>> funding for overheard with evan smith is provided in pprt by hillco partners, texas government affairs consultancy and its global health care consulting business unit, hillco health. and by the mattson mchale foundation in support of public television. and also by mfi foundation, improving the quality of life within oor community. and also by the alice kleberg reynolds foundation and viewers like you. thank you. >> smith: i'm evan smith. you know him from his columns and reporting in new york magazine, his regular appearances on msnbc's morning joe and other cable shows, and from his mega-best-selling book game change, co-written with mark halperin. the movie version will soon air on hbo - yes, he has a cameo - and with obama and the republicans back at it, he and halperin and hard at

-- are hard at work on their 2012 follow-up. can't wait. he's john heilemann. this is overheard. >> we have 15 million kids in our country who grow up below the poverty line. >> most americans want the same thing a good job. >> i realized there weren't a lot of people writing things in my voice, i realized that i had to do it myself. >> we are a better country than we used to be, we have more to do, we need to get at it. >> i would do that when i wanteddto get that buzz that you get for working at the [laughter] [ ♪ music playing ] >> smith: hi john, how are you? >> heilemann: i'm great, evan. you know, i'm thrilled to be here for all the obvious reasons, but most particularly i realize you actually, there's so many ways in which you have nothing in common with rick perry but, but there is one i now determined. >> smith: alright, i'm freaked out by this inn3 advance. [audience laughter] >> heilemann: as -- you know, it came to me at that moment that bill clinton referred to the governor as a good lookin' rascal. ú& smith: yeah. >> heilemann: and, you know, so are you. [audience laughter]

>> smith: you know, my wife doesn't even think i'm good looking. this is, you're, you're, you're throwing me off. >> heilemann: well, i'm putting most of the weight on the rascal part. >> smith: you sure are. [audience laughter] i've been called worse this morning, it's okay. so you, you were last siiting across from me on tv in march of 2010. and i wonder if you think that the script from barack obama from then until now has played out the way you expected. would you have predicted back then that if you fast forwarded a year and a half, obama would be in trouble? of being defeated in this reelection? >> heilemann: i guess i thought in the spring of last year that there were some that, that, he had some significant problems. i, i, i have, i was someone who had worries about the stimulus as hhving been something that it was clear to me had lost politically on the stimulus already. and that there was a pretty good argument that it had not been large enough to really mooe the needle on the macro economy. at that point he just, i guess, just passed healthcare reform.

and that was a victory of huge historic policy consequences for, for, for the democrat, for a very democratic president. and yet again it was not clear that it was going to be a political winner for him. >> uh-huh. >> heilemann: you looked ahead to the midterm elections and, and there was a fair degree of reason to be pessimistic and to think that republicans would do very well as they eventually did. >> smith: maybe even better than we even thought at that time. >> heilemann: and, and so the question then, i think -ou could look forward and say that the big question at that moment was what would obama do in the face of the most significant political setback he had ever had in his entire political career? this was a guy who unlike bill clinton, unlike ronald reagan had never really faced a major kick in the ass. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and the question was what would happen then? what i think would have been totally unpredictable is that his effort to try to pivot in the way that he did in the wake of that midterm &-tried to pivot in a very clinton-like way toward the center, towards compromise, towards conciliation, ttat it would fail as miserably

&-that, i think, was unpredictable and, and i, i am struck. now is quite dire. >> smith: but hasn't the situation with,,with the president's attempts to move to the middle really been like the old peanuts cartoon of lucy holding the football -nd charlie brown running expecting this time it's going to be different? >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: every time he tries to meet with the republicans, the realitt is the republicans don't have,,3 ii appears, even the slightest interest in ccmpromising with him. why hassit taken him this long to figure that out? >> heilemann: well, i, llok, first of all i think that, you know, this is something that i think has taken a lot of people a long time to figure out, which is that the, the difference between obama era is that the republican party has significantly changed. and it is, it is a much more, especially after the injection of the tea party members who came in in the midterm wave that got elected in november, it is a much morr hard line party. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: and i think, so i think a lot of the political class who take its lessons from history have thooght that compromise would be more fruitful.

at the same time, you know, i think obama is also someone who to a, to a really rare degree, is someone who really believes in compromise. not in a taatical or even strategic sense, but he believes that there is an inherent good in compromise. like he is a burkian, kind of onservative in a way. that, that actually, that actually there is something &-republic that comes through compromise in and of itself. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and so for him to, to abandon it is not just to make a tactical, have a tactical awarenees of what will work but also to kind of, to acknowledge that belief about how american government works and how it should work. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .is just not feasible in these, in these circumstances and this climate. >> smith: so yyu refer too3 ú&m as a conservative matter of factly. there's a lot of liberals in this country who have come to probably grudgingly accept that you're right.

>> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .i mean i, i, the burkian part is very important but. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .but yes. i, you know what, look, i was amazed throughout 2008 covering the campaign that so many progressives thought that they saw a fellow traveler in barack obama. there was nothing, i thooght, in anything innthe president's background or in the way he was campaigning. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .that suggested that he was a man of the left. he was very, very artful and very skillful at allowing himself to be a rorschach test in the 2008 campaign. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: you know, he was a man of the left in the sense that he had opposed the iraq war when hillary clinton had been in favor of the iraq war. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and that was enough for many progressives to latch onto him as the liberal alternative to her. but in almost every other -ay.ú >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .he wassa guy who was a, a guy who was talking very explicitly about how he wanted to overcome the polarization of the past 20 years in american politics. how he wanted to try to, i mean he didn't have a very good as it turned out, a turned out theory of how you were going to actually do

this. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: but he talked over and over again about how he was going to try to lessen the partisan tensions that is, those are not the words of a howard dean. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: those are not the words of someone who's a progressive partisan warrior. >> smith: right, but they are the words of george w. bush, 'i want to be a uniter, not a divider'. >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: they are the words of bill clinton. >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: .'we'll look for a third way'. >> heilemann: yes. for bush. >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: it didn't work out joo3 for clinton and it hasn't worked out for obama. shouldn't we just pronounce that whole let's unite the ú&untty thing dead? >> heilemann: well, it's -- i mean, it's such a, the people i thhnk are very reluctant to do that because i think most people,,even people who are at the extremes, look at the situation and say this is not productivee >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and, and certainly the great american middle looks, this is why so many people are so frustrated with washington. >> smith: turned off by3 politics, right. >> heilemann: .because the country is not as pollrized as our politics are. and that leads to aa a much deeper conversation than we probably have time for. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: but, but it certainly is the case that if you lookkat clinton, bush and now obama, each of them campaigninggin the way that you suggest and then each of

them turring out to be, and i'm not pinning fault on any of them in factt but each of them turning out to be more polarizing than their predecessor. i mean i never thought i'dd3 see a more polarizing president than bill clinton until i saw george w. bush. and i never thought. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .you'd see a more polarizing president than george w. bush and now barack obama has proven to be that. what it should, what it tells us is that this polarization is very, very deeply baked into the cake. anddthere are reasons for it. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .that are very hard to change, unless we can figure out a way to un-gerrymander districts in america. and figure out how, how to change our, our congressional districts so that we don't have all conservatives bunched up over here and all liberals bunched up over here. and where the way that we work. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .with primary systems encourages candidates to be more extreme rather than be more toward the middle. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: until you change that and in that way -hange the way that congress is constituted. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .it's going to be very hard to get rid of polarization and certainly rhetoric is not gging to solve the problem.

>> i complettly agree with you but i also want to bring up just before we get back to obama. >> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: .specifically, don't take ownership oo this problem ourselves. after all we, this middle that you talk about, voters who have the opportunity every two years or four years or six years to rehire people on the one hand or fire them on the other hand, they have the power to change this if they would only show up and engage and they don't. >> heilemann: as i say though there is , you know, it is a, it is a, it is a circumstance where a themselves with a situation &-they are in a, in a district that is aaliberal orrin a district that's a conservative district and there's not a moderate alternative. there's their incumbent and then there's the other3 party. and so it's hard. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .for a, a relatively centered deeocrat who has a relatively liberal representative to say well, in the interest of ending polarization, i'm going to vote for a republican who i don't share any, any views with and vice versa in the other, in the other instance, right? >> smith: right. assuming there's even a candidate who runs against the incumbent because one thing that's happened is

