying to do their best to be unified in a not giving any sort of victory to the president, but i think that's we have seen some smart democrats. she said that she would be willing to work with him on the infrastructure package. she is from a state like michigan, that's the democrats lost. they have not lost on a long time coming and it is because people like debbie dingell, they talk about issues that actually matter to voters, whereas i think democratic leadership has just kind of gone off of the

rails. >> katie: they are trying to nationalize their message, and they are also addicted to the kind of spending that an infrastructure bill would promise them. i think it would be so difficult for democrats to resist a multi-hundred billion, trillion dollar infrastructure package. that is like dangling a piece of gooey chocolate cake. >> katie: that is why i like that you said conservatives. >> kennedy: will they be able to resist the way that they hav have? >> marie: that is different. and lisa brought this up yesterday. at the two big questions are are republicans going to give a little bit on the regulatory side? they don't want them all taken off, and they will want to see some details on how it is paid for, so i absolutely think that they are democrats on the senate and the house aside who wish

that they would have started with this from the beginning of the mission. >> kennedy: on the thatch list of that's republicans -- or democrats have to have, if they come to the table, what has to be on that list? >> marie: i think that it cannot include an entire rollback. we have already seen a lot of rollbacks, the democrats are very concerned. there cannot be an entire -- getting rid of every single regulatory task is just to get this done. it will have to be tied to the budget. they are going to try to get to this budget through. they are trying to blow through every spending at cap. we are going to need some spending money. if you want to show some restraint. it is embarrassing. >> marie: that is how you spend money.

>> lisa: i think there is a lot of pressure on democrats right now with congress also having until march to address immigration and address dhaka, because they promise that they would force a vote, get something done before the end of the year. okay, if you want our votes in the senate, we are not going to give you them unless you do something on it daca. and many immigration activists wanted chuck schumer to do that. they are very angry at him. so we are wondering what's the democrats play is going to be, what they are going to do with daca. and for republicans, this matters. if republicans can keep the house and land, they can get all of their folks there. i think that they lose a little leverage in the senate, but paul ryan, if he can't get his house in order, then democrats have a ton of leverage. >> kennedy: and never mind getting their house in order within the caucus.

the house and senate are having a very difficult time reconciling watch their agenda is. >> katie: will, driving the truck, so to speak. he is going to have this meeting with mitch mcconnell and paul ryan. he will lay out his priorities and say that they need to find a way to get it done. i think that infrastructure is number one. this is something that he is passionate about. >> kennedy: 's ryan is talking about cutting entitlement spending. >> katie: i think that he is actually outnumbered on that. and i think that the president is interested in infrastructure. and in terms of him not starting with this, it is a strategy. we have an election year coming up. you mentioned michigan. people representing that states are also getting pressure from the union, and they will have to answer for this, that they have claimed for so long to be supportive of these union jobs. >> charles: infrastructure is one of those issues that has

crossed over from a republican issue to a democratic issue and helped trump won. >> kennedy: well, speaking of winning ends that push for 2018, the white house reportedly plans to use the economy as a centerpiece of its political message going into midterms. it reports that the argument from the white house for the new year is that the real estate -- knows it better than anyone of how to boost the economy. he is already talking about gains on wall street. listen to what he told those first responders yesterday. >> i tell you that that is something. little did we know about these big companies, at&t, comcast, giving back to their employees. it is a big, big deal. >> kennedy: the president it tweeted it just a short time ago. retail sales are at record

numbers. we have the economy going better than anyone ever dreamt, and you haven't seen anything yet. charles, when the president gets sidetracked, when he starts to attack people on twitter, one of the first things that we say is go back to the economy, go back to successes. lay out the groundwork for further economic again. is he internalizing that message, and is it to a winning message? >> charles: i think it is, and to a large degree, how he won the election. strangely, 2016 was a very issue oriented campaign. it was a very issue oriented -- it was about issues. and of course, if you just read the media, they were obsessed with all these little side issues. see one they still are. >> charles: and why did he do this? he loves the media, they fall for it every time. and they reveal themselves to be not very serious.

