this sunday, political realignment. democrats take back the house. >> taking our voice to washington. >> republicans hold the senate. >> tonight is a victory for the people of texas. >> and president trump gloats about republicans who shunned his support and lost. >> mia love gave me no love, and she lost. too bad. sorry about that, mia. >> democrats grabbed the suburbs, republicans tightened their hold on rural counties. what this realignment could mean for 2020. plus, president trump feeling emboldened and rattled lashes out, claiming with no evidence election fraud. >> all of a sudden they're finding votes out of nowhere. >> firing attorney general jeff

sessions and choosing an acting a.g. who has described how a sessions' replacement could kill the mueller investigation. >> he just reduces the budget so low the investigation grinds to a halt. >> already democrats are calling for matt whitaker to recuse himself. joining me this morning, the head of the republican campaign committee, senator cory gardner of colorado and democratic congressman adam schiff of the house intelligence committee. also a woman's place is in the house. a record 100 plus elected, most of them democrats. two are with us today. elissa slotkin of michigan and lauren underwood of illinois. and some two dozen people have now died in those california wildfires. we'll have an update. joining me for insight and analysis are matthew continetti, editor in chief of the washington free beacon, donna edwards, "new york times" columnist david brooks and eliana johnson, national political reporter for politico. welcome to sunday, it's "meet the press."

>> announcer: from nbc news in washington, the longest running show in television history, this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning on this veterans day. 100 years to the day that marked the end of world war i. in the first few hours of election night, it looked as if 2016 was repeating itself. democratic house victories were a mere trickle in the first couple of hours. republicans were winning big marquee races. we wondered whether democrats would have to wave their wave good-bye. five days later the election looks like what we expected. nationally democrats won 52% of the house vote to 46% for republicans. that 46% exactly matches president trump's popular vote total in 2016. his job approval rating in our final poll on sunday, 46%. which is likely to be it looks like the number in the exit poll itself. kudos to our pollsters. as of this hour, nbc news projects that democrats will win

231 seats in the house, plus or minus five. democrats should end up netting somewhere between 35 and 40 seats when all the votes are counted. we have 10 or 11 races still uncalled. in the senate republicans have netted two seats but arizona and florida are too close to call with florida headed for a recount and there's that mississippi runoff later this month. president trump reacted with concern and confidence. concern that house democrats can now block his agenda and use their newfound subpoena power to investigate russian election interference and see if he's profiting off the presidency. and confidence the senate will have his back on those issues and approve his judicial appointments. meanwhile mr. trump signalled he has no intention of slowing his assault on the mueller investigation, sacking immediately his attorney general jeff sessions within hours after the polls closed and choosing matt whitaker, who will oversee an investigation he's openly attacked. but it was the growing realization that democrats had won a sizeable victory on tuesday that seemed to have the president rattled.

>> whether they get a couple more house seats doesn't matter. it doesn't matter. >> president trump acting emboldened, but newly vulnerable is attacking the institutions which could hold him in check. claiming election fraud in florida without any evidence. >> and all of a sudden they're finding votes out of nowhere. >> do you have evidence of fraud? >> i don't know, you tell me. >> accusing arizona of electoral corruption and even asking whether it is time to call for a new election. mr. trump banned a cnn correspondent from the white house, while threatening to pull access from other reporters. >> there could be others also. when you're in the white house, this is a very sacred place to be. >> he also threatened house democrats, who made their biggest gains since the post-watergate elections of 1974 and will now wield subpoena power in investigations into his personal finances and contacts with russia. >> they can play that game, but we can play it better. because we have a thing called the united states senate. >> and he mocked republicans who

refused to embrace him. >> carlos curbelo. mike coffman. too bad, mike. mia love gave me no love. and she lost. >> most consequentially less than 24 hours after polls closed, mr. trump fired his attorney general, replacing jeff sessions with loyalist matt whitaker, lashing out at reporters who asked if he wants his new acting attorney general to rein in robert mueller's russia probe. >> what a stupid question that is. what a stupid question. >> the president denied his relationship with when it ak on. >> i don't know matt whitaker. >> but a month ago. >> i know matt whitaker. >> as a tv pundit, whitaker has said mr. mueller's investigation could be turning into a witch hunt and floated ways to weaken it. >> i see a scenario where jeff sessions is replaced with a recess appointment and that attorney general doesn't fire bob mueller but just reduces the

budget so low that his investigation grinds to almost a halt. >> well, mr. whitaker crosses the line the moment he accepts the job and doesn't recuse himself, and we know he's not going to recuse himself because the only reason he was appointed was to sabotage the investigation. >> president trump has continued to mold the republican party in his own image, and earned the gratitude of newly elected republican senators who ran like trump. >> i want to say a special thank you to the president. >> special tribute to our president. >> thank you, mr. president. >> on friday, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell made it clear he has no plans to bring a bill to protect robert mueller to the floor. >> it's not necessary. the mueller investigation is not under threat. >> joining me now is democratic congressman adam schiff of california, who will be the chairman of the house intelligence committee when the new congress is sworn in in january. before we get to the political news, we want to note the three terrible wildfires that are taking place in your home state, congressman. last night the death toll rose

