gives your business flexibility. get 1.5% discount for paying early, or up to 60 days to pay without interest, or both each month. i'm nelson gutierrez and i'm a member of the smarter money. this is what membership is. this is what membership does. two parties are talking again. is there any reason it won't be yet another dead end? at the start of this sunday morning in october, we're finding it a little hard to let go. we know in theory the upcoming budget negotiations between paul ryan and patty murray are supposed to be a fresh start. but can they put everything behind them and actually reach a deal? also, there are a couple of governors races coming up in a few weeks. it is the midterm one year from now that have us wondering if voters will still be remembering the shutdown when it comes time to cast their ballots. and here is a more basic question, will the republican party be able to survive

everything it's been through, everything it's going through right now? remember, it is not etched in stone, the political parties have to be permanent. we'll get into that a little bit. and kickoff for today's chicago and washington game is a few hours away. before they take the field, we'll wade into the controversy over whether the home team's nickname is a slur that should be changed. but first, stop me if you've heard this one before, after walking right up to a cataclysmic deadline, congress has pulled back at the last possible moment and agreed to hammer out a long-term bipartisan fiscal blueprint. something that will finally put an end to the governing by crisis madness that has come to define washington. that was the resolution that washington reached this past wednesday night to end the shutdown to reopen the government, to avoid default. it is not a permanent solution or even a long-term one, but it does set a new deadline, december 13th, for the republican-controlled house and the democratic-controlled senate to meet together and merge their budget plans, two very different

budgets with very different priorities, to merge them into one single bipartisan blueprint that each chamber would then need to pass. if and only if that happens will the government then be funded for the rest of the fiscal year. then and only then will we be able to take a break from all of this brinksmanship. if they can't get to that point, if the two parties can't come to an agreement, well, then we're right back where we started, staring at yet another potential shutdown. and there is a reason to be optimistic here. when he was asked if there is any chance we'll go through this all again in a few months, senate republican leader mitch mcconnell said this on thursday. no. one of my favorite sayings is an old kentucky saying, no education in the second kick of a mule. first kick of the mule was in 1995, the second one, the last 16 days, government shutdown is off the table, we're not going to do it. the fact that mcconnell felt safe to say this is important. he is running for re-election in kentucky next year the same state where a tea party primary

toppled his protege and sent rand paul to the u.s. senate. he's now facing a challenge of his own and yet the damage to the republican party's brand from the shutdown that damaged mcconnell's general election positioning has been so severe that he now seems intent on cutting some kind of deal to avoid another crisis. to avoid even worse damage to his party's image, even if that means alienating the tea party right. a big shift for mcconnell and if it mirrors a broader shift in his party, it does portend well for some kind of budget deal being struck. and, yet, well, like i said at top, we have been down this road before. the whole reason in fact that we just went through what we went through is because we went down this road before. let's go back to the summer of 2011. against the backdrop of a looming debt ceiling deadline, president obama and house speaker john boehner seek to negotiate a long-term fiscal blueprint, a grand bargain, they call it. president offers to meet the gop halfway by putting popular social safety net programs on

the table. >> essentially what we had offered speaker boehner was over a trillion dollars in cuts to discretionary spending. both domestic and defense. we then offered additional $650 billion in cuts to entitlement programs. medicare, medicaid, social security. >> in return for that, the summer of 2011, president obama asks the republicans to give ground on new revenue. he wants $1.2 trillion from closed loopholes and deductions and tax reform. boehner seems interested, but when he takes it to the house republican conference, message comes back loud and clear, no way. and with that, the grand bargain talks die. >> they refuse to get serious about cutting spending and making the tough choices that are facing our country on

entitlement reform. that's the bottom line. i take the same oath of office as the president of the united states. i've got the same responsibilities as the president of the united states. and i think that's for both of us to do what's in the best interest of our country. >> and so that set the stage for the super committee. remember that? the last second deal to avoid a default in 2011, called for, a special bipartisan committee to come up with a blueprint to strike the deal that obama and boehner couldn't strike and to end the cycle of crisis governing. but guess what? republicans were just as uninterested in giving ground on revenue and the super committee came up with nothing. when that happened, the clock started ticking to the sequester. the automatic across the board spending cuts that would go into place if congress failed to agree on a longer term fix by early 2013. early 2013 came and went and guess what again? no agreement. so then the sequester went into effect. it is still in effect because

there was just no bridging the gap between the parties, no budging republicans from their anti-tax orthodoxy. revenue as chuck schumer put it this week, is the old bugaboo that made any budget deal impossible for three years now. and now here we are again, republican house, democratic senate are supposed to come up with a deal. but how? early reports say two parties are narrowing their focus, not looking for the big broad grand bargain that obama chased in 2011, being more realistic, looking for common ground, playing small ball. but if anti-tax absolutism still the rule in the republican party, there is every reason to believe it still is, if republican office holders still fearful of primary challenges, still reason to believe they are, is there really any deal that can be reached here? joining me at the table is msnbc contributor victoria difrancesco soto, political scientist and fellow at the center for politics at the university of texas. that's a long title.

and the white house correspondent with buzz feed.com and april ryan, white house correspondent and d.c. bureau chief with american urban radio net works and msnbc.com managing editor daphne windsor. i want to see if we can understand, if we even know, and if we can understand what the basic parameters are that the house, the republicans in the house, the democrats in the senate, they have assembled this conference committee, paul ryan sort of point man from the house side, patty murray, the pointwoman from the senate side, the democratic side. april, do we have a sense of what the basic sort of contours, the basic parameters of their discussions are. we're hearing it is not as big as the grand bargain thing, a lot smaller. what does that mean? >> what it means is, i'm glad you asked that point, the question, i heard from the democratic caucus chair of the house, javier bacera, he said whatever happens, it is going to be very simple. they cannot come up with anything beyond simplicity. we saw the fighting. it is about what level of dysfunction were they? they don't want to go back to

that dysfunction again. they have to start out very small and basic. and what's on the table, again, is the medicare, which the president said, the entitlement programs, social security and things of that nature, that you have to also understand that the president is very encouraged. so that gives them some push to move this forward, that murray and that ryan began meetings right away. so they are -- they already know that the issue is bad. and they have to do it -- start from -- baby steps, like little babies, start with milk before they take the meat. so, you know, so they're having a hard time and they have to get it together because america is watching. >> you say medicare, it sounds like what's being discussed here is more means testing for -- so people with wealthy people who already pay, i guess, they pay a little more right now, than they have for the last few years, they pay more. that's what's on the table now. >> republicans don't like that. they don't like the higher taxing and things of that nature. it has got to be right now and that's what's on the table.

>> define what victory is for both the sides. the democrats, you know, they have a little bit -- it is a little bit broader for them. if they get anything out of the committee and get anything out of conference, they can put together and put a budget together. obama can say look, i governed across the aisle, we can do this for the party, the republicans have a much harder sell with this. their problem is what used to be a big defeat for them, the big upcoming defense cuts in the sequester, if they don't get a deal, are no longer a defeat. there are some republicans who are upset by the defense cuts still. if you go back at the beginning of the sequester, you can talk about buck mckeon, the head of the defense committee in the house, really upset about the cuts and wanting to stop them, scott ridgell from virginia, republican against the cuts. but by and large, these guys are looking at a ticking time bomb that if it goes off they like the result. it is much harder sell. >> and the national journal is

writing a piece on this and that so that the republicans faced a loss with regards to the government shutdown, very unpopular, but fiscally, they're winning the fight. they're keeping washington to spending levels that the democrats really don't want. so in the long-term, even if nothing comes out of this budget committee, it is going to be a win for the republicans. >> that's the part that i want to sort of understand here, so -- we had the whole dispute over the shutdown and the default and some coverage of the fact that democrats were saying you know, what was lost in this is democrats were saying, look, we don't want the shutdown, we don't want the default, but you can have these sequester level, spending levels for now. and that's where we are. we still have sequester level spending levels, there are additional sequester cuts that are scheduled to kick in starting january 15th. more cuts, more to the tea party side wants. the question, daphne, is if you're going to replace the sequest sequester, you need more revenue

to do it. if you're talking small ball, i'm assuming revenue is off the table. besides medicare, are there other cuts that democrats could live with in place of the sequester? >> i think when you took everyone through the beginning of what has been happening here and where are sort of the battle scars in the last couple of years, you know, we chuckled when we got to do you remember the supercommittee? and i thought, wow, the super committee is the laugh line now. but i think the bottom line that you really get to now is this issue of sequester and the fact that actually the american economy failed to grow by $24 billion over the last couple of weeks. people are suffering under the sequester. additional cuts are not going to make life easier for americans and i think this is really the issue now before the budget committees and i think that it is up to the democrats if they care about this to keep it front and center because i think, you know, this issue of where the economy is headed and how much can grow, and revenue, i think are the number one things that people really need to think