and he wouldn't just go back to those issues. economic issues, and that is what resonated with voters. and it democrats are in a tough position right now because they can either get on board with something like infrastructure -- >> kennedy: i think infrastructure spending can really drive the economy down. >> charles: but it is not the same as it sayeth welfare or some other spending that doesn't have some value in the long run. >> kennedy: right. >> charles: but democrats are in a tough position because of the economy does take off the way that all of these people think that it will, they are going to have to basically be banking on the economy craterin cratering. >> kennedy: i want to ask marie this because i want to touch on something that you just said. what you democrats do in terms of messaging if the dow continues to go up? if jobless numbers continue to drop? if you see continued gdp growth and corporate profits rising

from these tax cuts, not to mention consumer confidence? if those things continue to go in the direction that benefits individuals, how do democrats counter that without sounding like a bunch of wet blankets? >> marie: i always try to avoid sounding like that. and i know that kennedy will yell at me. it did start under the obama administration. >> kennedy: that is totally fair, and every present at the end of his term can take success for the success of a new president's term appeared >> marie: i think what is interesting, these economic trends have been very interesting, and i give president trump credit for that, but while the economy has grown, his approval numbers have gone the opposite direction. i don't know the answer, but my point is the economic success has not translated into people liking president trump.

>> katie: that doesn't matter. >> marie: it does matter. historically, it has mattered. >> katie: it is going to be difficult for democrats who argue against everyday people who are seeing their lives getting better, and the argument that $1,000 or $2,000 isn't benefiting you really isn't going to fly. it is actually very offensive to people who think that that is a significant amount of money because it is. when it comes to how democrats approach this and his approval numbers, you don't have to like the present. it is a likability thing. it is not necessarily based on his policies. his approval is based on not his policies but his personality. and you don't have to like donald trump to like what he is doing, and so we will see how that plays out in districts across the country. right now, it doesn't really

feel like it matters if people feel like their lives are bette better. few on the bottom line is a much better metric for most voters, than whether or not you want to go to a cocktail party with donald trump. >> katie: he was not well-liked, if you look at the polls and a 2016. as charlie pointed out, he focused on the economic issues through the issues that americans care about. those kitchen table issues. that is what he focused on. that is what republicans are going to run on. and katie, i think you are righ right. it is an asinine argument to say that a family of four making $75,000, who will see in over $2,000 tax deduction, somehow that is not a positive thing. no offense, marie, but you guys be my guest to try to go in 2018 and somehow make an argument that that is not positive. >> marie: if you are taking it

this home, the majority of americans don't have stocks, so the stock market going up doesn't help it. i think it is about 50%'s that stocks. >> lisa: what about a 401(k)? >> kennedy: it we will see. the rnc is on track to raise a record amount of money, while the dnc's slowest total for the month of november in ten years. what that could meet at the midterms. a politically biased agent at the fbi. >> as an american citizen, i am nervous and discontented that people would have those kinds of lack of impartiality and that of students.

you might take something for your heart... or joints. but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.

>> kennedy: a fox news alert, a new development with the special counsel robert mueller's counsel team appeared they have been questioning rnc staffers before the election. they worked with the trump campaign to reach out to swing state voters, and they are trying to figure out whether the russians were also part of that effort. plus, jared kushner's lawyer isn't searching for a crisis public relations firm. he has denied any kind of wrongdoing. if so, charlie, isn't it obvious that the rnc would be working with at the trump campaign to reach out to voters on the ground, especially given the damage that they did in 2012, by

not having ground operation? >> charles: ever since al gore invented the internet, they have been working to do digital outreach, so it is very curious. and what we have seen over the past year or year and half, it all goes back to the exact same thing for me, and that is that you have the entire -- the spying. and that is a truly terrifying. and there is no accusation that has been made since then about russia collusion or anything like that that matches -- that comes anywhere near close to how chilling and it terrifying single fact is. >> marie: we were spying on donald trump? >> charles: absolutely appear to be donald trump campaign. us before the intelligence community was looking at what russia was doing and when members of the trump team were picked up working with the