that the other party in those partisan districts &-i'm not going to even run. then, and then the only action is, is the action on, on, iffthere's a, if there's a primary is the action of somebody who ii trying to get either to the left of a liberal candidate oo to the right of a conservative candidate and so again it cycle. >> smith: this system is &->> heilemann: yeah [chuckles] you're absolutely right. >> smith: alright so let's, let's come baak to obama. >> heilemann: that'll be, that'll be the next thing after the texas tribune is, journalism, we will set you to work on electoral reform. >> smith: yeah, get, get right to work on that. -hat's fine. >> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: so let's go back to obama. so you said a fee minutes ago it's dire. >> heilemann: yeah. >> smmth: you think, you think he's going to lose? &->> smith: you're a betting man right now??3 >> heilemann: i think the nowwis, is around 40 or 41%. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: no one rate is going to move substantially down from under 9%. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: you have right now on the right traak, wrong track metrics across the country you've goo 70%3 of the country thinking that the country's on the wrong track. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: you know, if you're an incumbent who's running below, consistently below 50% you are in trouble. that is a standard metric

among politicals, among political prooessionals. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .and political scientists. to have your approval rating as low as his now, 41-42%, to have independents, two-thirds of independents against the president.i mean his approval rating with that group is ttrrible. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and now we're starting to see significant erosion, it's not massive but it's real. smith: it's something. >> heilemann: . erosion in the enthusiasm held for the pressdent by his base. and, youuknow, for the last two years people would say liberals are mad at obama and i'd say no. the left blogosphere is mad at obama. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: actual, the actual base, african-americans, hispanics, young voters, liberal voters, self identified liberal voters, they loved the president at historic leeels. that is now starting to. >> smith: would you go into that, every one of those subgroups.? >> heilemann: that, you're now starting to see erosion. >> smith::yeah. >> heilemann: and so i, i think his situation, it's very tough. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .you know, as, as you know most reelections for an incumbent president, they are referenda on the performance of that >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and then the, the thing that, that they

try to do, those, those presidents do is try to -hange that dynamic and try to turn the election into a choice. >> heilemann: and this is what george w. ush did in 2004. >> smith: with kerry. >> heilemann: .and, and you remember. i mean james carville at the time said that if george w. bush could win under the circumstances that he looked like he was heading into reelection with, it would be the, the, the political miracle of the centuryy >> smith: right. >> heilemann: they did that, and it was, people forget, it was in fact, in some waas a miracle. and. >> smith: and it was a very close election. >> heilemann: it was. >> smith: if 60,000 people in ohio went the otter way, john kerry was president. >> heilemann: would be ú&esident, right. >> smith: very close, very close election. >> heilemann: so let's not, you know, minimize how hard it is to turn a, a race in which there is an incumbent into a choice instead of it being a referendum. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: that's what the obama campaign will do and its major advantage in this is that, a, they are very skilled campaigners and, b, the president's going to have more money than god. >> smith: and, c, he will run against not a generic ccndidate named not obama. >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: .he's going to run against a specific republican. let me come back though. >> heilemaan: yeah. >> smith: .to the point you just made. george h.w. bush, poppy bush

was the last president o be a one term. >> heilemann: yeah, yeah. >> smith: before that, you have to go back pretty far to the next person who is a one-term president. it is, it is atypiial to say the least for aapresident to be defeated after a first term. to be so bad and the opponent has got to be so good. and let me come back around to that because regardless of what the circumstances for obama are, the republican field is probably obama's best hope for reelection at the moment. is it not? >> heilemann: well, yes, certainly. >> smith: at the moment. we don't know who the nominee is. >> heilemann: certainly. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and, and, and you know. look, he, the white house believes that whether the, the, the republican nominee is rick perry or mitt romney. i think at this point. >> smith: we accept it's going to be one or theú other. >> heilemann::.at this point it's, it's very, very likely. i can see a 1%, 2% chance that john huntsman somehow the field in, in the fall. i don't think that's going to happen. but let, let's just sayú thhre's a 97% chance that it'll be either mitt romney or john huntsman.