about. >> and this is the part, let's -- this is a quote from harry reid, so the deal was struck on wednesday, it went to effect and now on the budget talks and this is harry reid setting the stage talking about, would you give ground on, like, social security, talking about, like, this chain cpi for social security, would you give ground on that, and in exchange for getting rid of the sequester? he said, that's no trade. we're not going to affect entitlement so we can decrease defense spending. if revenue ends up being off the table, and you're going start getting resistance from harry reid on perhaps justifiably on things like chain cpi, how can you plausibly turn the sequester off if you're democrats? >> that's a good question. i think that's the question that we're facing, especially when you face the fact that, again, going back to the sequester at the beginning, it is almost hard to remember this now, the sequester is something that nobody in washington likes. supposed to be the most dangerous, most ridiculous, you

know, preposterous cuts that have ever been and when you have one side saying, hey, these are pretty good, you change the entire picture of the game. this is a big deal because if you have the democrats saying that this sequester is really awful, and republicans saying it is not so awful, you know, let's trade for it, but democrats saying we're not going to trade anything for it, you know, it puts a lot of onus on the democrats in terms of what they're willing to accept. >> the one thing about sequester, though, people with sequester, people are still off one day a month from work. and people don't remember that. this situation, the government shutdown, people were off. some people had to work without pay. people are still off. people are still not getting paid one day a week. then you also had -- we heard more screaming about the fact that the white house was shutdown during the time of sequester, than anything else. i'm sorry, the white house tours and until the white house was -- the secret service found money,

until january 15th, to allow the tours to happen for three days a week instead of five, we heard more outcry about that at that time than we did with the government shutdown. >> those are small. >> small, but it matters. >> coming up into the sequest, the first time around, there was the sky is falling type of mentality. an argument by democrats. people are hurting. the sky did not fall. we have had slow economic growth. >> you lose one day -- one -- >> -- decided to jury the republicans to cut off the pain of the sequester. like as soon as airlines got delayed, everybody in the entire house, entire congress, can't move together ever, they passed a big bill to spend money to keep airports open and keep lines short. >> the other thing with the sequester too, it is the cumulative effect, it takes months to develop, how it affects gdp or something, not instantly felt. we have the sequester, now i feel the pain. now it is like you look up a year or two late, why isn't this

economy so strong? it is tough to get that across. we have a member of this -- this is the latest super committee, won't call it the super committee. house and senate conference and one of the senators who is part of that conference, part of the negotiations is going to be joining us next. we'll ask him about this right after this. i love having a free checked bag with my united mileageplus explorer card. i've saved $75 in checked bag fees. [ delavane ] priority boarding is really important to us. you can just get on the plane and relax. [ julian ] having a card that doesn't charge you foreign transaction fees saves me a ton of money. [ delavane ] we can go to any country and spend money the way we would in the u.s. when i spend money on this card, i can see brazil in my future. [ anthony ] i use the explorer card to earn miles in order to go visit my family, which means a lot to me. ♪

in order to avo: sales event is which means a lot "sback.hen drive" which means it's never been easier to get a new passat, awarded j.d. power's most appealing midsize car, two years in a row. and right now you can drive one home for practically just your signature. get zero due at signing, zero down, zero deposit, and zero first month's payment on any new 2014 volkswagen. hurry, this offer ends october 31st. for details, visit vwdealer.com today. help the gulf when we made recover and learn the gulf, bp from what happened

so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.

chairman rhino yan knows i' going to vote for his budget, he knows i'm not going to vote for his. >> senator patty murray this past thursday, on the prospects of finding a budget agreement as the house senate conference

takes shape here. chris coun chris kuntz joins us from wilmington. thank you for being on the show. we were just getting into this in the last segment, if the goal here for democrats, if the goal is to address the sequester, to get that turned off or get a big part of that turned off at least and the sort of contours of these discussions as reported are sort of -- they're small in scope, maybe not talking about revenue like we were before, not talking about the concessions that president obama was talking about before, how are you going to find the money to actually get the sequester turned off? is there a strategy you have for that? >> well, steve, that's a great question. thanks for a chance to be on. if you look at the timing that was worked out in the deal that was finally agreed to end the reckless shutdown of the federal government to avoid default and get us back to work, the timing is such that if this budget conference committee, if this negotiation between the senate budget committee and the house budget committee works, we will

have just enough time to put in place a new budget that replaces the sequester, so that really is the goal. this is quite different than the not so super super committee you were talking about. we don't have the expedited path to the floor, the special legislative way of taking whatever deal we work out and getting it right to the floor without a filibuster, which the super committee had. so the scope of our total goal is a little bit more constrained. the other thing that i think, steve, makes it more likely we're going to get to some deal is that the very real pain of sequeste sequester, the impacts that your group spoke of, the impacts not just on defense, but also on education, on cancer research, on every function of government that matters, that's been impacting all of our home states. so any senator, any congressman listening to their home state community, district, is hearing that sequester, which for the super committee was a future potential harm is now a very real and actual harm. so we're going to have to find

ways to generate the revenue, roughly $20 billion gap, and it might be in payment system or forms, in tax loophole closing, but i'm not quite sure where we're going to get it at this point. what is good is weed anded twe government shutdown. >> to follow up with that, the question of revenue, we looked at how the super committee fell apart, how the deal that boehner and po baobama were working tow fell apart. it was the old bugaboo revenue. if we're talking smaller scope here, is it safe to say we're not talking revenue right now? >> well, steve, i hope we will find a way to put ref new on the table. i mean, it may not be. in fact, i would be very surprised if it included raising tax rates, but there are lots of ways to generate revenue in the federal government. probably the most attractive for us is by closing some tax loopholes, improving tax enforcement, or finding places where there is waste or fraud we

can agree on that ought to be cut out. all of those essentially are savings. so we have to find some savings to make possible offsetting the sequester cuts that under the budget control act will automatically kick in on january 15th. >> good morning, senator. this is vicki difrancesco soto from ut. my question is, we see that the confidence in government is near an all time low. the public is already skeptical about congress and this committee, what are you going to tell the public in terms of how this time it's different? >> well, first, this time it's different because of the amount of pain that our home communities have felt. i've gone to the dover air force base, for example, to apologize to the hundreds of families who have been impacted doubly, first by sequester in august, hundreds and hundreds of airmen and families were laid off, were furloughed and again with the government shutdown, the same group of people suffered through several weeks of uncertainty if not getting paid. so if anybody is listening, in

congress, and obviously the low approval rating you referred to suggests that a lot aren't, but those of us who are listening who are connecting to our home states are hearing just how difficult this is for classroom teachers, for parents whose kids are sick and who are hoping for new drug treatments from the nih, or for those who defend our country who are either reserve or guardsmen. there is real pain across our country as a result of this sequester and as a result of this government shutdown. my hope is that that will motivate republicans to be willing to join democrats in finding some balance, in finding some way forward. as you referenced, the confidence in government is at an all time low. even if we make some modest progress, even if we come together and produce some reasonable midpoint from the current spending level of about $986 billion and the projected spending level in january 15 of about 962, if we can split that difference and relieve some of the pain of sequester, we'll have done something, we'll have

demonstrated we can listen to each other and we can reach some compromise. >> senator, hi, this is evan from buzz feed. i got calls last week after the end of the shutdown deal from progressive activists and progressive members of congress who called me and said that their concern, their fear is that at the end of this fight that you -- that has been happening in washington, the endless fight happening in congress, democrats will go ahead and try to do some entitlement cuts as part of trying to matry t trying to make a big deal to show they're trying to make big deals with republicans. >> let me just start by saying what the folks who have been calling you and the folks who may be watching this morning ought to take some real encouragement from is just how strong the president was, just how strong the senate democratic caucus was in defending the affordable care act. it had some significant problems in its first few weeks of rollout and we have some issues

we have to address to make sure the affordable care act actually delivers on its promises. and i am willing to work in a responsible bipartisan way to improve the affordable care act to ensure it is implemented responsibly. for progressives who worry we're going to cave, i think the way the president led and that the senate democratic caucus held firm during this entire 16-day irresponsible shutdown that was really launched by a very small group in the republican party should give them real courage. i don't think we should take anything off the table. but as this segment was framed, the reality is that expectations for what this budget negotiation will accomplish are very small. and if we can get anything done that replaces the pain of sequester, i think we should do it. personally i'm very committeed to defending the defending the programs at the core of what americans treasure about our government and what we're able to do to reduce poverty among our seniors. but we have to be willing to put everything on the table that is

part of the budgets passed in the house and the senate and negotiate from there. that's what a negotiation means, evan. we have to be willing to talk about things that are required if we're ever going to get to a compromise. >> chris coons, thank you for joining us this morning. we'll talk about the other side of this too on the house with paul ryan and what he's looking for out of this, right after this.