russians -- >> kennedy: there is no way of knowing. >> marie: kennedy, i know that you are very dubious about the intelligence community, and i understand that. i know where you're coming from. when there were americans working with russia, it was national security -- >> kennedy: won once that happening? >> marie: when they were getting picked up on intercepts talking to the russians, it was -- >> kennedy: his job. >> katie: the operative word is hillary clinton. >> kennedy: can we get back to the issue at hand here? to address the iq rations, this is such a joke. i was the vice president of a political firm. let me address the two major accu accusations. >> lisa: anyone with a little bit of money can go out and get so much consumer data on each one of us on this couch. they can find out things like

pro-family, targeting your behavior, how you're going to respond to specific ads. that is anyone with a little bit of money. the second one is that somehow on social media, places like facebook, that's the trump campaign helped russia target certain areas and demographics, that is already available to anyone who wants to go on facebook and purchase an ad. you cannot target zip codes, congressional districts. you can also target someone who doesn't own a house. see five of the points that i was trying to make is the fact that at the height of the presidential election, you had an administration spying on political opponents. >> marie: that is just not true. >> kennedy: it is true. >> charles: my point is, you witness that happening, we find out these things come about what the fbi did in their investigation with hillary clinton, clearly politicizing everything.

it lets me finish the point. i did not interrupt you. so today, i have become so jaundiced about all of this, that i do not trust anything that these people are doing. when you find out that the fbi is looking into the rnc's outreach efforts, it makes me wonder, are they doing it for political purposes? >> marie: if the rnc helps the russians target voters -- call that is what they are looking into. they won't find anything. >> lisa: it is just as much of a joke to say that $100,000 in facebook as influence a presidential election. that is a drop in the bucket. we could go out and do that. >> katie: doubling down on his call for the fbi to purge politically motivated agents from their ranks. that includes peter straka, who

was removed after it was revealed that he send text messages about trump to his girlfriend. watch. >> are you sure that you want to be throwing a word like percheron? >> well, it may be a pretty strong word. i am maybe not the most nonpolitical person in the road, coming from a career in business, but i am prude see you upset about this, on the institution itself, on the importance to that institution. as an american citizen, i am nervous and discontents that people would have those kinds of lack of impartiality, and i hope that the committee can get to the bottom of it. >> katie: what about this balance between purging an entire law enforcement agency but also bringing accountability to an agency that clearly has

politically motivated agents working on a very serious political investigations? >> kennedy: yeah, there is a big gulf between a purge -- it is a most. in between purging and accountability. and you are absolutely right because all of these agencies require accountability because they have so much power, they can literally spy on any person at any time through just about any means, and that is way too much spying, so they never really get to the bad guys that they need to target. it is heartbreaking to think that there are people in the fbi who are compromised by this. i don't care if someone is a democrat or how anyone votes. it is washington, d.c., of course people are political. you just have to do your best to make sure that that's political influence does not find its way into these critical investigations. so, the doj has to be accountable without having a special counsel assembled every time there is an issue.

>> katie: charlie, my question for you is d.c. is a creature of politics. robert mueller has been criticized for having democrats on his team of attorneys. is the fbi able to find people who don't hold any kind of political leanings, given the status and the environment in washington? >> charles: i would say that they absolutely are. if they look for them. and i will be honest. i get very uncomfortable when you turn around and hear words like purging the fbi, and kennedy is exactly right. people have political opinions that should not be a problem, but when you have those political opinions, and then they match up with the results and actions that were taken that are very questionable and curious, it becomes very disturbing. and i did not like it when the fbi got involved with the hillary clinton -- during the campaign, and i don't like it -- them getting involved with the trump campaign. i don't want the fbi's -- >> katie: not to mention some