to 25. 23 of those deaths are in the campfire that's in northern california north of sacramento. two more fires are burning north of los angeles. neither of the fires is under control. congressman schiff, i know this is not -- it's next to your congressional district but you and i were just talking and you said there's now some fires actually in your congressional district. what's the latest? >> obviously they're doing their best to try to control these fires, but this late in the fire season to have this kind of devastation, it just takes your breath away. people are losing their lives, losing loved ones, losing their homes, and our thoughts are with them as well as these incredibly brave responders. >> the president tweeted the following yesterday. there is no reason for these massive deadly and costly forest fires in california except that forest management is so poor. billions of dollars are given each year with so many lives lost all because of gross mismanagement of thor for's. remedy now, or no more fed payments. is that what this fire is about, mismanagement of the forests in california? >> no, it's not. there are a lot of root causes

about why the fire season has become so much worse over the years, but for the president at a time when people are facing utter disaster to be making a statement like this, making a threat like this, this just goes to show how little he understands the job he has. that he would be punitive at a time like this rather than coming to the defense of people facing the worst disaster of their lives. he's out there making these broad and false statements and threatening to remove funding from a state that's devastated right now. >> do you think it's a political thing because california is so blue? >> i do. i do. this is a president who more than any other is punitive. i think we saw that in the tax cut by taking away state and local tax deductions. that was aimed at the blue states. he is only the president, in his view, of those who voted for him. the rest he could care less. >> i want to ask you about a letter that you guys are releasing this morning. i mean the leadership of the house, the senate, key committee

chairs, you're a signer of this letter, asking the justice department's ethics office to carefully review the current acting attorney general matt whitaker's statements and comments and essentially trying to see if they are advising him to recuse and, if so, are they going to inform congress of that. what more can you tell me about this letter? >> well, it's signed boy all of our leadership, house and senate, myself included, to demand that we find out did they give an ethics opinion. has one been sought on recusal. it seems to me the facts for recusal are very strong here. this is someone who's made repeated and prejudicial comments against the investigation, it's someone who has made false statements about it, claiming that the russians really had no impact on our election. it's someone who has a relationship with one of the important witnesses in the investigation. and i want to say this, if mr. whitaker does not recuse himself -- >> he's not legally required to, even if the ethics office says he should, correct?

>> i don't know whether he's legally required to. but here's the thing. we have every right to expect all of the employees of the justice department to follow the ethics rules and that means especially the attorney general. but, you know, i want to make this very clear, if he doesn't recuse himself, if he has any involvement whatsoever in this russia probe, we are going to find out whether he made commitments to the president about the probe, whether he is serving as a back channel to the president or his lawyers about the probe, whether he's doing anything to interfere with the probe. mr. whitaker needs to understand that he will be called to answer and any role that he plays will be exposed to the public. we don't want there to be any ambiguity about that. >> are you convinced that he's constitutionally eligible to hold the position? >> i'm not convinced at all. there are serious constitutional arguments that as a principal officer he cannot be appointed to this position. i think that's certainly the right policy answer, it also may be the answer demanded by the constitution. >> i'm curious what you thought of voter reaction to the mueller

probe. our exit poll, we asked about their feelings on the mueller investigation. 46% disapprove. that is a very familiar number to our viewers, 46% is the president's job rating. the number of the republican vote. so i think we know what that core vote is. but only 41% approved of the mueller investigation. does political opinion -- how much should it impact what you do in the democratic congress these days? >> well, public opinion always affects us in one degree or another, but i will say this having watched mueller's ratings over time. the one thing that we see is around the time he produces indictments, around the time that he produces convictions, the support for his investigation goes up. the longer the lapse between indictments, the more his ratings go down. so what we're seeing now, i think, is merely the lull, because in the period leading up to the midterms, he properly took no action. but i think when he issues his report or if there are further indictments, you will see public

confidence in his work once again rise. >> there is -- i know you probably want to get the house intelligence committee's investigation back on track after your -- after the uneasy relationship between you and who will now be the ranking member devin nunes, but i've heard a lot of investigations democrats want to do. you talked about in another interview that's going to air tonight about investigating what was the president doing with amazon and the postal service. the incoming house judiciary committee chairman was caught on the acela talking about how to investigate the kavanaugh issue. obviously the mueller probe is going to be a part of this. how do you prioritize what to investigate? and at what point do you do too much investigating? >> well, this is going to be very important, not just in terms of which investigations ought to go forward, which ought to go forward first, but also our strongest purpose here is to put forward a positive agenda. we don't want that lost in a flurry of investigations.