it's a growing trend in business: do more with less with less energy. hp is helping ups do just that. soon, the world's most intelligent servers,

designed by hp, will give ups over twice the performance, using forty percent less energy. multiply that across over a thousand locations, and they'll provide the same benefit to the environment as over 60,000 trees. that's a trend we can all get behind. ♪ save your coffee from the artificial stuff. ♪ switch to truvia. great tasting, zero-calorie sweetness... ...from the stevia leaf. so i can't afford to have germy surfaces. but after one day's use, dishcloths can redeposit millions of germs. so ditch your dishcloth and switch to a fresh sheet of bounty duratowel. look! a fresh sheet of bounty duratowel leaves this surface cleaner than a germy dishcloth, as this black light reveals. it's durable, cloth-like and it's 3 times cleaner.

so ditch your dishcloth and switch to bounty duratowel. the durable, cloth-like picker-upper. so ditch your dishcloth and switch to bounty duratowel. from the classic lines to the elegant trim in each and every piece, kohler will make your reality a dream. just heard from senator chris coons on the house senate conference committee and setting modest expectations out of this. i'm wondering, the timeline takes us to they have until that committee has until december 13th to reach some kind of a deal. if they don't, if they go the way of the supercommittee, that leaves a month for the congress to do what it has been continuously doing, pass a resolution that goes on for a month, two months, something like that. we look at chris coons and patty

murray, look at the republican side. the top two republicans are paul ryan and jeff sessions. paul ryan and jeff sessions both voted no this past wednesday night on the deal that would have averted the default and that reopened the government. and at the last minute, they still voted no on that. that tells me something either about the pressure they're facing, the posturing they're trying to do, combination of both and it really makes me wonder if even something modest like chris coons was outlining in the last segment is possible in the republican party in the atmosphere now. >> i think that's exactly where the spotlight needs to be. i think you have somebody like paul ryan coming right back in, after disappearing for a little while, voting no to reopen the government and this is the guy who is now going to run the budget negotiations from the house side. i think the question here is not so much where the democrats are going to be right now. any are coming into this whole new session very united, coming off a win, and i think the issue is just where is the republican party and what kind of path here can paul ryan really walk, having voted no, and it is still

with the same group of republicans who were keeping the government closed for weeks. >> the issue is you have to remember that they still have to appease the tea party. and we knew that the vote was going to happen, that it was going to pass it that night. but the problem is the tea party, and going back to javier becerra, he said when the elephants rumble, there is hurt. and so the rumbling is because of the tea party right now. and they have got the -- the republicans got to get the family feud together. they can't -- they can't come up with the words, the phrases, the whatever, they're trying to have this moving picture and the picture is not there. to your point earlier, you said the republicans are winning. each side is taking this i've won, i've won, but , you know, you look at it, the polls are right. the american public is saying the frustration has happened. i lost my money. and talked to a big fashion house here, someone from the fashion house last night, who sells shirts for $500, they were saying -- and government workers

were not buying shirts from them. they're saying that their sales were down for two weeks. so when you look at it, who held the whole thing up? the president and john boehner said every time we go back to the tea party, they said, no, they said no. you have to remember that the republicans have to appease them, but they have to bring them in line. >> i guess the question with ryan is maybe this is just -- this represents the limits of the tea party, but is it possible he's buying himself space for these negotiations by taking -- what ended up being more of a symbolic vote against this or way too much credit there? >> the deal he pitched in the washington journal did not happen and voted against the deal that happened in the house because it wasn't his deal, right? the real issue here is the republicans on this committee have to tell their base that what they get out of the negotiations are better than a huge cut to the government with the sequester. this goes back to, like the old john bolton thing about the

u.n., like lop five floors off the top and just as good or better for it or whatever. this is what they're thinking when it comes to government. lop 10% off the top, why not? top 3%. this is the key component of the republican party measure for so long that what paul ryan has to do is come out and say, listen, i made a deal with democrats that, let me see if coons is right, protects entitlement programs, protects a lot of stuff that democrats want protected, this is better than these deep, deep, deep cuts to government that you're already going to get. >> and that's it. if nothing happens, then the tea party could potentially just latch on to, hey, we have another round of cuts coming in january, another quote/unquote victory for us. the general rule for midterm elections is democratic president, republican gains in congress and vice versa, which should not bode well for democrats in 2014. what happens when you factor in the shutdown? will voters remember when they head to the polls one year from now? that's next.

you really love, what would you do?" ♪ [ woman ] i'd be a writer. [ man ] i'd be a baker. [ woman ] i wanna be a pie maker. [ man ] i wanna be a pilot. [ woman ] i'd be an architect. what if i told you someone could pay you and what if that person were you? ♪ when you think about it, isn't that what retirement should be, paying ourselves to do what we love? ♪ you're giving away pie? would you like apple or cherry? cherry. can i top it with oil or cream? excuse me? oil...or cream? definitely cream. [ male announcer ] a slice of pie always sounds better with reddi wip. that's because it's never made with hydrogenated oil. oh, yeah. [ male announcer ] always made with real cream. the sound of reddi wip is the sound of joy. don't be shy! try some p-- shh!

he was a matted messiley shy! in a small cage. ng day. p-- so that was our first task, was getting him to wellness. without angie's list, i don't know if we could have found all the services we needed for our riley. from contractors and doctors to dog sitters and landscapers, you can find it all on angie's list. we found riley at the shelter, and found everything he needed at angie's list. join today at angieslist.com

back to 1996, one year after the last government shutdown when illinois was still pretty much a swing state and there was a race for an open senate seat there. democratic candidate was a congressman named dick durbin, and this is how he decided to fight his opponent. >> -- supports newt gingrich's budget that cuts medicare benef benefits, and that's the wrong way to balance the budget. the gingrich/selby budget is wrong. >> dick durbin for the united states senate. >> he won that year. now he's the number two democrat in the u.s. senate and illinois is a blue state. that's what the last shutdown brought. what will the one we just went through mean for 2014 and beyond? we'll talk about that next. [ molly ] honey.

whoa! sweet mother of softness. paws off pal. just one squeeze? just enjoy it with your eyes. [ female announcer ] new charmin ultra soft is so soft, you don't even have to squeeze it to believe it. for the first time, you can actually see the softness with our new comfort cushions. new charmin ultra soft is still so much softer and more absorbent, you can use up to four times less. i believe it, but i still gotta squeeze it. [ female announcer ] used by more plumbers, charmin is now clog-free or it's free.

[ female annavo: sales event is used by more plumbers"sback.hen drive" which means it's never been easier to get a new passat, awarded j.d. power's most appealing midsize car, two years in a row. and right now you can drive one home for practically just your signature. get zero due at signing, zero down, zero deposit, and zero first month's payment on any new 2014 volkswagen. hurry, this offer ends october 31st. for details, visit vwdealer.com today. at any minute... ...you could be a victim of fraud. most people don't even know it. fraud could mean lower credit scores, higher loan rates... ...and maybe not getting the car you want. it's a problem waiting to happen. check your credit score, check your credit report, at experian.com america's number one provider

of online credit reports and scores. don't take chances. go to experian.com. [ crashing ] [ male announcer ] when your favorite food starts a fight, fight back fast with tums. heartburn relief that neutralizes acid on contact and goes to work in seconds. ♪ tum, tum tum tum tums! heartburn relief that neutralizes acid on contact customer erin swenson ordebut they didn't fit.line customer's not happy, i'm not happy. sales go down, i'm not happy. merch comes back, i'm not happy. use ups. they make returns easy. unhappy customer becomes happy customer. then, repeat customer. easy returns, i'm happy. repeat customers, i'm happy. sales go up, i'm happy. i ordered another pair. i'm happy. (both) i'm happy. i'm happy. happy. happy. happy. happy. happy happy. i love logistics. deciphering the political

calculation on the deal to reopen the government isn't that hard. they all voted for it and all presumably believed to varying degrees that their party was playing a winning hand on the shutdown. a pretty safe bet to make when surveys showed the other party plunging to the lowest favorable ratings recorded by either party in modern polling history. when it comes to republicans, though, last wednesday's vote was testament to the conflicting political imperatives with which gop lawmakers in the era must grapple. 144 republicans in the house voted against the deal. only 87 voted for it. look closer and some patterns emerge. only one of the 16 republicans who represent blue districts, this district that supported president obama last year, only one of them voted no. clearly they're more worried about general elections than primaries. look at the house republicans trying to move up the ladder next year. or planning to run for state wide office for the u.s. senate. three of them, tom cotton in arkansas, shelly moore and steve dans who represents all of montana supported the deal. maybe not coincidentally they're

not facing serious opposition in the primary, at least not yet. then there is john cassidy from louisiana. he's running for the senate and there is also no reason that he's in serious danger in the primary, but he still voted no. the tea party era, there may be no such thing as being too safe or feeling too safe from a primary threat on the right. there is the state of georgia. open senate race next year and three of those republicans in that field are from the house and all three of them voted no. jack kingston, paul brown, phil gingrey. they have been taking pains for months to outconservative each other. then thad cochran voted for the deal and they found out that republican state legislator is planning to challenge him in next year's primary and that two of the top national conservative pressure groups, the senate conservatives fund and club for growth will be backing that challenger. lindsey graham and lamar alexander, they already know that they're facing tea party primary challengers next year. they voted yes anyway. for that matter, you can throw

senate gop leader mitch mcconnell who helped broker the deal and is being challenged in next year's primary into the same category. democrats can't wait to start using the shutdown and debt ceiling crisis against house republicans no matter how they voted on the final deal. they already started. in arkansas, the democratic party this week sent tom cotton an invoice for the estimated $24 billion cost of the shutdown. also the basic matter of control of the house. democrats will need a net gain of 17 seats to take it back next year. that is a huge challenge for the white house party and the midterm election if history is any guide. the nonpartisan cook political report made waves thursday when it questioned and stressed the word questioned here whether the republicans are putting that lock on the house in jeopardy. quote, we always maintained house republicans would need to engage in some spectacularly self-destructive behavior in order for democrats to have any shot at netting 17 seats in the majority next november over the 16 day course of the shutdown, house republicans flirted with just that.

