>> dickerson: welcome back to "face the nation." with control of congress up for grabs next tuesday we want to take a look at where things stand in some key senate races. here with us is cbs news election and survey director anthony salvanto he has new numbers on hand. remind us on what is at stake in the senate then tell us what yo? >> right. the republicans have two-seat madge north in the senate trying to hold on to they have what we call favorable map. which means that of the states where senate races are up this year, the democrats are defen defending more and many are defending in states that donald trump won last time around. so we call them red states. republican leaning, that makes

it rather hard for them. we start with a couple of states that i think will tell the story at least early on on election night when we watch. the first is florida. and that race we have tied between rick scott and incumbent democrat bill nelson. scott seems to get a boost from his handling of the recent hurricane there that may be he helping him out. then we go to indiana, where we've got the republican up three points, a slight lead over incumbent democrat that is seat that the republicans would love to try to pick up and if they can, really helps their chances. then out to arizona, that's an open seat other state that donald trump won where we have kristen sinema over martha m mcsalie. >> florida, purple state we always watch florida that is split. indiana and arizona, tell what is the difference between democrats being ahead in arizona

which has had two republican senators, where as indiana you've got incumbent democrat but behinds there a difference? >> onest a little bit a cross over voting where sinema is getting more of that republican cross over vote than just donnely is, this is important because we see so very little of that these days. in fact in all of these states we see much less of it than we did the last time democrats won in these red states. that partly tells you what a partisan environment this is, it tells you this election is nationalized, that three and four voters are saying they're casting a vote for senator or congress this year to put the favored national party in control of congress. having said all that, sinema is doing better on health care, something that democrats want this election to be about. donnely is not benefiting from what some thought would be backlash against the president's

trade policy and heavily agriculture state. republicans overall tend to think that those trade policies will eventually pan outn them in the long run. >> dickerson: let's talk about that nationalized election, donald trump when you see him on the campaign trail thinks it's going to be election about values and returned themes from 2016, immigration, safety, even talking socialism. democrats have a different bet that they're making as you said in arizona democrat running is talking about health care, who is right? >> well, look, depends on whoever wins probably going to end up being the one that we think is right. the democrats want this to be about health care because people do see them as being better off at hamming medicare and also they don't necessarily buy the idea that republicans that they will protect preexisting conditions in particular. republicans aren't polling well on doing that. something that people want.

democrats are running on that, as far as larger values are concerned i think that you've got a situation where in this very nationalized election, the president becomes a large fact factor, we see a big split between people who say the economy is good but don't like the direction of the country. in a lot of these states the percent of people who say that the president is going to be a factor in a vote is far higher than we've seen in recent mid terms. and that could be -- that could be an enormous factor there as part of nationalizing all of this. >> dickerson: we talk about tribalism which is a jargon word, how do you see it playing out what is difference than in the past? >> after a week like this so much talk about anger, as you say about tribalism, something we pollsters try to wrestle with and capture, one way we it we'vle we theher a disagree with you about policy or they fundamentally different kinds of people? and we're seeing a majority of

partisans here saying the second of those. that they think they're fundamentally different kinds of people. that's hard to negotiate. it's personal, hard to adjudicate that. the other thing is we look at the groups that people feel like are represented by the parties. we see the republicans saying that democrats care more about the interests of immigrants than longer term citizens. we see the democrats saying they think republicans care more about the wealthy than working people. it comes down to those group politics and again it becomes very personal cast to the whole election. >> dickerson: just very -- not just different kinds of people but bad people, a very negative feeling. >> negative partisanship not just the idea that your party is right, maybe it isn't but you sure do think the other side is wrong. >> dickerson: anthony thanks so much. we'll be right back with ourot panel. this is not a screensaver. 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. ♪ ♪ i'm at this wing joint telling people that geico has been offering savings for over 75 years. that's longer than the buffalo wing's been around. dozen wings. and did you know that geico... (lips smacking) offers mo... (coughing) motorcycle insurance? ho-ho... my lips are burning. (laughs) ah... no, my lips are actually burning. geico. over 75 years of savings and service. see how much you could save at geico.com. it's too hot. oh, this is too hot, mate. it's too hot. 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. >> dickerson: now time for some political analysis. lanhee chen is policy expert and fellow at the hoover owns take talks. jeffrey goldberg is the editor and chief of the at ran particular. juice an page is washington bureau chief at "usa today." and jamelle bouie is chief political correspondent at slate and cbs political analyst. the president said this shooting in pittsburgh was unimaginable,n does iseemhaty ou?maginae. i don't think there's a jewish person in america or anywhere