of those unanswered questions. it >> charles: they can make their own decisions, and they make much better decisions that prosecutors do. >> kennedy: isn't it bigger than just political bias? at least concerned with it the text messages exchanged is that there may have been action taken, and that is the concern. and quite frankly, i find it scary and concerning that the mainstream media couldn't care less about what his insurance policy was, so that is what we need to figure out, and americans have every right to know. a >> marie: well, the personal and political opinions only matter if they impact your ability to do a job in a nonbiased way. i think what has been hard for me is yes, this guy clearly should not have some these text messages, but then a lot of people, including some of us here take that big leap and say well then, he must have been biased. i have always said let's get answers to the questions, and i

will be uncomfortable, and i will have a conversation like an adult. i am happy to have that conversation. >> katie: do you have some other platform of rationalization where you blame the president -- >> marie: these are huge investigations. investigators, fbi agents. there are dozens, if not hundreds of people who work at them, to throw all of that work out because of some text messages, i think that is not fair. >> kennedy: i will riddle you this because i think it is true that it is not necessarily political bias. if you talk about some of these career public servants, donald trump is a much greater threat to that sort of institutional living. and he has said you know, we have to look at these things. rand paul has said the same things. like it is inappropriate for these agencies to have the kind of power that they do, that they require more oversight, and maybe some, not purging, but dismantling. if that is the case, endless

political opponent is someone who poses an existential threat to your agency, then people are going to fight back, and that is the motivation. >> marie: i think you are reading things in there. >> kennedy: well, we have a lot to go. "vanity fair" is issuing ami occult , was this piece tone-deaf, or is that here a double standard when it comes to criticizing a liberal? plus, rnc on track for a record year in fund-raising. exactly how much money will matter as we march into the midterms? that is next.

>> kennedy: will come back. the republican national committee raking in the big bucks. now on track for $130 million into to 2017. that would break a record. she has made fund-raising a key priority. the dnc is going in the opposite direction, seeing their lowest total for the month of november. they have raised $121.4 million,

that is exactly twice as much as the democrats, who have taken in $68.7 million. so i'm going to start with you. all right, i want to start with you. obviously, the dnc took a big hit. allegations of rigging. even senator elizabeth warren conceded at one point that it was a regular. a >> marie: she is wrong about that. see to it doesn't matter, perception is everything, so my my's question to you is how much is this a reflection of the head? >> marie: i think from the plus side, i will start there, individual candidates have raised historic numbers, they have broken records. for individual candidates, they are still fired up in writing checks. it matters more than the national party. but on the negative side, 42020, particularly, the national party does matter, and if money won

elections, he would have lost the election. hillary clinton outspent him. but it is still concerning. they have to rebuild their imag image. i think it tom perez has some more work to do. i think doing well in 2018 will help, though. if we perform strongly, if we hold some of the senate seats, i think that's will filter up, and if we have a strong candidates running in 2020, it is going to be a big primary, and i do think that they can rebuild that trust it. q. how damaged is the democratic establishment to voters, and does that impact them in any wa way? >> charles: i think it is devastating to the party, but i do think that individual candidates -- if they are smart about it, they can kind of bypass some of the stink on the dnc. but, we are also seeing a another thing that i think

should be concerning four democrats in places like arizona, where democrats are actually losing registered voters at a time when they are supposed to be gaining registered voters. they are losing them as a pace -- in pennsylvania also, at a pace that is faster than republicans are losing them up. >> marie: but also, the democrats have had a more voters on their roles over the last ten years than republicans have, and republicans have been bleeding voters, and obviously, the president is a totally different kind of republican. and he could be attracting what independence and the sum of frustrated democrats have wanted, but it is very curious. i don't know why it is that republicans -- it seems like when he would make the presidential race, people are not as excited to write checks to your party come into democrats it should be able to capitalize on that. >> marie: i wanted to ask you, katie. of course, candidates matter,

and candidates can win without the resources behind them, but particularly, if you are a party trying to win back the majority, you have to be about judicious about which races you invest in. so what race does it play? >> katie: in terms of the national party, if the dnc has a ton of work to do, when it comes to money, winning elections. that is not the case in a lot of situations. it just depends on voter turnou turnout. >> lisa: they assumed that republicans were going to lose the senate, and there were a lot of close races, and also, they did the same thing. a >> katie: one more thing on the voters issues, democrats not being registered. that is just a reflection of where we are as a country, with the two parties. especially the younger generations don't want to be

affiliated with a party as well, they may vote for republicans or democrats, but they are not interested in being labeled as such. >> lisa: democrats also thought that they would do well in 2016, and they did not fear new predictions of the war between the president of trump and the mainstream media is far from over. how big of an impact could have on the present second year in office? we will discuss.