to look at what the shutdown and all of the droum around ama aro means, i want to bring in crystal ball. i make the same joke. i heard of the show, i was on it. and also the up against the clock champion a few weeks ago, her record score was broken yesterday by somebody else. >> i'm coming for you, brian boiler. >> look out. michelle bernard, president of the bernard center joins us as well. april and daphne still at the table with us. look at these piece by piece, i'll start with the issue of control of the house next year, because it is one of the things where i think democrats clearly understand from the last three years when you don't have unified control of the government, when you only have the white house, you don't have the house, the limits that imposes on what you can do as president, they would dearly love to get the house back for the last two years to have control of the senate. that 17 seats looks like such a tall order. is anybody here looking at this, feel the democrats really have a chance at winning back the house

majority next year? >> i do. i definitely do. and one of the things, you know, one argument i'm hearing made is that, well, republican approval ratings are record lows. but that's because republicans are upset with their own leadership. they shouldn't worry so much about that. and i think that's very wrong headed. in a midterm election, it is actually more devastating to have your own party upset with you. they may not vote for the democrats, but they may just not show up to vote. and we saw a lot of that in 2010. democrats were very dispirited. a lot of them stayed home. then you had a lot of energy on the other side coming from the right, and it led to a wave election. the other thing i point out, you were talking about the analysis of who voted for the deal and who voted against it, i don't think it matters that much. they all were complicit in shutting down the government. so i don't think voters are going to make this distinction over who voted for the deal and who didn't. they're all in trouble. >> steve, you know, at the end of august, the white house knew that there was go to be a government shutdown. they couldn't agree with the

republicans. and they also felt at that time that they were not going to win the house. but now, because of american frustration, from both parties, they think they have a chance. so we will see. it goes from the elderly to the poor to the minority to people in appalachia. you have the head of the house appropriations committee who has a good portion of his constituency in appalachia. so, you know, it is going to be interesting to see how all of this plays out in the elections. i think people are frustrated. >> do you think republicans are feeling that fear? one of the other questions is in the time between now and the election of 2014, if republicans think they're in danger of losing the house, think they're in danger of democrats winning a bunch of swing districts, maybe that would change the behavior a little bit? >> i don't think by any stretch of the imagination we'll see republican behavior change at all, whether on economic issues, which they are absolutely deplorable on now, but also on social issues which they have a history of being absolutely

awful on. i think they're more fearful, particularly in southern states of tea party challengers and of being quote/unquote primaried. i think going forward in 2014 it is a tall order. the american public has a short memory. we have a long time to go. but whether it is on social issues or economic issues, they keep basically stabbing themselves and the american public is, you know, beginning to look and say these people are really very, very dangerous. if the people that we have sitting in congress right now, house republicans are as dangerous as they are and they might be primaried by people who are more to the right, i think that we'll see more democrats come out in midterm elections and say we got to do something about this. >> to give you an idea of the math behind this, what it would take, last year president obama nationally wins by about 5 million votes over mitt romney, pretty comfortable margin. democrats got more than a million more votes cumulatively for the house than republicans did. beat them by a point there in

the house popular vote. they would need to win the house popular vote by, like, seven points next year to be able to take this back. >> right. i think one of the things that actually republicans don't have going for them in the midterms is they don't have the president running. so i think they're not having more people come out to the ballots as crystal was saying and get more people to try and vote against the president. i think the reason you would come out to the polls from the republican side to try to beat the president out of office is gone in the midterms, especially in the last midterm. >> that anti-obama fever is still very much there. i can't imagine a tea party republican still wouldn't like to stick it to the obama democrats. >> i think that charlie's comments in how many seats, 14 seats that may be vulnerable suddenly is very, very important. when he says spectacularly self-destructive behavior, i think, you know, that is something this we have witnessed. i think that that is something that, you know, again, you're right, people have short memories, but we're going into -- we just talked all about the budget negotiations that are

coming up. we talked about december 13th and january 15th and february and we heard lots of republicans in the tea party at the very end of the shutdown saying that, like, we're okay with this, as long as we're guaranteed that the fight is going to come back in february. i think, you know, there is a lot of space here for more self-destructive behavior. >> you can as soon as we get a commercial break in right after this. want to cover and correct spots? try this: cc creams from covergirl + olay. covers spots and lines instantly

as you correct skin tone over time. goodbye, spots, hello, beautiful. cc creams from covergirl + olay. get 'em on the spot. you've got to try this sweet & sour chicken helper. i didn't know they made chicken. crunchy taco or four cheese lasagna? can i get another one of those actually? [ superfan ] hey, america, we're here to help. ♪

i interrupted you. go ahead. >> i what i was going to say, even if we believe they're not going to campaign against obama during the midterms, with the whole rollout of the -- of the affordable care act, they're going to campaign against that and they're also going to be looking at hillary clinton in 2016 and just imagine, you know, the ads that we'll be seeing about what hillary clinton might do to the country, should he be elected president of the united states. they've got lots of issues that will give them lots of fodder for debate during the midterms. >> part of the problem is, we

have to be real about this, part of the reason why the republicans are headed for self-destruction, remembering that song from 19 -- >> 1989. >> part of the reason why there is an issue for republicans, they have such disdain for this president, his politics, and you have to bring in the elephant that is in the room on this. part of this is race. you can't deny that. so the white house, of course, will never say it, but you saw the confederate flag and walk away from the koran and things of that nature, it was right there. it was right there in your face. >> and, crystal, you have firsthand experience running in a midterm with obama in the white house. you ran for congress in 2010. >> great timing on my part. >> this is the reason why a lot of democrats are pessimistic about their chances in 2014 and the reason why a lot of republicans say, even though this is going really badly for us, we think we'll be okay in 2014, the climate of the midterm is different and the types of voters who turn out is different. can you talk about the experience you had in running in

that climate in 2010? >> in 20 10, that's when the tea party was coming out, that's when the there was a huge backlash against the president and huge backlash against the health care law. and part of why i said earlier that the folks who voted for the deal to open the government, it is not going to save them, is because the democrats who voted against health care, that did not save them. it didn't matter. it was the national mood of the country. partly the reason why i'm somewhat bullish on 2014 and caveats, there is a long way to go, there is a lot that needs to be done for democrats to win, et cetera, et cetera, is because the mood is so dramatically different. this time it is democrats that are much more energized and they see the stakes of how important it is that we have the house if we're going to get anything done. on the other hand, you have republicans who are divided, angry at each other, it is ugly and i don't think that they're going to stop the self-destructive behavior because even if you do have folks who are starting to respond to the pressure from swing voters, so far those supposedly more centrist

republicans have been cowards. the tea partiers who are more worried about the primaries, they're the one that is driving the ship. i don't see that changing. i don't see anyone really other than, you know, peter king standing up and saying, we have to be reasonable, we have to keep it open. >> that's one thing to keep an eye on here. how you voted on this final deal after the government was shut down for 16 days and with the threat of default hours away maybe isn't the ultimate barometer of standing up to the tea party. it is something. it was enough for, like, thad cochran to get a preemry challenge the next day. i think that's one thing to look at. longer term question i think in terms of the idea of getting the republican party back to sort of a functioning and healthy state, the question is, you know, would a guy like lamar alexander who voted for this deal, could he survive the primary challenge next year, could lindsey graham survive the primary challenge? there say congressman from idaho who voted for the deal, if they start surviving these instead of christine o'donnell beating mike cassell in delaware, that's the

kind of thing that has to start happening. >> you see that kind of message. the one thing i would say too about the hillary issue, which is so important, i'm so glad you raised it, is because i think one of the things we saw after 2012 and the gop autopsy was the damage that was created within that party, with women voters. and i would be very, very cautious, you know, within the republican party, i would warn, you know, about being very careful with the way that they want to frame women candidates and the way they want to respond to women voters. i think women voters did not like what they saw -- with what happened in the shutdown. we saw women in the gop working much more closely with their democratic counterparts to try to forge a deal. and i would be very, very careful if i was a republican about pushing a message that seems to be anti-woman again in the midterm elections, i don't think that's a winning strategy for them. >> i think you're right. i think right now we are poised as a nation to look for something big, the next

president has to be someone big because once barack obama leaves, the first african-american, the air will be let out of the balloon and you have to bring someone else big. hillary clinton looked dynamic yesterday. the hillary clinton we saw in her red with terry mcauliffe in virginia, hair sculpted, she looked like she was back in fighting mode. i talked to former president bill clinton, during the cgi, about three weeks ago and he said, i don't know yet, you know. >> yeah. >> but she is poised. and what was the singer, elton john gave her an award and said she would be the next great president. i think the republicans have to deal with minorities, and women, the elderly. they got a whole bunch of people they got to be -- >> we are up against the hour here, but i have to get this in, i want to get the last word in the segment. tweeted this morning that franklin said on fox news this morning, for the first time, you may have to start considering speaker pelosi in 2014.