>> you are worried there's so much talk about investigations, that actually the idea of dealing with pre-existing conditions is getting lost? >> we have to make sure it doesn't get lost. you know, that's really the first priority for us, it's the reason people voted to put us in the majority to put forward a positive agenda. let's face it, the investigations are sexy, they're interesting, you bring witnesses and people tune in. the legislative process is less so. it's much less dramatic. but nonetheless in terms of importance to the american people, making sure that they can provide for their families, that they can get health care, they can keep their health care, that has to be priority number one. but we are going to need to ruthlessly prioritize on the intel committee which investigative threads we go down, but among the committees also, and we've already started that process. >> two quick questions. first, the khashoggi tape that erdogan has said -- the turkish president said that the united states has a copy of it. you are part of that gang of eight. is that true? if so, have you heard it?

>> we're going to get a briefing -- i'm going to get a briefing this week, so i fully expect to find out. i did have a briefing up until -- and got information up until recently, but i don't know the answer to that. i'm not sure if i did, whether i'd be able to share it with you anyway. >> i want to share with you, final number from our exit poll was the favorable rating of nancy pelosi, 36% favorable, 56% unfavorable. it looks like she has the votes for speaker of the house. what do you say to the new members who campaigned on new leadership, campaigned on a new generation of leadership? if the democrats re-elect pelosi, hoyer and clyburn as the face of the house democratic leadership. >> we're going to have a lot of new people in the leadership. they may not be in the top positions, but we're going to have new leadership in the caucus. we've got a great breadth of talent coming up through the ranks. but i will say this, we're going into a fight likely with the president. i certainly hope that this president decides that it's in

his naked personal self-interest, because that's the only thing that motivates him, to work with democrats on an infrastructure bill, on bringing down prescription drug prices, but if he decides it isn't, if he continues along this path where all he wants to do is rile his base. >> and run against nancy pelosi. >> and run against nancy pelosi, we need the strongest general we have, the best tactician, the best organizer. >> and you believe that's her? >> that's her. there's no one else honest 3 comes close. >> adam schiff, who will be the new chairman of the house intelligence committee, thanks for coming on and sharing your views. >> good to see you. joining me now, senator cory gardner, the man who is in charge or till in charge of trying to get republicans elected to the senate. i say still in charge because we have some outcomes that we don't know. welcome to "meet the press," sir. >> thanks for having me, chuck. >> let me just start quickly with the president's comments about the wildfires. number one, i was curious what

you made of the appropriateness of the president threatening to deny federal help to california in the moment that people were fighting for their life? >> well, first of all, i think the colorado thoughts and prayers of our state go out to california. we've been through this, certainly the catastrophes that we face each and every day we have a forest fire, what they're going through. it's tragic and terrible. i don't think it's appropriate to threaten funding. that's not going to happen. funding will be available. it always is available to our people wherever they are, whatever disaster they are facing. i do think, though, this year we came up with a strong bipartisan success in fixing the wildfire funding issue that had paralyzed our ability to go out and fight fires and suppress fires and mitigate next year's forest fires. one of the great bipartisan accomplishments of this past congress was in the area of forest fires and finding a solution for funding. >> let me move to your job these days, which is at the nrsc. the florida recounts, i want to

play something that governor scott said on thursday night when it was clear that we were headed into some form of a recount down in florida. here it is. >> every floridian should be concerned there may be rampant fraud happening in palm beach and broward counties. we've all seen the incompetence in broward county for years. here we go again. i will not sit idly by while unethical liberals try to steal this election from the great people of florida. >> do you have any evidence that fraud was committed, that somehow unethical liberals are down there trying to change the vote in broward county? was that rhetoric? was that an appropriate timing for that rhetoric? >> well, we have evidence that the state constitution of florida was violated. a court in florida has said that. we have evidence that people were going into unwitnessed areas filling out ballots, duplicating ballots, which is allowed under the law but only if you have witnesses in the canvassing board.

we have officials, elections officials who are disobeying court orders, at least were disobeying court orders so i understand governor scott's frustration that there are people who are breaking thelaw, violating the constitution in florida in broward county and palm. so i think he's right to be upset. now, what we have to do, though, is make sure that we are protecting the integrity of this election, that we count every vote, that we count every ballot, that we make sure that the integrity of this election is as strong as it can be and that we keep out those attempts by some to violate the constitution and where we have those -- >> do you believe democrats are actually trying to steal the election in florida? because that's what the president has implied in his tweets and that seemed to be the implication of governor scott. >> well, let's look at the courts in florida. you have a court in florida that has said the constitution of florida has been violated. you have several -- >> i understand that -- >> there are several cases and i feel very strong about that. >> but there's no evidence that

they're trying to steal this. >> is this a democrat that's doing this that violated the constitution or is this a republican that violated the constitution? i'm going to leave it to the courts to decide how we best protect the integrity of this election. but i think every person in florida and around this country has an interest and a right to a secure integrity filled election. and if somebody is violating the constitution, that's got to stop and that's what we're trying to do. let's get the results the florida people actually went to the ballot on. let's make sure counties across florida have the same standards, that a vote in miami is treated the same as a vote in pensacola. if they're not, something is wrong with that process so let's get this fixed, let's make sure this is right and make sure that we are proud of the results going forward in florida. >> if a recount shows anything other than a rick scott victory but there's no -- you can't find any evidence of fraud or anything else, but the recount happens to show bill nelson winning and it's done on the up and up, are you going to accept those results? >> well, look, this is going to be done on the up and up because we're ensuring that.

