for joining us tonight. >> thank you. >> the documentary is called "into the sea." you can find out how to watch it on our facebook page or website. leadership. let's play "hardball." ♪ good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. today the president of the united states delivered on his promise of the country that twice elected him. the world partners on a course towards peace, he brought us hope. he will be chapped, of course and with iran and in your face challenge to the people who surrounded and ruined the last presidency. the neocons and their blimps, chicken hawks and dick cheneys

that controlled george w. bush and brought us to the chaos of today's middle east, the very notion of talking to the enemy. they live and speak the op-ed columns, everyone hates us, no one is to be trusted. least of all, our elected leaders. president obama threw out the challenge. with the preliminary deal with world leaders and the government of iran. he said those who kill the deal before it's tested must take full responsibility for the ultimate option out there, another war. this is why we elected this president, to strike out a new position of hope. he is not the first president to do so. woodrow wilson campaigned to the end of his life for u.s. league of nations only to have republicans in the senate back then, like the senior killed it. and the naysayers for the marshal plan and jack kennedy signed a ban treaty, and richard

nixon conditioned with brezhnev and pushing for peace at camp david with others not resisting him. he ended up brokering a treaty with israel and then posed the greatest military threat in the region. of course, ronald reagan brought an end to the cold war working with gorbachev. today he resolved one of the greatest threats to world security. >> today, after many months of tough principled diplomacy, we have achieved the framework for that deal. and it is a good deal. a deal that meets our core objectives. this framework would cut off every pathway that iran could take to develop a nuclear weapon. we have a historic opportunity to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons in iran and to do so

peacefully with the international community firmly behind us. we should seize that chance. >> let's go to andrea mitchell. the big story today, andrea? >> reporter: the big story today is the deal is a lot more specific than many people had imagined, partly because they had refused to give any details to keep the secrecy of the negotiations. they had an all-nighter last night and ended at 6:00 in the morning and it paid off. they got a deal that the president signed off on. he was briefed about 10:00 your time, 4:00 in the afternoon our time and it started to come together. they left a lot on the table. a lot has to be negotiated. the iranians said that sanctions would come off but the timing and phasing has not been determined. there's hard negotiations ahead in the next three months before a final deal, if it can be done, can be agreed to on june 30th. but i really feel that they

dealt with more than was expected. they talked down the working centrifuges to 5,000 plus. the centrifuges that make the nuclear fuel will have to be first generation, not the new, advanced ones. they've got eyes on, they claim, with new technology from the u.n. weapons inspectors that can be verified. so i think the downside was they wouldn't stand up together and sign or read the same statement and zarif said the white house put out a specific fact cheat sheet. he just felt that the deal was good enough, why do you have to be specific? they don't want to be that specific. it's important for them for their politics back home to keep it vague until they actually is to get the sanctions relief, which is what they want, and sign the real document. >> thanks so much. that's nbc's andrea mitchell in switzerland. >> reporter: you bet. >> president obama had a strong warning for congress.

>> if congress kills this deal not based on expert analysis and not offering any reasonable alternative, then it's the united states that will be blamed for the failure of diplomacy. international unity will collapse and the path to conflict will widen. >> i'm joined right now by bill richardson, former u.s. ambassador to the united nations and joe cirincione, president of the ploughshares fund. governor richardson, thank you for joining us. i wonder if the president's first goal was to screw up the deal before it's even brokered? >> it's going to be a tough sell. there are three problems. one, will the negotiators achieve the unquestioned big questions in the agreement. in other words, the pace of sanctions release, the inspections regime. secondly, will khamenei, the iranian leader embrace the deal? second, how can iran destroy

this many centrifuges in a short period of time? there's a lot of questions on here but if congress moves before june 30th, they can squelch this deal. i think congress needs to give the negotiators between now and june 30th, the europeans and the u.s. a chance to conclude the best possible deal. >> the only thing that could actually stop the president is a veto approved by congress and that would require a lot of democrats. >> i think democrats are going to be with the president on this. i think some republicans will be with him. there will always be those politicians and ideologues but the warriors, they are going to like this deal. it eliminates one of the greatest threats we face and nobody dies and doesn't cost us anything. >> governor, i'm afraid there