the white house believes3 that both of those candidates are in very different ways are profoundly flawed. and that -- and that against either one of them they will. &-again with the aid of a billion dollars and, aad this is something you can't. >> smith: underestimate. >> heilemann: .you can't underestimate. people. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: hat, what, what we will see. >> smith: and it'll be the most money by a long shot ever aised. >> heilemann: oh by, by, by, by, yes, by a long shot. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .on bbth sides. smith: right. >> heilemann: and, and the republican candidate will not raise as much money directly but will have outside groups. >> smith: and we'll have enough. >> heilemann: we'll have, oh yes, i mean i hink we'll probably almost have parity. if you, if you, if you include all the super pac money, all this outside money that. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .that affiliated groupp are able to run on the republican side, which will be where the action is on the republican side, you could see republicans spend as much money as the president spends, very close. and one, one thing i can tell you about that is that for anybody who continues to harbor some view of obama as being above politics, this campaign will, will disabuse them of that notion very quickly because. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .because the democratic race, this racee3 by, by definition and the way democrats prosecute this

race will be the most negative campaign in the history of american politics. &-the republican nominee is. >> heilemann: regardless of who the republican politician is. by what i mean by thht is most money, i mean, obama ran more negative ads in 2008 than any candidate in history. >> smith: weeforget that. that.ilemann: we forget the, this year it will be that times 10. and because their whole job will be turning this election into a choice and rendering the republican. >> smmth: right. >> heilemann: .so unacceptable that obama even -ith four years of very dismal performance on the economy and having lost the confidence of a lot of people in a variety of ways, that he will still, he will seem better than the republican after he's been reduced to rubble by. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .the $750 million in negative ads they run against them. >> smith: a, a year ago jonathan alter, who we bothú kkow, was the author of a book about obama's first year in office was here. and he said look, the failings of the obama administration really come down to communications at this point. there's an enormous amount that the obama team has achieved, the president's achieved in the first term.3 they're just not doing a very good job of talking about it.

can obama with a straight face put positive ads on this time? be able to put ads on i think about his vision for the future. >> smith: yep. ú& heilemann: he will not be able to put, i think, ads on that will tout his record. you know, i mean, i think beyond. >> smith: he's not going to brag about healthcare. >> heilemann: he's not going to brag about healthcare. >> smith: he's not going to brag about saving the car companies. >> heilemann: he's not going to brag, not going to brag about that except some targeted markets maybe in michigan. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: you know, not across the country because the bailout, the, the fact that that is considered in many parts of the country to have been a bailout is not popular, is not actually >> smith: right. >> heilemann: it's popular in ohio, it's popular in michigan. not popular necessarily across the country. he, he's not going o be able to brag about how he saved us from falling into a deeper depression because ú&r a lot of people, their attitude iss well, yeah, you had a tough hand but, youú know, it's four years later and the unemployment rate's still 9.1%. and one place where i think jonathan alter is right, and i think it's actually one of the most devastatinn things that they did wrong in terms of communications was at the timeewhen they came in, given how bad the, the state of the economy was, and

given what they are being economists about how slow the, the recovery, if there was going to be a recovery, how slow it would be. they were foolish at the beginning to try to talk up their degree of confidence about how much the things they were doing and how quickly the things they were doing would affect the economy..3 and so. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .things like talking about how afterrthe stimulus, they expected unemployment to be below 8%. just insane. the, the, the notion that they callee the summer of 2010 recovery summer that they touted that. >> smith: yeah. heilemann: .you know, what, looking back then. >> smith: it's like their version of mission accomplished, right, yeah. >> heilemann: .looking, yes, looking back on it, thee would have been much better, it's very hard to convince a political person of this kind of logic, but it ould have been much better for obama to constantly be talking at the beginning. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .about lowering expectations, talking about how hard this was goiig to be, how slow it was going to be. not raising anyone's sense that, hey, we're going to spend a bunch of money and everything's going to be fine. because as it turned out, they spent a bunch f money. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .and everything wasn't fine. >> smith: but the theory here had to have been nobody wants to elect president