republican pollster frank lunts this morning. i want to thank april ryan, daphne windsor. is republican infighting so bad they might break apart and go the way of -- who were those guys again? we'll talk about that after this. americans take care of business. they always have. they always will. that's why you take charge of your future. your retirement. ♪ ameriprise advisors can help you like they've helped millions of others. listening, planning, working one on one. to help you retire your way... with confidence. that's what ameriprise financial does. that's what they can do with you. ameriprise financial. more within reach.

that'make my markcan do i wawith pride.ork. create moments of value. build character through quality. and earn the right to be called a classic. the lands' end no iron dress shirt. starting at 49 dollars.

♪ hey lady! noooo! no! [ tires screech ] ♪ nooo! nooo! nooo! hey lady, that's diesel! i know. ♪

♪ wears off. [ female announcer ] stop searching and start repairing. eucerin professional repair moisturizes while actually repairing very dry skin. the end of trial and error has arrived. try a free sample at eucerinus.com. the revolt against president truman reaches its climax at birmingham under the safe rights banner. murray comes out of retirement to join the protest against the president's civil rights program. more than 6,000 flock to the convention to select a presidential ticket. >> 65 years ago, southerners left the democratic party in droves over the embrace of the civil rights plank to hold their

own convention where they nominated a rival presidential ticket for the 1948 election. nominee was none other than strom thurmond, who is not always remembered as a former democrat, as a dixiecrat, but he should be. we think of the democrats and republicans as ageless eternal entities, and they have been the two major parties in this country for 150 years now. about the only thing either party kept for all that time is its name. once upon a time, no region more in love with the democratic party than the south. the white house segregationist south. this through a series of dramatic events in the middle of the 20th century when harry truman integrated the military, northern democrats pushed through that civil rights plank in 1948, when lbj signed the civil rights act in 1964, through those events that the white house south split off from the party. that series of events also marked the birth of the modern republican party. for generations after the civil war, there was basically no such thing as the republican party in the south. because the gop had been the party of northern liberals.

anti-segregation pro civil rights liberals. when the white southerners came up for grabs, the conservative movement of the republican party made common cause with them and they shaped and defined the modern republican party. sometimes parties don't get to keep their names though. sometimes they disappear. mentioning the wig party might get you a laugh these days but it was the real deal for the generation leading up to the civil war. an alliance between business interests and moorists in the north and slave owners in the south. they wanted the federal government to create conditions that were favorable to commerce. jackson in his party the democrats preferred the idea of an egruyerian nation. some of the biggest names wering when is whigs. there were three whig presidents in the 1840s and 1850s. the coalition wasn't stable. became impossible to avoid the

issue of slavery and that issue there was no common ground. party fractured and the whigs of the north folded into the new anti-slavery party called the republicans. the whigs of the south became the democrats. the whig party was tossed on the scrap heap of history. given everything that happened in washington recently, everything that is still happening in washington, i'm not about to predict today's republicans will go the way of the whigs. if one thing is clear, what defines the republican party isn't that stable. at least at this moment. one way of looking at what is happening now is it is a phase. the tea party uprising is temporarily paralyzed the gop helped to elect dozens of true believers who pride themselves on standing up not just for the obama white house, but also to their own party's leadership in washington. movement that is also scared the daylights out of republican office holders who aren't true believers, but they bite their tongues and play along with the tea party anyway because they don't want to be the next victims. the story of john boehner's

speakership. but maybe, maybe it is all a phase that will just pass. poisonous poll numbers take a real toll and scare the true believers straight. the business community, the financial backbone, will assert itself, the passions of the base will cool, the true believers will realize they can't get everything they want if their party isn't big enough to win national elections. that's the happy ending that the republican party establishment is hoping for. won't happen next week, won't happen next month, but eventually the gop will evolve back into a relatively healthy and relatively functional political party. we watch the extraordinary lengths, the increasingly extraordinary lengths that john boehner has to go to just to do things like averting a default. it raises another possibility. what if this isn't just a passing phase in the history of republican party. what if we're living through a bigger more fundamental turning point? republicans have bp t s havs ha of business for a long time. it is one of their favorite things to talk about. how many times have they invoked

job creators past few years? we're watching right now the interest of the tea party and the interest of the business community diverge. businesses terrified of a default, hates of idea of flirting with a default, which is what it did. in the tea party, well, it just didn't seem to care all that much. that leaves establishment figures stomach pd abofigure s stumped about what to do. i can't see how it can last. it feels like something is going to give, something is going to have to give and soon. and here to discuss this, we have msnbc contributor victoria difrancesco soto, fellow at ut, back at the table and shawn valencia at princeton university, still with us crystal ball from msnbc and political strategist michelle bernard. and will confess, if that monologue sounds familiar, i did do a version of that on the rachel maddow show the other day. i would like to get some smart people around to talk about

this. i'm a public school guy. i appreciate that. you're the resident political historian at the table. when you look at today's republican party and the dysfunction that defines the republican party in washington right now what we presented, can you look at this and apply some historical context and say, yeah, the party is going to be all right, they go through phases like this or seeing something extraordinary? >> it is hard to say. depends what the tea party manages to do. not the whig party so much. it is the democrats from the same period. party of the south and of the west, they flip names, but then the party is being driven very, very hard to the right in effect by a faction. that faction was the faction led by john c. calhoun. the politics lines up more exactly because that was the party of nullification, the party of not just small government, but really small government, and that eventually was going to lead to secession.

that's the challenge i think the republicans face today. not so much, i don't think the tea party is interested in forming a whig party or having people fall out, they want to take the republican party over and we'll see if they do. >> what happens to -- if the tea party does take over the republican party, we're seeing how their interests don't always line up with what has been the financial backbone of the republican party, the business community. and you look at our two party system now, the democrats are already sort of the party of labor. what happens to business if the tea party takes over? >> i actually don't think the tea party is going to take over. i think what we'll see in the next couple of months is the business sector really reassert itself. what happened with business in the past couple of years was, first of all, they didn't take tea party candidates seriously. when you're ted cruz came around, they said who is this crazy whacko guy and look where he is today. they also were turning a blind eye because they had so much contempt for obama. so now they're saying, okay, we cannot turn a blind eye anymore. and we need to treat every

contender seriously and then you also see the institutional components like roads, american victory project going forward. we see the business class asserting itself institutionally and not taking anything for granted. >> we did have some news this week, this was a bloomberg story yesterday that has the chamber of commerce, the political arm of that, run by scott reed, ran bob dole's campaign, we're planning to spend, we the chamber of commerce, spending a lot of many town support the thad cook ranz chrans of the wo. >> i never thought i would see the day where i'm like, yes, chamber of commerce! but, you know, the problem with that is for as important as money is in politics, the business community is not going to take to the streets. it is just not who they are constitutionally. they might, you know, throw in money for lobbying and behind candidates, that is sort of the civilized thing to do, but they're never going to be the

ones at the town hall meeting, screaming at the members of congress. that's not going to happen. as much as i'm encouraged to see these sort of movements from the chamber and from more sort of reasonable people who would like the country to continue running, i am not ultimately hopeful that this is going to be that helpful because it is not just the money coming from the tea party that is the problem. it is the fact that the money is feeding into all of this anger from citizens in the districts who will show up who will call, who will take to the streets. and ultimately when someone is in your face like that, that is what the real pressure is on these legislators. >> i have to say, i am actually very hopeful that we're going to see a big change. my prediction would be that we're going to see the great american center rise. you are meeting -- it is anecdotal, but i would tell you, i have met republican after republican in the last few weeks, particularly over the last 16 days of the government shutdown, who have said, you know, i've done this very qui quiet

quietly, but i'm now an independent, i've done it this quietly but i'm a republican. they have said they're doing so number one because when one party can hate one president so much, that they're willing to destroy the country, that something is very, very wrong. when one party has the loudest voices in their party being anti-black, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-hispanic, something is very, very wrong. and then on top of that, you're willing to cripple the economy, we don't want anything to do with this. i do believe and i'm quite fearful of the tyranny of the minority, i think the tea party has a very good chance of taking over the republican party and i think as a result of that, we will see more and more moderate republicans migrate out and either self-identify as independents or become -- >> that's the question i had, take an issue like the affordable care act, like obama care, defunding obama care, the drive to do that behind the shutdown, the default brinkmanship we went through, the dispute there that exists in the republican party is not over