we've gone to court and won those court cases. we've proven that the violation -- we've proven the violation of the florida constitution. i think that has shown the courts have worked. so i believe this will be an election that we can be proud of, an election that we were able to protect the voters in. >> i'm going to ask you about the arizona senate race. that counti is still coming in. the president has tweeted about it, implying that fraud could still be going on. arizona obviously has a lot of history of taking a while to count. i want to ask you about this. top officials at the white house and the republican national committee, this is in politico, who have been prodding the mcsally campaign to amp up its efforts of expressed frustration that the arizona congresswoman hasn't tried to drive a message that there's something amiss with the vote count. do you believe there's something amiss with the vote count in arizona or not? >> we're still looking at hundreds of thousands of votes to be counted in arizona. it's a little bit different than what we've seen in florida, whether it's incompetence or corruption, they're the same side of the ledger. what we've seen in arizona is a

concern that every ballot -- every county be treated equally in how they deal with elections and signatures. and i believe we've come to an agreement in arizona where however they're treating a ballot in maricopa, signature verification or otherwise, is the same way they're treating it in yuma or wherever else in arizona. you can't have two different standards on determining what is a valid or legal vote. you can't do that because that's not fair. so i think we're on the right track in arizona. we need to make sure that we do this. but there is no way, there is no way that an election official in arizona should be allowed to treat their votes differently, more specially than any other area of the state. >> there was a staffer of yours at the nrsc who was quoted as saying that an official in maricopa county was, quote unquote, trying to cook the books. it inspired this tweet from mark salter, the chief of staff for the late senator john mccain. stop doing this, nrsc. mcsally is losing fair and square and underperforming in more than maricopa.

the race is almost certainly lost and nothing will change that. all this does is poison our politics more. despicable. what do you say to mr. salter? >> i think we do have a chance to win in florida -- in arizona. i do think there is a path. we've seen it in the numbers. but i do think it's important that we protect the people of arizona. we can't sit by and allow votes to be counted in maricopa that would not be counted somewhere else. >> i understand that. but did you approve of your staffer saying things like cook the books? it does -- by throwing that language in there, as you know, it automatically polarizes the two sides. the minute this language gets used. >> look, there's a lot of releases that go out that i don't see and i'm not familiar with this one. what i do think is important and it's not the first time somebody has been accused of cooking the books or rigging the outcome of an election. i think that's the last two years have been about by democrats trying to go after president trump on that as well. so what i think we have to do and what we've proven in the court in arizona -- excuse me,

the agreements we've come to in arizona is a way to treat voters equally across the state. this is about making sure that the votes are counted and the votes are counted fairly. and that's what i think we're getting to in arizona finally. >> finally, last question very quickly, the mueller probe, jeff flake and chris coons said when they come back from the lame duck they're going to get for unanimous consent to get this bill voted on. do you think it's necessary? do you think mueller needs protection? mitch mcconnell does not. what say you, cory gardner? >> i support the mueller investigation. i know i've heard senator mcconnell say he supports the mueller investigation. it's important for the american people. it's important we have this for transparency and i think it's important for the president to have this information out there fully, transparently and accurately. the president has said he wants to keep this investigation moving forward and i believe that's the way it will go. >> does it need protection legislatively, though? do you need to do that in the senate? >> mueller is not going to be stopped. it's going to continue and it should continue. >> all right, but you didn't say whether it was necessary in the

senate? >> well, i think it's going to continue. if it continues -- >> you don't need -- >> why do something if it's actually continuing. >> okay. i will leave it there. senator cory gardner, thanks for coming on. when we come back, is president trump trying to derail the mueller investigation by the mueller investigation by naming matthew whitaker

this is a tomato you can track from farm, to pot, to jar, to table. and serve with confidence that it's safe. this is a diamond you can follow from mine to finger, and trust it never fell into the wrong hands. ♪ ♪ this is a shipment transferred two hundred times, transparently tracked from port to port. this is the ibm blockchain, built for smarter business. built to run on the ibm cloud. this is the ibm blockchain, built for smarter business. and the car has become anis now accessory to the smartphone. ride hailing, car sharing, carpooling...