>> housing media? a good? is everyone good? these are great people. >> lisa: president of trump yesterday visiting firefighters, and giving a little nod to the media, with whom he has had a tumultuous first year. the hill is suggesting that their relationship will probably not change much. while trump and his allies regularly attack the press, and that quote, the trump team has been given ample political ammunition. several high-profile corrections and retractions in coverage of trump, usually pertaining to the russian investigation. they have been accused of loosing their reporting standards. this as a new study shows that the news coverage and his first 60 days in office has been three

times more negative of obama's early days. you can see the little bar added just 5% positive country coverage. that is not very much. although having spoken to a spokesperson, he did not feel like every day was a walk in the park for obama. charlie, i will start with you first on this. what were you going to say? >> charles: may be because what you had to defend was indefensible. >> marie: i never thought about that. we talk a lot about media bias here. i actually am heartened when journalists who make mistakes come out and correct them because i think that mistakes make it go to journals. it they lose their credibility in the process. at the end of the year, how do you see all of this? >> charles: i think that's mistakes to get made, but the problem is that's mistakes get made again and again, and they are always going in the same direction. i think that one of the most amazing things about the election last year was the amount of negative coverage of the president of trump and his campaign. but this is one thing that i

particularly like. and this is on republicans. they are always complaining that they never get a fair shake from the press. >> lisa: they don't. >> charles: they don't, they don't, but to grow up. get over it. that's how it is here that is a reality. but what i love about it is that donald trump says yes, you cannot only gets the bad press in terms of republican level bad press. you can get trump level bad press. >> lisa: like access hollywood table level bad press. >> charles: yes. >> lisa: republicans have to deal with this, but so many of them and appreciate president trump for calling out. i have seen it, so my viewpoint is achieved by seeing how republicans get treated so differently by the media then democrats, and look at, if the media doesn't want to be called very fake news, stopping fake news, and you look at people like brian, the abc report

that's got so terribly, followed by the cnn report, both of them getting basically the time time wrong, and they ran with it because they wanted to be true. and that is the problem. >> katie: i think for some of us, we don't like when the president uses these term fake news for any story that he doesn't like it, and there have been some stories that have been very true and very important this year. >> lisa: here is the thing. the relationship between the press and the government is always going to be adversarial. that is what it is supposed to be like. it is not an issue of whether they should be covering him in a positive light, it is whether he should be covered in a fairy and factual way. there are things that have been truly factual, there are many, many cases where they have extremely damage their own credibility, which journalists have admitted, recognize, and have said we have a lot of work to do.

>> kennedy: i was talking with one writer who said i would love to see every administration held to this is standard. not just republicans, but democrats as well. so everyone is scrutinized in the same way. >> marie: are you concerned about the president's attacks on the press? i have always said that it is like the chicken in the egg. >> kennedy: it has nothing to do with the linear progression of one attacking the other. >> marie: are you concerned? >> kennedy: it benefits the president because he gets to completely neutralize unfavorable stories, it excites his base, and his most ardent supporters are extraordinarily distressful stomach distressful of them, and that helps the presence narrative. stephen colbert and "the new york times" are making more money because they are getting more attention. vanity fair with a mocking video, suggesting new years resolutions for hillary clinton.