else who thinks this sort of thing is unimaginable. there is a long history. onmagable bt predictable to a certain degree. and let me state very, very clearly, these sorts of incidents predate the rise of donald trump and the tribalism that we see now. there were fatal shootings in the last 20 years, shooting at the holocaust museum before the trump era. it's important to note that some of the language that donald trump consciously uses, some of the language that his supporters use tend to activate people who have dark thoughts and feelings about jews, among that group that is activated some clearly are willing to carry out violence, that's not to say that donald trump is responsible for the shooting. the shooter is responsible for the shooting. but we live in a climate right now which the president himself been 'bets or creates a climate which this sort become more

imaginable. >> our other conversation around past week about tribalism and about our language with each other but my view this looks to be much more conversation about transmission of anti-semitic, anti-racism into the public sphere that has not been the case in a long time. you mentioned earlier in the show the shooting in kentucky of two african americans, shooters attempted to break into a church and kill many more people. i think that is of a piece what happened in pittsburgh, that is a piece with the attempted bom bombings that above and beyond the heated rhetoric, there is a rhetoric of racial threat, rhetoric ofngua that is cong inr violence.

people are going to act on it. >> ofould have shot up -- the material on the internet is all there for them to become activated. >> dickerson: it feels like when if that material is out there and swirling and boiling, the politicians they lack the ability that they are the wrong people to talk about these kind of issues in the first place? >> i think they're the wrong people. but i also think they have to realize that they have put been put into a position to requires them to accept additional responsibility, the president sits in unique position, only person with a national constituency. he's the only person with a megaphone that truly reaches all americans. now, this is not to place -- obviously not to place blame on the president but it is to say that politicians need to start taking this more seriously. that they are public officials who people will look to as moral leaders as well. i know we don't elect politicians to be moral leaders,

maybe they should take that role a little more seriously. >> of course we do elect politician to be moral, like presidents to step up at times of great national trauma. to bring us together. that is one of the things that presidents are in unique position to do that this president has declined to do by and large. i think it's not a surprise that we've had three terrible incidents in a 72 hour period where hate is backed up by violence as we move toward a mid term election where both sides see the consequences of the election as fundamental to the future of our country and that kind of super heated rhetoric i think started with -- president trump didn't begin it but he has certainly increased it. >> you don't really notice the importance of the role the president plays, a president plays in creating a tone, a positive tone in america until you have the absence of a president who creates a positive tone. and yes donald trump has been trying, he's been reading statements about

right back to division. so, it really is remarkable to me to see how quickly he pivots away from the message he understands or someone has told him he should be delivering back to division. >> a more direct connection especially off of susan's point. the shooter in pittsburgh expressly says the thing that he was angry about were the migrants heading toward the american border. a situation that has been demagogued by the president, ha has been hyped up and demagogued by right wing media that is sort of been -- is being talked about in these terms, this is going to destroy america these people get here. and while of course thet cetera, et cetera, also the case that this guy clearly em biding that rhetoric, he clearly that was radicalizing him i think we should recognize the ways in

which this kind of demagoguery. >> this started on inauguration day, apocalyptic language that is employed on policy issues that creates this feeling of his tear why and darkness. >> i do think that we've seen this now on both sides in terms of the policy issues being radicalized, see it when democrats argue republicans want to destroy your health or health care, you see it when republicans use immigration to get people all lathered up. there's a radicalization of issues, we're not talking about the policies any more, what the personal implications might be in ways that are apocalyptic or that suggest that the other side is somehow responsible for your personal demise. i think that is the challenge that we're facing. >> dickerson: that's right. separate and apart from the president if if democrat wants to sell the idea that republicans don't care about preexisting c noto say, they aremark-based aoa ing to say,heartless and don't let them get i