are people out there that want it to fail, not just a deal but the success of the deal. they don't want any kind of reproach with iran, they don't want a working relationship, even if it's only on the strategic weaponry. the saudis don't seem to want us getting back together. some israelis don't like them being there. they want to crush them. in our own country, good old partisan politics, they don't want obama to look good. >> well, i'm not as optimistic as joe is. i want to see new details. i think it's a good diplomatic start but i wouldn't be doing any victory laps. i would like to see iran go beyond this nuclear agreement. if they've made concessions on these issues, chris, between now and june 30, why don't they release that american marine, that american journalist? why don't they act more responsibly in iraq and act more responsibly in yemen and act more responsibly in the region,

stop being a state sponsor of terrorism? i know i'm throwing a lot in there. >> yeah. >> but they've made concessions. sanctions have hurt them. i want them to be more responsible actors. i think the devil's in the details. i think the administration deserves credit for moving the ball forward with the europeans but i don't think you're going to see this great exultation of a major victory. the administration deserves. >> we had brezhnev deals with nixon. they brought down the threat of a nuclear war between our two countries. you can get big stuff done without getting everything done. >> right. when nixon went to china, 22 years earlier the chinese had killed thousands of marines and still arming the north vietnamese who was still at war with us. this issue does not solve everything but locks it up and puts a camera on it. >> let me go back to bill richardson.

isn't it true that ultimately there are not three options. we end up having to blow them up over there or not get a deal. do you believe there's a third alternative? the president says there is, which is to get tougher sanctions and break them. >> well, i think sanctions has hurt them. it's hurt them with their gasoline, their food, their comprehensive on energy markets, on medicine. you know, another issue is going to be if there is a iranian oil that comes into the market with sanctions relief. that's going to lower gasoline prices but it's also going to lower the price of oil worldwide. that's going to be a little bit of economic turmoil which can go either way. look, i think it's a good start. but, again, the proof is in the pudding. what is going to happen between now and june 30th when you have to formalize these agreements? yes, there is less plutonium, yes, there is less centrifuges.

nuclear fuel cannot be exported. i was pleased that the iaea is going to inspect. but the level, chris, of finding ways that iran ensures its observance of this treaty, that hasn't been settled and the sanctions relief, the base of that, that hasn't been settled either. let's see how it happen there is. >> on a score of one to ten, how much do you trust their willingness for what zarif said he would do today? >> i would say 4, 3. i don't trust the iranians. i want them to do a lot more but that's the role of the international inspectors and community. >> joe, where are you on that continuum? one to ten? very charming today, zarif. is he as good as his word? >> it's been verified by the world powers. it's not just the u.s. and iran doing this. i think all of the incentives are on iran to fulfill this deal. >> nine or ten?

>> i'm going to give it a ten. do we have a verification system that can catch iran if they cheat. >> we have a mean number here of 6 1/2. not great but okay. i just averaged the two. bill richardson, thank you, you know your stuff. i'm joined by ali arouzi who is in tehran. thanks for staying up all night tonight. >> reporter: this deal was announced and people took hold to that cause, a public holiday, honking their horns and hoping that it would come through and i think that will continue as long as the deal is in. chris? >> do they want to bomb?

it's a very good question. you know, ahmadinejad when he was in power said that is all talk. i mean, whether you look at these bombs that act as a deterrent, i've been in meetings here with senior people in iran and they've mentioned to me, they've said, look, the pakistanis have a bomb and the world engages with them. we don't and we get threatened. so that's definitely some of their thinking here. but i don't think they want to give up everything just to have a bomb. possibly, you know, they do but they are certainly not in a rush to get one. they are more interested in keeping their ideological strong holds here with hezbollah and if they went down the bomb route they would put that in danger. they are playing their cards very carefully here, chris. >> i think so, too. thank you, ali arouzi in tehran. can president obama sell this plan at home?