buzz kill. i mean they wanted somebody who was going to be a positive. >> heilemann: yee. >> smith: .you know, project an affirmative view of things. >> heilemann: .but, but you would like to, and if you, if you had been willing to be a little more dour at the beginning you could have argued that that would have set the stage for being much more optimistic when it counted fouu years later. spending 2009 being more subdued, spend 2010 being more subdued and then hopefully as the economy started to inch upward you can turn. >> smith: be, be, be positive. >> heilemann: .towards morning in america. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .later on. now he's in a situation where, you know, it's going to be very hard, impossible. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .to argue morning in america. you don't need to see thh economy improve dramatically as, as reagan proved. because in fact the economy was not improvvng dramatically in 1984. >> smith: unemployment rate when reagan ran for election was not low, it was hiih. >> heilemann: it was very high. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: but it was dropping. >> smith: it was showing the sign of improving, right. >> heilemann: .a little bit every month. >> heilemann: .throughout 2000, throughout 1984. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: so you don't need dramatic improvement but you need the trend line to be in the right direction. >> smith: and unfortunately for the administration, they're going to have basically a, a, an unemployment rate that's essentially been unchanged.

>> flat. >> since the day that they took over, flat and much too high as a baseline. right, let me ask you very quickly characterize beforeewe talk about, i want to talk about tte game change movie. >> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: i want to talk ú&out you and halperin on the campaign trail thisú time. >> heilemann: yeah. give me the kind of haiku versions of romney and rick perry as the white house perceives them from the standpoint of the general election campaign? &-cerrainly i mean the, the headline here is the white house is much more concerned about mitt romney as a nominee. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .-han rick perry as a nominee for, for the simple following reasoo. i -- they believe that the most devastating and potentially successful line can really be encapsulated in almoss a haiku. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: and in fact romney uttered something close to it in thh debate a few weeks ago out. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .in california at the reagan library, where he said basically barack obama is a good man. he inherited a horrible economy.

he -- the badness of this economy was not his fault but he tried a lot of stuff. he tried things that cost a lot of money. they didn't worr. he's in over his head. it's try, it's time to try something new. >> uh-huh. >> heillmann: said in sorrow, not anger. and that -- that plays to the inhereet, the fact that most americans actually llke barack obama. they root for him. they wanted him to succeed. not angry, not hot, not he's a muslim, not he's a socialist, not any of those things. >> smith: right. &-know, he, he just doesn't understand this economy and he's had his chance and he so let's try sooething else. >> right. >> heilemann: that is an argument romney can make. and as i say he's sttrting to already make it. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: that the white house knows is the, the line of attack that they're most3 vulnerable to. doesn't even sound like attack, right? that's whh it works. they look at perry and they thee think, man, he is just too hot. the converse at this point, he's never going to be able to make that line, that line of argument against obama. he's going to be too hot. >> smith: but what did he saa to your partner mark halperin in time magazine?

>> heilemann: he's, he's a socialist. -> smith: he's a socialist. right, he double downed on the whole socialism. >> heilemann: double downed on the whole thing. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: and, and they think he will scare away swing voters in the suburbs that, yyu know, soccer moms innsuburban. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .philadelphia and suburban pittsburgh and, and, and outside cleveland. they will never vote for, for rick perry. that he's too texas, that he's too hot. that he alienates too many people. they think that the other thing that he does for them that they, that they are, that they're most, almost most concerned about is he drives democratic turnout >> right, yep. >> the white house assumes that republican turnout is going to be very high because republicans hate barack obama. there's just going to be a ton of republicans who come out to vote on november of 2012. >> smith: anger, anger as always being a better motivator for turnout than joy. >> heilemann: correct. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: so their concern is how do we getú democratic turnout to be sky high also? and they look at romney and think, you know, he might not be scary ennugh. >> smith: right. &-there's some democrats whh might just kind of like shrug and say, well, mitt romnny, he won't be so bad.

kind of a moderate republican, youuknow, all this conservative talk, we don't believe that anyway. he was the governor of massachusetts >> smith: right. >> heilemann: who was in favor of abortion rights and in favor of, of gay rights. >> smith: gay rights. >> heilemann: that's okay. for swing voters, that's okay. so maybe a lot of the democratic base is just not that enthused, and they're also kind of bummed out about obama so they just don't turn out. rick perry, you know, drives democratic turnout. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .through the roof. >> smith: if ooly he'd pick mel gibson as his running mate, it would be perfect. >> heilemann: yeah. [laughs] >> smith: right? i mean you could, you couldn't improve on it. >> heilemann: yes, and, and, you know, and they know they need -- especially they need the hispanic vote to turn out and to be -- tooturn out in large numbers. >> heilemann: and toobe really in obama's column. and they think that perry is vulnerable on issues around immigration. and that, and that hispaaics are going to be scared by rick perry. and so they're, they, they look at thhs, there's no question who they rather, who they would rather run with romney, they think. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .they, they know a lot about his record in massachusetts. it's, it's one of the low inside baseball things that, that we know that most people don't pay attention to is that, you know, david