rol bethot about you, this is just the way the system of politics works. >> of course it leaves no middle ground. how do you make a compromise between someone who wants to kill your elderly parents by taking away their health care and someone who cares more about immigrants than they care about american citizens. it makes it -- it's one of the factors make it so difficult to have -- to do anything, you mention that the two senators have this remarkable example of bipartisan by cohosting a prayer group. i think that's great. i'm glad they're cohosting a prayer group. but think of how small our politics are that they're not coming to a reasonable agreement on immigration that could help deescalate that issue or on some other big issue that we expect congress to deal with. >> dickerson: also feels like the primary steps, beginning steps of reconciliation require some introspection. but if you' i bet chris coons' twitter feed is anger, our own side has these issues that we shouldn't be shouting down mitch mcconnell

and maxine waters shouldn't be doing what she's doing because the immediate response from democrat is, how dare you, look what the president is doing. if that cycle continues nobody is getting anywhere. >> i think that's right. a little sympathetic to the hypothetical responders to chris coons, i think distinctions are important, there's a qualitative difference especially in the society that you have history of raciallized violence and racial division, i think there's a qualitative difference between getting angry and apocalyptic about identity issues, about these immigrants going to fundamentally change american identity, resonates specific way in a country whose history is saturated with racial violence, saturated with rote rick of that sort, that led to awful atrocities. although i would like -- i'm a calm person by disposition i'd like to see more calm political receipted rick. it's important that we don't

conflate these two different kinds of --n of them is unfortunate, makes compromise difficult. one issue for people for living people in this society. >> there is a common thread he here. you've written about this. restraint. democracy can only function if people don't say everything that's on their minds and what we have now is people saying whatever comes to mind in order to achieve a short term political gain. >> either picking up on that restraint, used to talk about this am the time in the old days s. there policy way to get restraint in the culture that seems hard, or with this question of domestic terrorism in americas there anything -- senator lankford said we're not going to listen to each other. is there a policy response to this escalation innstitut response and policy response. just that the reason why we have the situation we have now is because the traditional balance between executive and legislative branches, for

example, congress doesn't do its job any more, that has something to do with it. traditional way, you have a strong congress that would check and over active executive the way the founders wanted it that's what you would have. from a policy perspective, it seems to me that law enforcement needs to have the appropriate tools in order to monitor these kinds of things, that having been said there's very fine line between an over active law enforcement function and the need for us to be looking at things people are saying online, the kinds of rhetoric they are using, the kind of dialogue they're using, i think law enforcement has those tools, it's a question of what the right balance is. and if congress wants to conduct oversight again they could, but the question is, do we need new policy to deal with this? i don't think so. we need people to actually be doing their jobs which law enforcement largely is. >> there's one thread between all these terrible incidents that made us seem so ripped apart is that as a nation, that is availability of guns. i don't think any of us think that gun laws are going to go

anywhere this congress, if americans really wanted a change in gun laws, thought it was wrong that this deranged man in pittsburgh had an assault rifle, they could elect different leaders, they could make it a higher priority, people who feel that way. and i actually think that is a possible response we'll see in the mid terms in nine days. it is possible, it's conceivable that that could also be a response to this domestic terrorism. >> dickerson: jamelle, do you see a lot of democrats on whom placing their hopes in swing house districts running on gun control? >> in the places where trump did really well, working class, there is not much on gun contr control. if democrats take the house majority and if it's substantiar suburban districts, you might end up seeing a conflict between two sets of democrats

on very different constituents. >> dickerson: clearly donald trump feels that the issue of immigration, some of these value issues will work well for republicans. why aren't they running on the big tax cut they passed, a. b, democratic response seems to be talk about health care to be more policy oriented, what do you see? do you see that split? >> i absolutely see that split. going to be the health care versus judges election. judges is shorthand for some of these more cultural elements that motivate republican voters. i think the reason why the two sides have gone to the issues they have gone to is because they are going to the issues they know will motivate their base at the end of the day. tax cuts and the economy are great but more of overlay. it's very hard to get someone to say, go out there and vote because of the tax cuts i gave you. may be the case they can say, if you don't vote for the republicans those tax cuts will be gone. negative message mi fundamentally both sides have settled on issues they settled on because they realize these