congress is making that job tough. lawmakers in indiana fix the so-called religious freedom law that could be used to discriminate against gays but already showed their true intentions. don't you think, by passing that law in the first place? racism on campus. the president of the university of oklahoma will be with us here tonight. they've been dealing with tough issues after the fraternity members sang a racist chant. ted cruz didn't get that memo. this is "hardball," the place for politics. there's nothing more romantic than a spontaneous moment. so why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms

of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com two women in new york have been charged with trying to build a bomb for a terrorist attack. the two women from queens, new york, were inspired by isis, al qaeda, and the boston marathon bombers and the november killings of two new york city police officers.

they were arrested after they showed an undercover informant the propane gas tanks and torches they allegedly planned to use to make a bomb. loretta lynch is the lead prosecutor on that case. we'll be right back.

welcome back to "hardball." indiana governor mike pence signed a bill late today that clarifies that religious freedom law he signed last week. the language now explicitly bars discrimination based on sexual orientation. let's take a look at the recent history here. indiana republicans had their chance to say they opposed discrimination weeks ago when an amendment to the religious freedom restoration act was offered up in the state senate but the amendment failed and was defeated with 40 state senators opposing it and only ten supporting it. and then governor pence was given an opportunity on tv to say if he wanted to protect the lgbt community of his state. and here he is with george stephanopoulos. >> one of the things that people have talked about is simply

adding sexual orientation as a protected under the state laws. will you push that for? >> i will not push for that. that's not on my agenda and that's not been an objective of the people of the state of indiana. >> it's not on his agenda back then on sunday but certainly is today. their intents were not as inclusive as they said they are today. they got caught trying to make a political statement, those people in indiana, to exclude gays. jonathan capehart is an opinion writer with "the washington post" and steve mcmahon and kristina of the bucket fund. they had an opportunity, when the bill came up, the democratic member of the legislature offered an amendment to make sure this does not allow people to discriminate at the storefront, at the bakery or a bar, you can't discriminate against gay people and they shot it down four to one and then he said that's not on my agenda and now they are coming out and said

we really didn't intend to discriminate against gay people. they are caught, aren't they? >> there has never been an exemption based on the -- >> can you get back to my question? why didn't they take the opportunity when -- >> because there was no need. the different between the old version and new version -- >> how about when george stephanopoulos and there was a need and the governor said that's not on my agenda, why didn't he take a chance then, why didn't the legislature take the chance so there's no confusion, this could be about caterers or churches or weddings, you guys look like lovers, i'm not serving you. >> there's no doubt that the messages was terribly handled and so was the overreaction on the other side. >> i think they were very clearly heard.

they didn't want to protect gay rights. >> the messaging wasn't mishandled, the law was mishandled. the problem was two-fold. one, it applied to private business and, two, it provided a shield from civil rights litigation. so if my partner and i were to walk into an indiana shop and be refused showers, say, and then we get mad, we go and sue, we wouldn't be able to have a suit because they could claim a religion exemption. >> when was the last time that happened? that has never happened. >> it matters it if it can happen and if it creates the opportunity for it to happen. let's not kid ourselves here. the reason this law was written was specifically to discriminate against the lgbt community because everybody is so afraid, apparently, of gay marriage. what's going on in the country, the country is moving, the courts are moving and politicians in indiana and

arkansas that don't want to move with it. >> kristina, i'm going to give you some space here. i read a couple of arguments today and one of them was, there is a place -- if you run a catering business and don't want to cater a gay wedding, that would be an argument you could say, that's a contract relationship. i don't have to sign the contract. but if you open the store, a bakery, for example, and somebody says i want to buy bakery goods, that's a public accommodation. if it's a storefront, it's a storefront. is that why they passed the law in the first place? who are they trying to protect? >> americans disagree about religion and sex all the time. >> what were they trying to protect? >> what rfra protects is members of minority religions. >> like what? >> like my client, a native american, wanted feathers for his religious ceremony. the federal government came and confiscated his feathers threatening him with fines and