the tea party republicans who want to get rid of it and the moderate republicans who say, no, this is a good law, republicans, we should be for it, it is entirely a tactical dispute. the tea party saying, basically taking the rhetoric that the entire parties agreed to its logical conclusion. every party said this is a kill -- >> getting back to crystal, i agree the tea partiers are fired up, they are out there. but the key to republican moderates is using that money to get nonprimary republican voters out to vote in those primaries. it is going to be difficult, but you need to get -- >> that's a big battle. >> that's a push. >> i don't think we're there. you can see the dynamics in the last fight. the tea partiers make up a minority, even within the republican caucus. but the others are so fearful that they were quiet and allowed this to happen. i think the republican party has to hit bottom. they have to nominate someone like ted cruz and lose 40 states before there will be a real

backlash. >> if the tea party takes over, not unlike what happened in '64 when the extremist wing of the republican party nominated barry goldwater and had to go through that experience. they caught on and changed and moved to richard nixon, conservative but not barry goldwater. >> they ended up at reagan and ended up -- >> reagan was different, a much more inclusive kind of politician than barry goldwater was. it is a much broader -- a different situation too. different time. but the other thing was neither the whig party nor the republican party had the freedom works, all that stuff feeding it. it is the anger. the money behind it is extraordinary. that's why i think the tea party, may not succeed in the short run, but it is not going away anytime soon. >> it is extraordinary. if you think in the last week to see orrin hatch who i used to think of as the conservative's conservative and john mccain coming out and saying we have got a serious problem, and

republican party cannot be run by the heritage foundation, heritage action, the club for growth, i mean, normally you would never see that kind of public statement being made. and they said it, this shows us there is a -- it is not just a splint nerg the republicering i party, they have an earthquake going on and the tea party is responsible for that. >> i'm curious, we talk about the difference between the tea party wing and the moderate republican wing, what does it mean? what would it mean to be a moderate republican anymore? >> you're a democrat. >> there it is. we'll take it up on the other side. we'll pick up that question on the other side. [ female announcer ] the best thing about this bar

it's not a candy bar. 130 calories

7 grams of protein the fiber one caramel nut protein bar. [ male announcer ] staying warm and dry has never been our priority. our priority is, was and always will be serving you, the american people. so we improved priority mail flat rate to give you a more reliable way to ship. now with tracking up to eleven scans, specified delivery dates, and free insurance up to $50 all for the same low rate. [ woman ] we are the united states postal service. [ man ] we are the united states postal service. [ male announcer ] and our priority is you. go to usps.com® and try it today.

are you prepared to back challengers to these republican senators in their contests? >> i've been saying for years

that robust competitive primaries make for a better political system. it makes people work harder. and express more articulately what their record is and what their intentions for our country is. so as for the individual races, i'm going to see who the opposition to the sitting kind of status quo politicians are, and we'll go from there. >> sarah palin, same question i ask about the super committee earlier, remember her? there she is, toying with primary challengers, backing primary challengers in 2014. more news this morning, marco rubio on fox news this morning asked about whether he would join the senate conservative fund, the jim demint group, and opposing mitch mcconnell in the republican primary and he said, no, he's for mcconnell in that primary. i know rubio has been pretty quiet and sensitive to offending the right after the immigration stuff earlier this year. picking this up where we left off after the break, i was talking about what it would mean to be a moderate republican

anymore. i'm thinking of this in the context of compare the affordable care act, obama care now with when bill clinton tried to propose a national health care program, a generation ago. and back then the parties were, i think, a little more ideologically diverse, yeeographye geographically diverse. one plan that was drawn up by the heritage foundation became the basis for what president obama did a generation later. we're in an era where the parties are so sorted out that as sort of the sort of default -- it is the home of all of the conservatives in the country, no alternative for republicans to pose, nothing for them to do but oppose obama care. is there room anymore for a moderate republican or have they sorted themselves out so much, there is no in between. >> i don't see where there is room. you get branded by talk radio,

or by others as a republican in name only. someone has -- someone in talk radio or many people in conservative talk radio now have the ability to define. there is a litmus test for what it is to be a republican, and if you don't make -- meet all of the standards on that checklist, you're a republican in name only. what do you do? don't think quote/unquote moderate republicans have any choice but to hang in there and watch the party self-destruct, or if you're a dedicated public servant. >> there is a middle. in terms of an nbc poll that just came out recently, we see there is an ideological base on the left. and on the right. but there is a vast middle. there is your minivan moms, your pickup game blue collar folks, your apathetic -- there is a middle there. the republican party, if it wanted to, could approach that middle. the problem is they're not doing a good job of it. >> historically, the removal of

the moderates goes back to '94 and it has been a long process. it begins with gingrich and what gingrich is doing. they all -- gingrich said in '94, out in '98, he said, i want to lead, but i don't want to lead cannibals and a process of cannibalization in the republican party ever since and that's where we are today. who are the moderates in the republican party? if orrin hatch is the moderate wing of the republican party, policy has shifted and the cannibalization has been really complete. >> how much of this, i raise this yesterday in the show talking about ted cruz, how much of this isn't about ideology, it is about tribalism or tribalism, like a conservative -- a demographic -- a sort of very specific demographic group maybes up the conservative tribe and it is just fear of offending the tribe more than it is fear of breaking any ideological thing -- >> i think there is a lot to that. we talk about gerry mandering and that had an impact. we're also self-sorting. we are moving ourselves into

ideological enclaves and there might be people who are more moderate, but they are not the ones who are fired up. they're never going to be the ones taking to the streets, not going to be in control of the primary process. and even in the nbc poll, you know, who was classified as moderates, didn't necessarily mean that they were moderate on a particular issue. they had a different ideological sort of mix in terms of where they are on different issues. they might have been more socially liberal, more fiscally conservative or fis versa. but that didn't mean they were necessarily in the center on every issue. so i don't know. i've never seen this thing of the center suddenly becoming energized and overruling the folks at the extreme because those are the people that are the most energized and control the process. >> where do we think this is going? we have seen this tea party movement sort of rise up at the start of the obama era. with barack obama, you know,

two-term limit, out in january of 2017, does that take the air out of it or is this the future? >> i don't think about barack obama particularly, i think it is about any democratic president, back to bill clinton. the idea that democrats should be in the white house is illegitimate as far as these people are concerned. it is not going to end. the internal dynamics means the death throws of the continued turmoil, it is going to continue. it is going to continue. and it is going to continue. i don't see it ending anytime soon. >> at least at the state level. let's think back why the tea party -- it goes back to tom delay's move in redistricting midterm for texas. and it filtered up. we have a ted cruz really because of a tom delay, so if the democrats for the medium to long-term want to see a shift in our politics, we need to go to the state houses and when we start building up those races and getting democratic houses and redistricting comes around, that's where we can finally put the tea party to rest. >> go ahead. >> the fact that if you think about today's republican party,

the fact that eisenhower, nixon and ronald reagan would be too liberal for today's republican party, that's -- it is a very sad negotiation about what has happened in terms of the cannibalization of the right and of the republican party. i think the good news is, in a very ironic way for people in the middle and for democrats is this is a great opportunity to go out and energize the voters who really care about the country and who quite frankly their livelihoods are in danger, to go out and get them energized and engaged in politics. think about all the people who can vote, that don't vote that are registered to vote or not even registered and should register and go out and vote, and i believe that there is a time now for the critical mass, the great american center, to get involved and actually do something about this. >> i think we settled it. end where we started. the whig party is coming back. i want to thank michelle bere narcotic, victoria difrancesco soto, sean willentz.

a passionate movement is coming to washington, d.c. and doesn't involve the tea party. we'll tell you when it is next. thank you orville and wilbur... ...amelia... neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions... in everything from the best experiences below... to the finest comforts above. we're not simply saluting history... we're making it. [ male announcer ] you say mango. ♪ old el paso says mango salsa stand 'n stuff steak tacos. ♪ you say what's for dinner? old el paso says start somewhere fresh. it guides you to a number that will change it guides you to a number your life: your sleep number setting.

it even knows you by name. now it's easier than ever to experience deep, restful sleep with the sleep number bed's dualair technology. at the touch of a button, the sleep number bed adjusts to each person's ideal comfort and support. and you'll only find it at a sleep number store. where right now our newest innovations are available with 36-month financing. sleep number. comfort individualized. a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. celebrex can be taken with or without food.

and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion.