>> disable auto fill on your iphone, so that it doesn't become "form exploratory committee" for 2020. >> marie: well, they are liberal audience enjoyed it about as much is having a root canal, and now, the media outlet is saying they are sorry. what it says about the left. liberty mutual saved us

almost $800 when we switched our auto and home insurance. with liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. >>hey. oh, that's my robe. >>is it? when you switch to liberty mutual, you could save $782 on auto and home insurance and still get great coverage for you and your family. call for a free quote today. you could save $782 when liberty stands with you. liberty mutual insurance.

your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if

you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.

>> kennedy: welcome back. you may remember this from from yesterday. it "vanity fair" now apologizin apologizing. they suggested new year's resolutions up. >> we all know that you think he cost you the election, and he may have, but so did a handful of other things. what's the hell happen? >> pick up a new hobby. literally anything that will keep you from running again.

>> kennedy: at the liberal audience was not happy. actress patricia arce had to getting in on the action, tweeting "stop telling women what's the expletive they shouldn't do or can't do. get over your mommy issues. thank you, dr. freud. another response. "this video was insulting. telling a woman what to do, specifically a woman of her accomplishments is a sexist and gross. enjoy the followed." "vanity fair" now says that it was an attempt at humor, and we regret that it missed the mark. katie, did it missed the mark? >> katie: no, it was perfect and hilarious. the worst part is that they are apologizing for it. spare me the drama. hillary clinton is the woman who was trying to be all grandmotherly during the campaign and it wasn't selling it stitched pillows. do you remember this? on her web site, and they were selling frame to art.

so you know, she has done this. >> kennedy: it maybe that is exactly what it was. aren't politicians rights stomach right before mockery, regardless of gender or political progress? a look "saturday night live" ." their ratings are way up. people make fun of politicians. it is a time-honored tradition. >> marie: not to get serious, i think that these women online were so upset. but it is like we have bigger problems to worry about. men are harassing people in every industry. we still don't get equal pay. we don't have good maternity leave. let's focus on on the real pros problems. women in saudi arabia can drive now. at age 35. let's focus on the real problems, ladies. and there are real problems. this is not one of them. >> charles: 's but it is really obnoxious to hear somebody like patricia arquette lecturing about it telling women what to do.

go back to 2016, one of many women across the country came out in support of donald trump. and the way in which they were vilified and harassed by people about supporting donald trump, i think it is kind of amusing her here. >> kennedy: and it felt to vote for hillary clinton for the sake. and that there is a special place in hell for people who don't support hillary clinton. >> kennedy: they must be pretty crowded there then. i think it is funny. embrace it. and i also think it is even more embarrassing that people were angry about this. so i am embarrassed for the other clinton supporters who were up in arms about this. have some humor. >> lisa: republicans or criticize all the time by "snl," and various late-night shows. sometimes it is funny, and sometimes it is not, but this time, this is funny. >> kennedy: exercise a little bit of self-awareness, because if you have younger staffers

begging hillary clinton not to run again, that's might tell you something about the future of the party. and she may not be a part of it, but she also doesn't have the grace to get off of the stage. maybe they are giving her this. >> katie: how long are you going to make this a sexist argument? i know men who knows. do they have any predictions for hillary clinton, or does she have any new year's resolutions? >> charles: i think she should run again. i think she is an excellent candidate. >> kennedy: law, charlie just donated to her super pac. >> lisa: we will have more "outnumbered" in just a minute. whoooo.

finding the best hotel price is now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches... ...over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the... ...hotelock it in. tripadvisor.

>> kennedy: thanks so much to charlie hurt. >> charles: thank you and happy new year. i'm going to florida to go

fishing. >> kennedy: that's a great place to watch an all-american new year on fox news channel. we are back at noon eastern tomorrow. guess what starts right now? "outnumbered overtime." take it away, julie banderas. ♪ >> julie: president trump is aiming for more legislative victories ahead of the midterm. the first weekend of the new year, laying out the 2018 g.o.p. agenda, welcome to "outnumbered overtime," i'm julie banderas in for harris faulkner today. president trump is eager to check my legislative achievements off of his list before the midterm. reports that he is going to host paul ryan and mitch mcconnell the first weekend in january so they can start plotting the 2018 legislative