he was able to obtain the feathers back. >> this was passed for american indians? >> largely to protect minority religions. this was not a magic wand where they say other people have no rights. this meant you get your day in court. if you cannot do something -- >> what was the catholic church and the concerted jewish people -- they are the ones standing with the governor when they signed this. what did they want? >> religious liberty. >> from what? >> right now the obama administration is trying to provide contraceptives to employees. the government cannot give out these drugs through exchanges or anything else and they are trying to order them to do so. >> here's the problem with your argument, kristina, the eagle feathers examples, those are all government actions. the problem with the indiana law

is that it opened itself up to being -- it was actually expressly given to private business. this exemption. and that was the problem. >> the obama administration has given -- >> let me get in front of a question. like everybody, i've been thinking about this for a week. >> yeah. >> should a business that opens -- says open on the door, should they be able to say no gays? >> no. but no -- >> but in principle -- >> in the last 22 years, that has never been -- >> your belief is nobody should be discriminated because they are gay? >> i don't think there should be discrimination to service because a person is gay but i believe -- >> do you think there should be a law protecting that right and say, i want a room for a night and no night clerk can say, sorry, you guys look gay? where are you on that issue? >> i think it's -- i think it's very difficult to make a generalization on other side. >> what if you're african-american? >> i'm latina. race has an entirely different place --

>> how about a mixed-race couple? >> i'm from mixed-race parents. >> so should it be part of our anti-discrimination laws? >> there are anti-discrimination laws. >> are you for them? >> yes, of course. but i don't want to discriminate against religious people either. why should they not have a day in court even if their views are repulsive to most americans. >> here's why. the law is not narrowly tailored to meet a compelling state interest and that's what it has to meet in order for -- >> my parents came to this country in -- >> even though i respect -- here's jeb bush, one of the best of them, perhaps, front-runner jeb bush raced to defend the law on monday on a conservative radio show. listen. >> i think governor pence has done the right thing. florida has a law like this.

bill clinton signed a law like this at the federal level. this is simply allowing people of faith space to be able to express their beliefs and to be people of conscience. >> here comes the flip-flopping. last night jeb bush appeared to modify his comments in a closed-door silicon valley fund-raiser telling a small group of highly secular potential supporters that a consensus-oriented approach would have been better at the outset. he said, quote, by the end of the week i think indiana will be in the right place, which is to say that we need a big diverse country like america, we need to have space for people to act on their conscience, a constitutional right that religious freedom is a core value of our country but, quote, we shouldn't discriminate based on sexual orientation. well, he has evolved from a monday to wednesday. this is what happens in politics. the squirming need to reconcile your views with opposing philosophies.

one that is ultra religious and that's all that matters. >> you know, what he said in silicon valley, i believe, is jeb bush's natural instinct. that's where he wanted -- no, because -- >> because you agree with that? >> i agree with it also because jeb bush has gone way out there on discrimination and maybe he thought, i can't go any further on this other issue. but if he would stay true to himself, jeb bush wouldn't be in the mind that he's in. >> i wonder if you're all saying what i say, which is, please, god, give us a real choice. you can imagine voting for the other guy besides hillary. >> you know, small government conservatives true to their principles think that the government doesn't belong in any of these decisions. i think jonathan is right. jeb bush and others in the race, chris christie -- >> rand paul hasn't spoken yet at all. >> he wants to be a libertarian and probably wants to be a libertarian on this issue but ted cruz won't let him.

it's going to be interesting to watch these guys -- >> this guy somebody on this show. thank you, jonathan capehart, steve mcmahon. up next, the university of oklahoma's president is going to be talking about how they are dealing with the racist chant that surfaced. this is "hardball," a place for politics.

it's back. the philly cheesesteak pizza. get our philly cheesesteak pizza. with original philly cheesesteak company steak and garlic parmesan sauce. a large for just $12. better ingredients. better pizza. papajohns.com leftovers. the unsung hero of meals. they get re-heated. re-nuked.