...mobility services are proliferating. and there's a new generation who don't seem to want to own cars in the first place. it all means massive disruption to the car industry, cities, businesses and investors. ♪ ♪ welcome back. panel is here. matthew r matthew, former democratic congressman. david brooks, welcome. happy sunday after the midterms. david, i want to ask this, did the mid determines change anything, let me put up these numbers here. 46% was the president's popular vote total in 2016. 46% was the house vote for the republicans in 2018. and 45% and then perhaps gets reweighted to 46% will be the president's job rating.

i think i sense a pattern here, but i guess, did the midterms change anything. >> they entrenched things. we've got a big wall. a big barricade around the 46%. that's his base. they come out for him. i don't see anyone leaving him. this election wasn't a realigning election. it was an endrentrenching. the thing that leapt out is his people did show up. that tells me the working class is still hurting despite the economy. the second thing. the new democrats, there's always a spin debate whether the progressive really well or the new democrats more moderate. more moderate have a very good story to tell this year. flipped 23 red seats with people embraced by the moderate democrats. there is some moderation still in america. it's a lot of republicans who used to be orthodox republicans who are now moderate democrats. >> midterm loss is typically humble a sitting president of the united states. donald trump is beyond humbling.

a high stakes come b s comeback. he will be at the center of it all. >> what we have seen from the president over the past two years, questions of whether he would become presidential in the job. we've seen he's a skilled communicator, but he doesn't have a lot of range or ability to switch gears. what we get from him is a number of meditations on american carnage whether it's on immigration or post midterms, democrats stealing the vote in places where he lost. and that's what we're going to get for the two years from here until 2020 and as david mentioned, that does get the base out, but it doesn't expand the elect trorate. now can they put a candidate up going forward that expands theirs and eats into the obama trump voters who turn out for the president and are proving extremely loyal to him. who he is very skilled at communicating with.

>> was this a referendum on the president. >> i think it was a rebuke of the president. i think we began the week on election night with a modest, but significant victory for democrats. by the end of the week, it had really crested into a blue wave. and where i look at promises for the democrats going forward is in states like michigan and pennsylvania and wisconsin, that we're really significant victories in southern virginia. and to me says where the democrats need to place their eggs in the 2020 basket. >> what you make of the president, it did seem as if he moved faster on jeff sessions than jeff sessions was prepared for to the point sessions made it clear, i was asked for this resignation, which is washington speak for you need to call it a firing. >> we've seen this with donald trump since he descended down that escalator three years ago when he was hit with the setback. immediately pivots and create as through controversy where he may have a more solid ground. so have things changed, of course they've changed.

the democrats are going to be in charge of the united states house of representatives. that is a big deal. we've seen with chairman shift there will be investigations. the chance for conservative legislation. not that there is much passing this year anyway, but the chance going forward is greatly diminished. was there a referendum on trump. yes, what we've seen again, and, again, i think, really since 1994 is that these med term elections are referendums on the president. typically the voters don't like what's happening, whether that president is a democrat or republican. >> matt whittaker, david brooks, what do we make of him? the arguments that he's even constitutionally is even a constitution appointment. >> i think one of the -- i went to 23 states this election and heard the word unraveling over and over again. are we racially together? are we economically together. are we morally together. are our institutions together.

donald trump threatens the institution by personalizing power. you don't serve the constitution, you serve donald trump. he wants people to serve him. that's not how the attorney general's office is supposed to act. it's a threat to one of our institutions and another one is the way with bark at the reves on the elections. and when you accuse somebody of corruption without any evidence, you're destroy the social fabric to some degree. we've seen a lot of that this week. we're seeing the decay. >> what do you make of that? >> i agree with david. i mean, i think that you know the president has gone after one institution after the other and you see that in this call of corruption in these elections, not to allow an election to be settled. and what i see is a president who really does feel that he's under threat and so if you look at his response by both firing sessions and appointing whittaker who is, you know, made himself known to the president so that he can take advantage of that, and then you look at

democrats response, i think it's going to be important to be really judicious about how they proceed. >> the whittaker appointment to me was reminiscent of the administration's policy on child separation where it was something that the president thought about and wanted to do, put in an acting attorney general who could sit there for 210 days and who was skeptical of the mueller probe and yet you see the president skeptical of it and backing away because he didn't anticipate the blow back that he would get from democrats and republicans alike and it really i think revealed how even the best laid plans of this administration aren't so well thought through in that his statements hadn't been reviewed by the white house and tend to backfire and then you have a president who abandoning them very quickly. >> what do you make of that. >> almost any attorney general who succeeds sessions is going to have a critical view of the mueller probe. most republicans now have a critical view of the mueller

probe chblt there probe. >> there's two sets of criticism of whittaker. is the appointment even constitutional. those are pretty at least disputed and probably weak. the more substantive criticism is he qualified for the jochblt you just look at the resume, he's one of our lesser qualified attorney generals. so that i think is a problem for the president. and that he has to come up with someone to replace whittaker and emphasize the temporary on the temporary appointment. >> seems like some of the candidates are pulling out. they want to wait to see what mueller does. you're coming in front of congress with whatever action you do anyway. >> 2018 was indeed turned out to be the year of the woman. when we come back, two democrats who helped make that goal a reality. ♪ traders -- they're always looking for advantages. the smart ones look to fidelity to find them. we give you research and data-visualization tools to help identify potential opportunities.