add brand new belongings from nationwide insurance and we'll replace stolen or destroyed items with brand-new versions. we put members first. join the nation. ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪ seems every week in our rapid fire high stakes current events quiz show up against the clock there is one question that stumps everyone, like this one yesterday. >> d.c. area congresswoman donna edwards co-sponsored legislation this week that would strip the trademark from this controversially named organization. time! not showing that as a knock on our contestants. they all passed our screening process. they acquitted themselves honorably. if you don't know the answer, we'll tell you and talk about the sensitive issue at the heart of it right after this. [ male announcer ] mmmm.

cinnamon and sugar so delicious. oh yeah. the cinna-sweet taste you just can't resist. cinnamon toast crunch. crave those crazy squares®.

to your first roll, pampers swaddlers was there. and now swaddlers are available through size 5, for many more firsts to come. ♪ pampers. ♪ make my mark i wawith pride.ork. create moments of value. build character through quality. and earn the right to be called a classic. the lands' end no iron dress shirt. starting at 49 dollars. a little kid, back in third

grade or fourth grade, a spent a week at a camp sponsored by the local basketball team, the chiefs. within a few years, the school changed its identity, became part of the university of massachusetts, umass lowell was the new name. there was pressure on the school to change the nickname too. the school releaptrelented and chiefs became the river hawks. similar story played out in new york city around the same time. 1994, st. john's university stopped calling their teams the red men and became the red storm. in 2005, seminole tribe of florida passed a resolution to continue to use the same logo and traditions. it prompted dozens of nickname changes from elementary schools to premiere universities all across the nation. there is a singular team name that remain unchanged. stands out for prominence, popularity and brutal origins. the washington redskins. battle over the nfl franchise is

the pinnacle of the decades long fight over team tradition trumps racial sensitivity. maryland democratic congressman donna edwards, whose district includes the stadium where the team plays, introduced legislation to require the redskins to change their name. president of the united states said he would think about changing it if he was the team's owner, and this week the man with one of the biggest microphones in all of football, bob costas, said it is time for washington to ditch the moniker. >> put it in these terms, if you were to walk into a gathering of native americans, on a reservation or happened to come across a family of native americans in a restaurant and you began conversing with them, would you feel comfortable referring to them as redskins? >> want to bring in wilson pipeston of a tribe in the osage nation. and we have crystal ball and evan mcmorris santoro. wilson, i'll start with you.

welcome back. it feels to me, in the latest sort of big news on this, i guess you want to call it, this is charles crowthamer, it feels to me there is some new momentum on this, do you feel this is all coming to a head and something is going to change? >> i think it certainly is. you're seeing daniel snyder become more and more isolated on this issue. you have president obama, charles, real conservatives, saying it is time for a name change, daniel snyder has to take this very seriously. and you're seeing also that roger goodell, and daniel snyder now saying two very different things. first, they were on the same song book. saying that no change is necessary. and daniel snyder said no, never, we will never change the name, put it in caps. now you see roger goodell saying, well, if one person is offended, we need to take this very seriously. and i think very soon, sometime

very soon, daniel snyder will look out from his sky box at fedex field and see society changed around him and it will not be a good place to be. >> can you tell us about snyders of the washington redskins team owner and this guy bought the team, like 30 years old or something, haven't been that good with him as an owner. he's been so sort of stubborn on this, i think. what is behind the -- just financial, something more? >> he's dug in his heels. that's the personality of the man. safe to say the most loathed owner in the nfl fairly or unfairly. i think i have to add fairly or unfairly. it is an extremely valuable brand. it goes back 80 years. what they always say, the intentionality of the nickname is not to offend. they go back to why they were ska called the redskins, a famous player, willie dietz was a member of an indian tribe, though scholars have researched his heritage and perhaps he wasn't even.

he was actually hauled before a court to challenge that. >> the original owner of the washington redskins, his history on racial issues is nothing -- >> a flatout racist. but so i think when snyder started this, always a little bit in the background, it just clearly is a slur, been a slur and known to be a slur in dictionaries for two decades. the question is will you change? now there is more momentum, the president weighing in and even snyder himself, he said the never thing back in march, now he's not saying that he's going to change it, but his tone, he's not saying put it in all caps anymore. >> that's the thing i noted too. snyder sent out a letter that he is still very much standing by the name very much laying out the argument that you say that it is meant as a term of respect and why do we want to strip all native american heritage from society. but it was much more meant to be much more genuine and contemplative, i thought about this and it is weighing on me verse never you put it in all caps, absolutely never.

i thought the piece was thoughtful. his argument was, look, language changes, i'm not for the language police this is what he was saying. i'm not for the language police. but just think about it. you would never use the word negro anymore. not because of the language police, but because you yourself have realized it has negative connotations that you don't want to be associated with. and it is the same thing here. so i think you're right, steve. i've been a washington sports fan and in particular skins fan since i was a little kid. and i've never seen this much momentum, this much attention to the name. i think we are coming to a place where snyder will find it is in his financial interest ultimately to make the change. >> will, from the politics in d.c., you have president obama, you know, weighing in on this, you have tom cole, top republican, indian heritage, he's speaking out, donna edwards, the congresswoman, whose district includes fedex field, now with this legislation we teased from the great quiz show we do on weekends.

how much of that -- how much of that political pressure do you think is a factor here? can we expect more of that, more people in washington speaking out? >> as a political reporter, i will say that it does feel to me like we have reached a point where this is going to change. i know there is a lot of fights going on, debate going on. if i'm covering this as a political issue and it is on the campaign trail, this is the part where the candidate has decided not to apologize, decided not to, and then they're going to apologize. i feel like we have flipped over that, and part of this is this political pressure. nobody wants to really defend this, except for a lot of -- >> it is really defensible. >> to be fair, i live on u street in d.c., a street that is very proud football street, when the games are played. and people there, they don't want to see the name change. a lot of people -- a lot of fans don't want to see the name change. >> there is polling on this. you poll the fans, you poll the question, there is still a lot of support for the nickname. we have it up there.

this is an associated press poll from april. keep the name or change it. 79% to 11%. there is a gap here between the conversation we're having and the conversation that fans of the team are having. >> i think that can change rapidly. people don't want to be offensive. they don't want to be associated with an offensive name. they may be the biggest washington sports fans, they may love the skins, but they may come to feel uncomfortable with the name at the -- the more they hear about it, the more they realize what the historical connotation is. >> there are examples of peter king is the sportswriter of the sports illustrated nfl writer who doesn't use the term anymore. there is a lot of self-censorship i haven't seen before. wilson, maybe you can talk about what would it mean for -- this is -- the movement to change this name is part of a much broader and longer movement and we'll talk about it more late, but part of a long movement that is decades in the making. what would it -- is the feeling like if we can get washington to change their name, then all of this will go away at every level in the country, every name like this will go away?

>> i'm not sure about that. i do know that ignorance is a very powerful enemy. it is particularly powerful for indian people who are fewer in numbers, and many of us live in isolated places. but i think what we're seeing is a moral change in the public is coming -- the society is just becoming more educated on the issue and those numbers will change. so, first of all, wouldn't question the polls, first of all, and the questions that went into them. but, you know, last year i'm a father of four young kids, one of my two boys in the seventh and fifth grades. they came home and asked me questions about this washington team name and the activity that goes along with this. and we sat down and talked about it. they said, dad, are they making fun of us? i said, well, we need to talk about that. when you're an indian parent, and you're trying to teep your kids, it is a good thing to be an indian and you should respect other people who are different than other, and when we see things this this sort of -- you try to teach them that the ceremonial use of paint and the use of eagle feathers are sacred

and these are good things, that it makes it more difficult when these sort of things are part of a significant institution within our society, and ultimately when confronted by the truth of the team name, its origins and meaning, the meaning and background of george marshall preston or george marshall preston, that they will realize that when society is couldn't fronted with the truth, there will be change. and the change is coming. >> and, mike, i wonder too, i heard other names out there suggested for -- the city paper in washington calls them the pigskins now. >> i like that. >> the football, the hog, the hoget tradition, it seems to mess with the team, would they really lose much money? p >> peta will not like that one. usually the redskins of miami of ohio became the red hawks, st. johns became the red storm. sometime they keep the red, sometimes they don't. i think the -- another point that people are making is, well, once you change this, what's the

next guy down the road? what about the fighting irish? what about the minnesota vikings? what about something else that might be analogous, therefore can i give offense in the first instance? there might be other things. i think it is a poor analogy. the fact that i would be uncomfortable turning to this gentleman saying, how about the redskins, makes me feel bad, sorry, dude, i think at some point you look at those polls, not just the one you put up, you look at poll and you say native americans aren't a majority of them polled aren't against it. what number are we happy being rude and offending people and making their feelings extremely hurt. 20% fine. i'm fine offending 20% of native americans. i'm not. >> there is an interesting story. in north dakota, there was a campaign and it led to a vote last year and surprising result. we have that poll number on the washington name, something very different happen north dakotaed in last year. we'll tell you about it after this. not double-talk. if you have the nerve to believe

that in a puzzling financial world, clarity is king. [ man ] if you believe nothing beats a sit-down for knowing where you stand. [ male announcer ] join the nearly 7 million investors who think like you do: face time and think time make a difference. join us. [ male announcer ] for 90 years, it's how edward jones has made sense of investing. wears off. [ female announcer ] stop searching and start repairing. eucerin professional repair moisturizes while actually repairing very dry skin. the end of trial and error has arrived. try a free sample at eucerinus.com. of their type 2 diabetes with non-insulin victoza®. for a while, i took a pill to lower my blood sugar, but it didn't get me to my goal. so i asked my doctor about victoza®. he said victoza® is different than pills. victoza® is proven to lower blood sugar and a1c. it's taken once-a-day, any time, and comes in a pen.