and re-baked. and when leftovers are done... there's always stuff left over. new dawn platinum power clean calls dibs on those. it powers through tough, dried-on messes in seconds. even 48 hour stuck-on food. so go ahead, triple that recipe! a drop of dawn and grease is gone. welcome back to "hardball." on march 8th, an online video went viral showing members of the fraternity at the university of oklahoma leading a racist chant with a bus load of students. david boren took immediate action and ordered an investigation. boren then expelled two students. president boren's investigation learned that it was learned by the national office of the fraternity years ago and sent a letter saying the matter can't be closed until the national

office tells them what steps are being taken to stop this racist rhetoric from being taught to others. joining me right now from norman, oklahoma, is the president of university of oklahoma david boren. what has been the reaction? we heard the president of the international fraternity is denying they ever taught this anti-black chant. >> well, chris, i received a letter of apology from him today. he made a facebook posting and immediately and very quickly took it down. he's trying to draw a distinction between hearing a chant at the national convention and learning a chant. i said, no, don't waste your time on splitting hairs. let's talk about moral issues. the executive director of the fraternity is saying he's going to investigate. this happened four years ago. the culture has to be changed, not only changed at the university of oklahoma, it has to be changed all across the country and all of us have to join together and say zero tolerance for this kind of

thing. we've got to stop this epidemic of racism across the country and we hope we're doing our part by sending a strong message that there's zero tolerance here and we hope other people will take up the call at other universities, institutions and all of us as individuals, we can't sit silent when we hear the word used in social conversation or in jokes or other things. we have to start speaking up and saying, not here, not in front of me. that's not us. and i think that's what we have to do everywhere and that's what we are trying to do here at the university of oklahoma. >> how much can you moderate that? or could i say, if some kid who's of color or concerned like most people are about any kind of racist chatter and they hear somebody make a comment at a football game or in a cafeteria, should they turn that person in? >> to the school? >> is it that serious? >> well, i think it is serious. i don't know that they should turn the person in but i think

they should turn around to the person and say, i beg your pardon. but i don't believe in making these kind of racial stereotypes or comments. and please don't make them in front of me. you know, i think all of us have to do that. we feel it's socially awkward sometimes in conversation but until we all do our part, i think it's going to be very hard. the outside culture come in on us at universities and other places. and we have to fight back against that. and we have to -- i think, again, take immediate action. i hope other college presidents and i hope students -- i'm so proud of our students because right away, the next morning, even as the fraternity was being closed down and students were being withdrawn from school and being disciplined in other ways, our students were out there with a single voice saying, this isn't who we are. this isn't our family. this isn't our community. and they were really, really -- and that continues. we've had dialogue with all of the fraternity members on

campus, of all of the fraternities, i've talked with them in a group setting. we've had personal apologies between the past officers of the fraternity and african-american leaders in my office, no cameras, no one there. they exchanged apologies and talked about why they were hurt, hugged each other. these kind of healing things are going on but it all starts, i think, with every single american. just like we said, this is not the university of oklahoma, we all have to say, this isn't american. not our america. >> i think everybody in the country liked the way you handled that. it was swift and clear. you made clear where you stood and where your university stood and where we all should stand. i'm proud of you. president boren, thank you. >> thank you, chris. up next, sewing the deal. president obama said it could prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon but can he convince a skeptical congress and country? can he say it will work? you're watching "hardball," the

place for politics.

is there such a thing as a sure thing in business? some say buy gold. others say buy soybeans. i say, buy comcast business internet. unlike internet providers that slow down when traffic picks up, you get speed you can rely on. it's a safe bet. like a gold-plated soybean. reliably fast internet starts at $69.95 a month. comcast business. built for business.