so, you can do it this way... or get everything you need to help capture investment ideas and make smarter trading decisions with fidelity for just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade. fidelity. open an account today. ♪ open an account today. who transition out of the u.s. formilitary every year...ers ...one of the toughest parts is the search for a job that takes advantage of the skills you've gained while serving. you can now search with the phrase 'jobs for veterans' directly on google... ...and then enter your military occupational specialty code. google brings together job openings from across the web that match the skills you gained in your military role. just click to apply and use your experience to guide your future. that skills like teamwork, attention to detail, and customer service are critical to business success. the kind of skills, that work for you.

winning audience awards greeacross the country.ovie terrific. there's no better way to spend the holidays than with viggo mortensen and mahershala ali. they're so good, you'll wish the movie would never end. oh that was a good time.

welcome back. move over, 1992, 2018 is the real year of the woman. more than 100 women, including incumbents, were elected to the house on tuesday. in fact, democrats got the 23 seats they needed to win back the house with just women candidates alone. the "new yorker" is mosarking ts with a cover called "welcome to

congress." two of the men who toppled republicans and helped power democrats to victory in the house are with me this morning. lauren underwood, whose district is just outside of chicago, and elissa slotkin who represents a michigan district that stretches from suburban detroit to the state's capital, lansing. welcome to "meet the press" to both of you. >> thank you so much. >> congresswoman-elect slotkin, let me start with you. would you call your victory a referendum on the president? >> no. i think honestly we were able to amass support from democrats, republicans, independents because the overall tenor and tone of politics i think is fundamentally unbecoming of the country. so the president, leadership climate is set from the top so he's certainly a part of it, but it was an overall feeling that washington was broken and integrity had been evaporated from the system. so it wasn't just the president. he was a part of it. >> what about in your district, how much did the president matter in your district? >> well, the president is certainly a factor, but in the illinois 14th district we had

not been well represented. we had a congressman who was not carrying forward our health, voted to raise our taxes, refused to act in the face of escalating gun violence in our country. in our district, it was very clearly about representation and did we have what we deserved. >> it's i'm sure hard to think about the fact that you have to immediately think about re-election, but let me ask you both this question and i'll start with you congresswoman-elect underwood. what is the one accomplishment you have to have if you seek re-election two years from now? >> protect health care for people with pre-existing conditions. it is the most critical issue -- >> is that a promise that you made? >> absolutely. >> how do you think that's going to get done? >> it's going to get done immediately because we can protect the affordable care act, fix it, stabilize premium prices, lower drug prices, but this idea that somehow people with pre-existing conditions might be vulnerable is something that i would never support. >> other than health care, i imagine pre-existing conditions was huge in your district too.

frankly it was the number one advertised subject. is there another accomplishment you have to have besides that in order to earn re-election? >> we have to move on infrastructure and not just talk about it but actually put money behind it. in michigan we need once in a generation investment in infrastructure. our roads but our water. i live 15 minutes from flint, michigan. we have a water issue going on in our state, so we have -- that's a place i think we have real bipartisan opportunity. people have talked the talk and now we need to walk the walk with real federal dollars. >> neither one of you brought up investigations of the president. how do your constituents, how do they view these potential wrongdoings by the president? how often did it come up? how much do you think congress should focus on this? >> protecting democracy is critically importance. article 1 the congress is a co-equal branch of government so oversight is critically important. the congressional republicans essentially refused to do so. so i think that there's certainly an interest to make sure that our critical pillars of democracy like free and fair elections can occur but that

it's not our primary and chief priority. >> you heard congressman schiff, he admitted, yes, there's all these investigations and they can't cloud the big picture on substance. how concerned are you that it might? >> i mean we have to watch it. if we can't as democrats, as elected officials, provide for people and help their pocketbook or their kids, we do not deserve their vote. so we can walk and chew gum, right? we can protect american values and hold accountability for the executive branch, but if we can't do things on health care and infrastructure, we're going to lose people, especially in the midwest. >> let me talk about the leadership of your party. the rnc had a snarky release and you're both in it in different categories. the rnc put you, congresswoman-elect slotkin, in the i promise to oppose pelosi and/or support someone new caucus and congresswoman-elect underwood, you were in the i'm going to avoid the question because of how deeply unpopular pelosi is in my district. a little snarky. congresswoman-elect slotkin, is

there any way under any circumstance that you can imagine supporting nancy pelosi as leader? >> i never want to be disrespectful to anyone who's served, especially a woman whose broken glass ceilings, but in my district they want on both sides of the aisle a new generation of leadership. so that's what i've said, that's what i'm sticking by. we have a long time now until we have to make this decision in washington hours and days, and so i'm going to wait to see who else emerges and make my decision. >> congresswoman-elect underwood, where are you on this? >> i think we have taunt opport to support a leader that will allow us to jump start our economy, maintain public schools, et cetera. i'm interested in supporting someone who is aligned on that type of agenda and look forward to having conversations with whichever candidates end up running. >> you're still open to supporting nancy pelosi as speaker, it sounds like? >> i'm looking forward to having conversation with her and whoever else is on the ballot for speaker.