plouffe ran deval patrick's campaign when he ran for governor successfully in massachusetts four years ago. know the oppo on mitt romney and they know romney's record as governor of massachusetts. they think it's very, very attack that. and they also look at romney's history at bain and say we can make him walll3 ú&reet..3 >> smith: right. he's the problem. >> heilemann: we can make, we can make him lloyd blankfein. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: he's, he's, this is not a guy who knows anything about job creation. what he knoos about is about dismembering companies. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: and, and that, those two pieces go to the, whht they think is the heart of romney's economic argument aaainst obama and they feel like he's much weaker on that than people know. and they will be ready to go after that. but as i say, there's no question who they would rather face between. >> smith: in the fall. >> heilemann: .between those two. >> smith: right.very &->> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: game change movie. >> heilemann: i tend to talk a lot, i'm sorry. >> smith: i love it. i wish we had an hour long show. ed harris is john mccain. >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: julianne moore is sarah palin. >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: woody harrelson is steve schmidt. >> heilemann: yes. >> smith: .mccain's consultant. who's playing obama?

>> heilemann: there's no barack obama. >> smith: he's not even in there? you didn't do will smith,,i mean.? >> heilemann: no, i think, they decided the, the guy jay roach, the director, and danny strong the screenwriter. they did, did the ilm for us. they mmde the decision that in a two hour movie, they needed a tellscope on something. and they were very attracted tooreally telling the sarah palin story. and so the movie is really about palin and mccain and the 60 ays between her selection as vice president. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .as the vicee3 president nominee on the republican side and the election day 2012. so there's no john edwards, there's no hillary clinton, there's no barack obama. i mean they appear. joe bbden appears in like news footage and, and stuff. but in terms of the actual, the, the action is really. >> smith: and, and the storylinee ú&'s really fooused on that. >> heilemann: the storyline is a very tight narrative and it's really about palin and mccain and steve schmidt the chief sttategist who. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: .was more responsible for ringing her onto the campaign than anyone and uutimately felt the most guilt and responsibility for having done that in the end. >> smith: what happened. >> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: when does she -tart attacking julianne ú&ore on facebook? >> heilemann: oh, i think probably before this show airs. >> smith: you think so? >> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: excellent. >> heilemann: but i got to

tell you, i've seen the film and the -- the actors are as good as you an imagine. people will be astonished. >> smith: yeah. >> heilemann: .by julianne moore's sarah paain. they'll be astonished by how great she is in it. she's just, she's fantastic. >> smith: can't wait. >> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: in one.15 seconds left. heilemann: yeah. >> smith: .the differenne in 2012 writing this book versus he last book is blank? >> heilemann: we're starting earlier. and, and so we're not going to have to go back and do a lot of reconstruction s we did last time. last time we started very late. >> smith: right. >> heilemann: this time we're starting at the ground in. so we've been hanging out with theee candidates for a long time now already. >> smith: but they're &->> heilemann: you know, if they are they're not showing it so far. >> smith: is that right? >> smith: okay.3 >> heilemann: we were, we thing.isguises, that's the >> smitt: okay. well, you -- [audieece laughter] i like that idea. you in a mask. >> heilemann: yeah. >> smith: come back and we'll, we'll talk about more stuff. >> heilemann: anytime. >> smith: okay, john heilemann. good to see you, buddy. thank you very much. [ applause ] [ ♪ music playing ]

>> funding for overheaad with evan smith is provided in part by hillco partners, texas government affairs consultancy and its global health care consulting business unit, hillco health. and by the mattson mchale foundation in support of3 publii television. and also by mfi foundation, improving the quality of life within our community. and also by the alice kleberg reynolds foundation and viewers like you. ttank you. oyoyoho(