are the issues that our side really will get worked up about and is health care. for republicans, it's somemb o w enforcement and immigration. i think we've seen all of those issues in play in the last couple of days. >> my question on that is, whether the events of the last week sort of obviate the kavanaugh bump that the republicans got. the kavanaugh bump was very effective for donald trump, he promised to get the judges in, he did. things are coming unhinged, wheels are coming off, people including suburban voters who might be on the fence might look at donald trump say, you're abetting this. this is a nationalized election. >> to a certain degree there is maybe some impact on it but the kavanaugh bump and enthusiasm that was created by that whole process i think really, that's the key narrative going into the election because so many people have voted already. >> i was going to sayh's confounding about this upcoming election is that enthusiasm across the board is so high,

likely turn out will be so high for midder that certain point difficult to make predictions because timing changes enthusiasm and turn out among different demographics that get you radically different results. >> and dangerous to make predictions. i take your point on policy and majority of the house by democrats have been on health care but this is the election of trump. we did a poll this week showed three out of four likely voters said president trump had an impact on their decision of who to vote for. majority of them, 57 likely voters said allotted of impact by president trump. so, this is an issue about health care and judges but this is first of all i think issue about president trump. >> dickerson: we'll have to end it there. thanks to all of you. we'll be back in a moment.

>> dickerson: the recent murder of jamal khashoggi has called into question the u.s. strategy of using the saudi kingdom as wedge against iran. cbs news correspondent elizabeth palmer spoke earlier today in take ran with iranian foreign minister and asked about his

government's view on the u.s. u.s.-saudi alliance. >> the choice, is that have been made in this region have been wrong and there's nothing new. >> what choices are you talking about? >> choices about supporting saddam hussein. choices about supporting the taliban. >> this is saudi that you're talking, saudi supported. >> saudi supported them with almost a -- from the united states. >> i think reading between your lines you are saying that saudi ray -- saudi arabia is a poor ally for united states and iran would be a better one? >> i'm not saying that. i'm saying that united states choices in the middle east are wrong. and these wrong choices lead to the disaster in our region. renewed at the invasion of iraq and saddam hussein was an enemy,

we knew that the attack against was the wrong choice, taliban is our enemy. we know that the invasion and attack of yemen are wrong choices, but the united states is continuously and persistently on the wrong side, be it in yemen, be it imprissening a prime minister of another country be it the recent incident in -- >> the u.s. support of saudi and in particular muhammad bin al salmon like imprissening leban lebanon's prime minister. like allegedly ordering the murder of a journalist. >> i think blanket support that the u.s. provides to saudi arabia and to israel has enabled them to carry out atrocities that would not have happened had

there not existed this blanket supported. >> dickerson: our elizabeth palmer taped earlier today in take ran. we'll be right back. junior achievement reaches young people all over the world to prepare them for the future of work. we go into classrooms and we teach entrepreneurial skills and leadership skills. when you actually create a business when you're in your teens, it raises your self-confidence. junior achievement is really unique because they inspire young people to think creatively. the citi foundation's pathways to progress initiative helped us reach kids in over 50 countries. citi has also loaned us their executives and their employees to help us deliver our programs. our youth are three times more likely to become entrepreneurs and they're more likely to create jobs for others. they are going to bring an entrepreneurial spirit to making our world a better place.

♪ we've hadfor a long time.is in san francisco and half-measures haven't fixed it. homelessness doesn't just hurt homeless people. it hurts all of us. that's why we're all voting "yes" on c. the plan is paid for by corporations that just got a massive tax break. it's time for them to give back by helping all of us to fix our homeless crisis. with more affordable housing... expanded mental-health services... clean restrooms and safe shelters. vote "yes" on c. it helps all of us.

>> dickerson: that's it for us today as we leave you we want to remember those who were killed at the tree of life synagogue yesterday. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

the following is a paid advertisement for the bissell crosswave pet pro, sponsored by bissell. [music] the bissell crosswave pet pro vacuums and washes at the same timo u can clea wet and dry messes, everyday