>> how will you sell your constituents, congresswoman slotkin, if it's the top three as far as your constituents are concerned? >> i'll work with whoever is speaker ander who is the er whw. amazing as it sounds, americans can disagree and still respect each other and go on and do good work, so that's what we're going to do. >> who is the leader of the democratic party, if someone asked you that right now, congresswoman-elect underwood? >> that's a good question. what's been really wonderful in this election is that each congressional candidate was able to set the tone and agenda for their race. and so i don't know that we have a national leader, and i think that that's just fine. >> are you in the same position? >> i'm in the same boat. i think the lesson of this election is you've got to run your race for your district. there is no mega message that's going to win things across the board. we have new energy in our party, which is great, but it's diverse. >> elissa slotkin, new democrat

from there, lauren underwood, new democrat, welcome to both of you. >> thanks, chuck. coming up, we can debate whether tuesday was a wave whether tuesday was a wave election, bu (nicki palmer) being a verizon engineer is about doing things right. and there's no shortcut to the right way. so when we roll out the nation's first 5g network, it'll be because we were the first to install millions of miles of fiber optics. and we'll be the first to upgrade the towers and put up the small cells that will power the smart cities of the future. when i started at verizon, i knew i was joining a team that was pushing the industry forward. now, with the launch of the only 5g ultra wideband network, we're doing it again. this time, changing the way we learn, work and live. and i'll always be proud that we're not just building america's first 5g network.

we're doing it right. kevin, meet yourkeviner. kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin trusted advice for life. kevin, how's your mom? life well planned. see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ comfort. what we deliver by delivering.

welcome back. data download time. following tuesday's elections i feel more certain than ever that we are undergoing a massive realign naement in american politics. trends we've seen over the past decade in urban areas, democratic gains in suburbs and cities are starting to move south. the sun belt is the new balg battleground. let's start in ft. worth, texas, tarrant county, where ted cruz won by 16 points pack in 2012. in 2016 hillary clinton was able to cut that republican margin in half. donald trump only won tarrant by 8. this year, the move to the left continued. beto o'rourke won tarrant county by 1 point. now, this trend was already under way before president trump came on the scene, but there's evidence that his toxicity in the suburbs has helped accelerate the twend. let's move to gwinnett county, georgia. nathan diehl won by 12 points in 2014. hillary clinton swung the county

democratic in '16 and won it by 6. this year democratic stacey abrams extended that advantage winning the county by a whopping 14 points, double digits. that county is blue, not purple anymore. by the way, this was one of the counties in the atlanta suburbs that once helped newt gingrich remake the republican majority back in the '80s and '90s. wow, is it looking blue today. and of course there's florida. in his 2014 race for governor rick scott won seminole county by 7 points. in 2016 donald trump lost a little ground there. he only won the county by 2. this year andrew gillum flipped the county blue when he narrowly won it by 2 points himself. the gop did tighten its grip on rural, white areas which led to big statewide victories across the country, think ohio, for instance. but politics seems to be catching up with geography in the sun bet. it's possible republicans hung on to some of these areas for longer than they should have because in 2014 and '16 democrats weren't fully engaged

in the sun belt. these combined with wins in suburban house seats show democrats growing power in these areas. the question is, is this the peak or is there more to come? do these blue dots become blobs that expand? stay tuned in 2020. we're back in a moment with end game. what "animal house" has to do with this year's midterm elections. coming up, end game, brought to you by boeing, continuing our mission to connect, protect, explore and inspire. fact is, every insurance company hopes you drive safely. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?

but before you do that, you should meet our newest team member, tecky. i'm tecky. i can do it all. go ahead, ask it a question. tecky, can you offer low costs and award-winning wealth management with a satisfaction guarantee, like schwab? sorry. tecky can't do that. schwabbb! calling schwab. we don't have a satisfaction guarantee, but we do have tecky! i'm tecky. i ca... are you getting low costs and award-winning wealth management? if not, talk to schwab. and award-winning wealth management? this is not a screensaver.game. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life.