and the needle is thin. victoza® is not for weight loss, but it may help you lose some weight. victoza® is an injectable prescription medicine that may improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. it is not recommended as the first medication to treat diabetes and should not be used in people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. victoza® has not been studied with mealtime insulin. victoza® is not insulin. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. symptoms of a serious allergic reaction may include: swelling of face, lips, tongue, or throat, fainting or dizziness, very rapid heartbeat, problems breathing or swallowing, severe rash or itching. tell your doctor if you get a lump or swelling in your neck. serious side effects may happen in people who take victoza®, including inflammation of the pancreas (pancreatitis), which may be fatal.

stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have signs of pancreatitis, such as severe pain that will not go away in your abdomen or from your abdomen to your back, with or without vomiting. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the most common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, and headache. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. if your pill isn't giving you the control you need ask your doctor about non-insulin victoza®. it's covered by most health plans. got it! i...did not get it. [ female announcer ] you may not be the best with a smart phone but you know what's best for your kids. so we listened when you said gogurt should have only natural colors and flavors and no high fructose corn syrup. thanks, mom. so, talking about the controversy over washington's name is really the product of a

decades long campaign. and one of the most sort of prominent and drawn out aspects of the campaign is involved, the university of north dakota. you don't necessarily associate university of north dakota with athletic greatness. in the world of college hockey, university of north dakota, it is a big deal. the story is they were called for years, the fighting sioux, one of the top college hockey programs in a country, big arena, 15,000 seat arena. the ncaa passed a rule and said they were going to start penalizing teams, not allow them to competition if they had offensive names. so the fighting sioux had to long protracted fight and all came to a head basically last year where faced with the sanctions, they put this to a vote, and they put this to the vote in the state of north dakota and 68% said, no, let's get rid of the name. the university of north dakota is looking for, they have until 2015, to come up with it. they don't have a nickname now. it is no longer the fighting sioux.

that's an examine where once you explain the issue, people's minds changed on it. >> the idea that the team names honor american indians and alaska natives, i think that's wrong. if you see what george marshall, the first owner, george preston marshall said, what he did as the first owner, he created this team name, and he was -- as was said earlier, he was an avowed racist and he made william dietz, the head coach, wear a fake head dress and dance around to try to -- as a way of entertaining fans, or trying to get more interest in the team. that is not honoring american indian people. that's denigrating them. so daniel snyder is a part of that legacy and needs to change that legacy. >> one thing i want to ask you, the one exception to this ncaa rul

rule -- this was a tradition created, no roots in actual history, but the seminole tribe did this in conjunction with florida state. seminole tribe appealed to the ncaa and said we want this to continue. i'm curious what you think of this. >> that's exactly how it should work, when you're using imagery that belongs to a certain tribe. they should be working together, respecting one another and i think that's just fine. >> there ray coupare a couple o you have to get the tribe to sign off and present evidence to the ncaa. the show aspect of it has been less because of that. it is more or less to honor the chippewas still exist, more or less to honor the tribes rather than just, you know, appropriate them. >> wilson, i was wondering if you get at all frustrated, though, that the debate we're having on this show is about the name, but we talk very little in this country about other issues, which are much more important to

native americans in this country. do you get frustrated with the lack of concern in those areas? >> i don't really think there is a lack of concern. even though this one is an issue that is right now, it has been around for a long time. so last week i was at the national congress of american indians convention. and tribal leaders across the country decided this for a long time. it is not like there is a real ongoing debate. despite some of the manufactured polls you see out there, indian country, i believe, is a -- has largely -- indians are tribal people. and our tribal leaders have spoke out across the country saying this is really something that needs to be changed. so do i -- i think that our issues do get attention. we have seen dramatic change over the last year, with legislation, changes in policies through the obama administration, so i don't think we're getting short thrift. >> i wonder if you can game out what you think happens next, how this all kind of plays out? there seems to be a consensus we're heading towards had this is eventually going to change, when, how, what are the conditions what do you think will play out here?

>> i think probably roger goodell, the nfl commissioner intercedes and made clear to daniel the nfl commissioner intercedes. and maybe there can be some way, you know, i think snyder is a really good businessman, despite everything else that he's arguably fairly or unfairly the most loathed -- you know, you could resell a lot of jerseys if you have a new team name. you could resell stadium naming rights if you have a new team name. he could probably make a ton more money on the red clouds or red anything or the pigskins or whatever. >> anyone, what should we know today? our answers are coming up after this. is all about getting things to work together. the timing, the actions, the reactions. everything has to synch up. my expenses are no different. receiptmatch on the business gold rewards card synchronizes your business expenses. just shoot your business card receipts

and they're automatically matched up with the charges on your online statement. i'm john kaplan, and i'm a member of a synchronized world. this is what membership is. this is what membership does. with 0-calorie monk fruit in the raw. it's made with the natural, vine-ripened sweetness of fruit, so you can serve up deliciously sweet treats without all the sugar. raw natural sweetness, raw natural success. help the gulf when we made recover and learn the gulf, bp from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts

watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger.

all right. time to find out what our guests think we should know. crystal, we'll start with you. >> i think we'll hear a lot of talk about health care this week and the white house is now saying that almost 500,000 people have filed applications, that's not the same thing as enrolling, but they are trying to show that there are a lot of

people who are interested and who are filing applications and that is moving forward. >> all right. evan? >> very interesting sort of twin track, two stories we've been talking a lot about. voting rights and abortion rights are going to be happening in albuquerque, new mexico, on november 19th. there's a ballot initiative to ban abortion after 20 weeks. and because of some extrsome th, the normal vote by mail has been canceled. it's going to be a low turnout election in a liberal place and interesting you'll see things happening with abortion there. something to keep an eye on. >> this week the sons of jim thorpe and the second fox nation will file briefs in a federal appeal course in a case about whether or not jim thorpe remains will come back to the second fox nation for internment there. in 1963, when jim thorpe died, they had started a ceremony to begin his funeral, and his widow

came in with the state troopers, took his body away, because she had sold that to a place that's now called jim thorpe, pennsylvania. really hopeful that jim thorpe will come home. >> possibly the greatest american athlete ever. so those were really etifying. i'll take this in a different direction. we have less than two weeks from halloween where the streets are filled with ghosts and goblins. but there are no goblins. no costume store sells goblin outfits. we say ghosts and goblins, there are no goblins out there. i figured out why. goblins are weird, they're small, they have one trick, they bite you on the leg. they're not at all cool. if you want to be a ghoul, be a zombie. we've got to do away with the "ghost and goblin" idiom. >> how about washington goblins. >> well, my last week, in case

you remember, i'll never stop bragging about this, i successfully predicted the final score of the patriots and saints game, i said 30-27 patriots. i'm not going to try to do a football -- melissa is angry. i'm not going to do that again today. i am going to say the red sox in five games in the world series, though. i want to thank wilson pipestem, mike pesca, krystal ball. thank you for getting up and thanks for joining us. melissa harris-perry is next. next, a very serious conversation about rape culture. this is a conversation that should be seen by anyone. parents, students, and especially young men. when it comes to sexual assault, there are many false assumptions and misunderstandings. melissa will tackle those matters head-on this morning. stick around for that and we'll see you next week here on "up." hey guys.

hey! glad y'all made it. sorry we're late. did you run into traffic? no, just had to stop by the house to grab a few things. you stopped by the house? uh-huh. yeah. alright, whenever you get your stuff, run upstairs, get cleaned up for dinner. you leave the house in good shape? yeah. yeah, of course. ♪ [ sportscaster talking on tv ] last-second field go-- yeah, sure ya did. [ male announcer ] introducing at&t digital life. personalized home security and automation. limited availability in select markets. ♪ ...amelia... neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions... in everything from the best experiences below... to the finest comforts above. we're not simply saluting history... we're making it.

with an innovative showerhead plus wireless speaker, kohler is the proud sponsor of singing in the shower.

this morning. my question, why is chipotle taking on the food industry? plus, the brutality of rape culture marks a town in missouri. and why 12 years of slave may be the most important film of the year. but first, one year since sandy. how response from the storm predicted our recent government shutdown. good morning. i'm melissa harris-perry. in just two days, the anniversary begins for what was the deadliest hurricane to hit the northeast of the united states in 40 years. on october 22nd, 2012, a tropical depression formed over the caribbean and strengthened into tropical storm sandy. the storm first made landfall in