there will be no sunset to the deal that we are working to finalize. no sunset. now, certain provisions,

including many transparency measures will be in place indefinitely into the future. they will never expire. >> welcome back to "hardball." you're now witnessing a pivotal moment and if these iranian nuclear talks succeed, it would disarm a nuclear iran. if they fail or sabotage, we could be headed toward war. this is the ultimate test of what you might call the obama doctrine, "the washington post" summed it up as the president's firm belief that, quote, persistence and engagement with our enemy can change the world. they have battled months of attacks and repeated attempts by critics on the right to destroy these negotiations and will face many in the month ahead, especially on june 30th. the skeptical congress awaits. republican senator bob corker says there's growing bipartisan

support for the congressional review of the nuclear deal. he's going to hold hearings on foreign relations. president obama seemed to acknowledge that today, that congress has the ability to kill this deal in its crib. here he is. >> if congress kills this deal not based on expert analysis and without offering any reasonable alternative, then it's the united states that will be blamed for the failure of diplomacy. international unity will collapse and the path to conflict will widen. >> the round table tonight, stouter, and michelle bernard, president of the bernard center. anyway, let's go with this. >> republicans are not happy. and you hear from the chorus of people you already know saying they want a destruction of

iran's nuclear capability and there is already conflict with zarif tweeting out that there is spin about the deal. the iranians want the people to believe that the sanctions are immediate. we want phased sanctions relief. there will be disagreements that he is not a deal. andrea mitchell just tweeted out that she spoke with john kerry and asked him, do you think you'll have a deal by june? he said, i hope so. this is a very fragile situation. >> democrats are not really willing to give away any power either. harry reid is optimistic about this. congress is going to review this and no one is willing to just let the president do his thing. >> yeah. >> do you think it will go up or down in senate. michelle, you lead the way. will there be a vote up or down in the senate? >> no, i don't think they are going to kill it before we have it. i think they are going to see, number one, if we have anything.

all we can call it is we have a deal on a framework. that's the big problem. >> how will we know that answer until we get to june 30th? >> well, we're going to have to get to june 30th and despite what we say here, we're going to get to june 30th but a lot of questions will be asked and frankly they should be asked. >> congress wants to force a vote so they are involved. >> let's take the president's argument. i think it's right. we can't get tougher sanctions because the europeans are in no mood for more of this. >> right. >> head towards -- >> i'm not going to weigh in on the policy here. i can tell you politically republicans say we're not for war. we're for deeper sanctions. they think that sanctions have worked so far. >> how do you get them? >> i don't know. they are going to work their magic with the rest of the coalition. >> we can't sanctions them by ourselves. >> the whole world has to do it and the rest of the world isn't prepared to do it. i am somebody who wants the

deal -- i don't want the deal killed but i don't want them to have nuclear capability. the bottom line is, congress is going to get to a point when they realize this is the best that we can do. if we want to minimize anti-western sentiment, that's the best -- >> there are going to be the tom cottons of the world that are never going to vote for this. >> what do they want? >> they want another president. >> what do they do with the new president, president cruz, what would they do with cruz? i'll say this for dick cheney. he's not bashful. he's addressing a growing group of hawks on the right to say war is the only option. what has worked is military force and willingness to go in and use military capability to strip nuclear arms from places such as iraq, such as iran and syria. here's a sampling from the bombs away crowd. here they go. they are not shameful here. >> you have an iran, other place around the world, groups that want to annihilate israel and

us. you can't take out part of it or it will come out. >> we should never, ever take off the table the notion that it may be necessary to conduct some sort of military strike against their ambition. that is it a real option because that's how serious the nuclear threat is. >> israel struck syria's nuclear reactor in 2007 and have not reconstituted. rogue regimes have a way of getting a picture when there's a credible threat of military on the table. >> i think it's time to bomb iran. anything that resemble as nuclear facility with centrifuges. it's time to bomb. >> jackie, at least they tell you what they believe. people like netanyahu say you don't have to deal with the iranians because you can't trust them. if you can't make any deal with them, there's another alternative. >> i think sending in troops is one thing. >> sure. bombs.