♪ ♪

>> announcer: end game brought to you by boeing, continuing our mission to connect, protect, explore and inspire. back now with end game and time to channel some john belushi from "animal house." >> over? did you say over? nothing is over until we decide it is! >> all right. there are some races we haven't decided are over. in the senate florida remains too close to call and is headed for a recount, possibly a manual recount with republican governor rick scott holding a narrow lead over bill nelson. a scott win would be a republican pickup there. arizona is also a nail-biter. kyrsten sinema's lead has grown to 30,000 with roughly 300,000 votes to be counted. that could end up being a democratic pickup.

governor's races we're headed for another florida recount. ron desantis has a narrow lead over andrew gillum. yesterday andrew gillum rescinded his concession. it's going to a machine recount. we'll see if it falls into the threshold for hand recount. and brian kemp has a narrow lead over stacey abrams. that could go to a recount to see if it needs to go t a runoff. in the house, 11 races have yet to be called. the democrat leads in six of those contests, the republican in five. that's why our protection is plus or minus five at 231. okay. let me start with florida and rick scott and bill nelson already with a war of words. take a listen. >> it's clear, we've got some left-wing activists, we've got some democrat d.c. lawyers, they're down here for one purpose, to steal this election. >> clearly rick scott is trying to stop all the votes from being counted, and he's impeding the democratic process. >> is this the end of 2018 or the beginning of 2020? >> you know, there are a couple

of races that are genuinely close. the florida senate race is one of them, the arizona senate race is another, but i do think that the candidates, the other candidates, like in the florida governor's race, where gillum retracted his concession, i'm not sure if that's happened before, and the georgia -- >> al gore famously did. yes. >> and in the georgia governor's race, there is -- these candidates are looking ahead and they see digging in their heels in these races as a way to sort of amplify their celebrity. popularize themselves with their base, because i don't think the democrats will be able to pull ahead, but they are ginning up enthusiasm with their base by refusing to concede. >> donna, how important is it that democrats fight to the end on these? >> i think it's really important. let's look what democrats are asking, they're asking for all the votes to be counted. before you get to a question of recount or runoff, count all the votes. that's the case in georgia and

definitely in florida as well. you know, these races are different because in georgia, the question is can stacey abrams get to a point where there's a runoff then in early december. that's a completely different question than what happens in the recounts in florida. this is really important because democrats across the country want us to fight for every vote. >> i want to do big picture here. the national house vote is 52-46 and extrapolated it out as if it were electoral map. here's our what-if map, david and matthew here, and democrats picked up four states if you believe the house vote there. pennsylvania, wisconsin, michigan and iowa. florida we put if you give them to the republicans, democrats would need it, 284. what's interesting is democrats could get to 284 without florida or ohio if the states come back to them. >> i talked about the entrenching. the democratic entrenchment is bigger now and seems to be

permanently bigger. the question to me is do they have an agenda for the future. running on pre-existing conditions is not exactly a vision for the future. do they have an affirmative vision on how a diverse country should work, how work should work, how moral integrity should be reintroduced. these are the big issues happening in countries all around the world. democrats have been running on a very small set of issues. may be excusable for the midterm, not going forward. >> has the battleground shrunk or expanded? it feels like colorado, nevada feel bluer today than they did yesterday. ohio feels a little redder today than it did yesterday. >> and the election is two years aw away. >> two years, please. >> when you look back and see are midterms dispositive for the subsequent presidential? the answer is no. do republicans have work to do? yes, because the terrain in terms of people has shifted. independents, they narrowly backed trump two years ago, now they're for democrats big time. you look at the suburbs. again, republicans competitive there two years ago, they are going toward the democrats big

time. white women, narrowly backed trump two years ago. going to the democrats this time. if trump and the republicans want to have a successful re-election in 2020, they need to get those groups back. >> any evidence that he knows how to appeal to those groups, though? >> i go back to my comment earlier, which is that trump has not shown that he has an ability to -- he has no range as a politician or an ability to shift gears. i think with him the single gear is what you get, and it may have worked in 2016, but i think it all depends on who the democrats put up in 2020. trump was very lucky in 2016 the democrats put up a uniquely unlikable candidate and 2016 was about who voters disliked more. we don't know if 2020 will be the same. it could. the democratic primary will be very interesting. but if trump will get lucky again, i'm not sure. >> donna, what did you take away from the fact that the moderate centrist democrats lost by bigger margins in places like indiana, missouri, and north dakota, but the progressive

democrats got awfully close in places like texas, georgia, and of course there's florida? >> they did, and i think what i take from that is that there is a strong democratic message. i think we spend a lot of time around these tables in this last election saying democrats didn't have a message. turns out they actually did running in each one of these congressional districts, running to the districts and if democrats do the right thing legislatively, that is going to lead to success in 2020. >> thank you very much. that's all we have for today. thank you for watching. perhaps you're watching at the 11th hour of the 11th day of this 11th month. enjoy your veterans day weekend. be sure to thank a veteran if you know one or love one, and of course we'll be back next week, because if it's sunday, it's "meet the press."

welcome to the "u.s. bank nbc sports report." >> hi, everybody. carlin manno from our nbc sports studios. the grand prix of figure skating is coming up, but beginning with college football, notre dame played host to florida state saturday night. brandon wimbush started for the irish and threw three touchdowns in the first half, including that one to miles boykin. later in the half, again, this time to matt. check out this catch. absolutely terrific. his second touchdown of the game. notre dame wins