>> and i think there's two very different -- you can talk about it all you want. when it comes down to it, there's going to be a division in the republican party. >> also, the president has never said that a military option is completely off of the table. anyone who would argue that this president would allow the united states government or israel to be in danger of being bombed by iran is wrong. he's going to hit that button and they are going to be gone. >> no president, right, left or center, no matter how far left you think obama is, he's not going to let them have the bomb. >> exactly. >> there's a test of time of this. he's a young man, obama, he intends to spend 30 years on this earth celebrating what they accomplished. if they get the bomb because of him, he's not going to be celebrated by anybody. up next, can republicans win the white house by going far to the right? ted cruz seems to think so. this is "hardball," the place for politics.

president obama is heading to utah late tonight, a state in which he managed to get 25% of the vote back in 2012. the president will be speaking at the air force base and the trip to utah means he's hit 49 of the 50 states as president. the only one missing is south

dakota. go to mt. rushmore, mr. president. he made a goal to hit all 50 states during his time in office. president bush missed, no surprise there, vermont. we'll be right back.

today, roughly half of born again christians aren't voting. they're staying home. imagine instead millions of people of faith all across america coming out to the polls

and voting our values. >> we're back with the roundtable. in his announcement, we just saw there for president last month. ted cruz outlined his strategy for winning the white house last year. he said only a true conservative nominee can motivate voters to come out. otherwise, he says a large portion of the republican base just won't show up. will a base turnout strategy really work for republicans. in the piece today titled "cruz is aiming at the wrong republicans" cruz evidently assumes the middle, likely partisan is too minuscule to matter. the republican nominee must crack the ice and cruz cannot do that by getting more votes from traditional republican constituencies.

even karl rove says cruz is off base. in a piece today, rove points out the conservative share of the 2012 elect rate was highest since 1976. republicans concerned about voters who failed this should look elsewhere. there you have two guys that want to win more than anything else. they think if you go to the hard right and do all these cultural war stuff, you'll lose the general. they're worried because their guy, jeb bush, is not looking too good in the polls. >> they don't want to win. and democrats actually are worried about whether or not hillary clinton can excite enough depressed democrats after obama and replicate the obama coalition and get over -- over the finishing line.

>> look -- >> romney lost by 333,000 votes. >> what does that even mean? are those the ones that float? are those the ones that sink? >> are you talking about witchcraft trials? >> it's a false premise in some ways. >> i think if you're the hard right candidate, you need to vote for the hard right candidate to win. you're pitching yourself. >> if ted cruz is the republican nominee, hillary clinton is going to sail through and be the next president of the united states -- >> who is she afraid of? >> i would be afraid of jeb bush and although nobody believes it, i would still be afraid of chris christie. he out of all of the republicans is the only republican i have seen that has a winning strategy for reaching out to nonwhite people that will vote for him. he's done it in new jersey. he's got the african-american vote.

>> he didn't get the african-american vote. >> he got the largest -- >> he got like 20%. >> no like 36% of the african-american vote in a blue state. >> who was his opponent? >> romney wanted -- >> i can't remember. >> romney won independents and he lost. they watched obama turn out new voters. >> here's the problem for you guy. >> which guy? >> i think it's bush. according to a new poll, bush still leads the republican field down there with 24%, but that's down from 32% a big drop of eight since february. the poll shows scott walker is leading in the pennsylvania primary with 14%. walker in pennsylvania. bush is tied up there in second with ben carson. that's not good for a bush. and ted cruz is fifth at 7%.

always great to have you. jackie, you're great. and michelle, you're obviously great. when we come back, let me finish with president obama. he's leading and not from behind on this big treaty. this is "hartball" the place for politics. i win again. paul george the all-star. you still got it. play for the check? nope, with papa john's new payshare it already split the check for us. so, we wont be needing this anymore. introducing payshare. new at papa john's. share your bill on any mobile or online order. like our philly cheesesteak pizza, with original philly cheesesteak company steak. a large for just $12. better ingredients. better pizza. papajohns.com

the conference call. the ultimate arena for business. hour after hour of diving deep, touching base, and putting ducks in rows. the only problem with conference calls: eventually they have to end. unless you have the comcast business voiceedge mobile app. it lets you switch seamlessly from your desk phone to your mobile with no interruptions. i've never felt so alive. get the future of phone and the phones are free. comcast business. built for business. let me end tonight with this, a great senator once told us that the only reason to be in politics is to be out there all alone and then be proven right. today, president obama took a position out there on point.

politically, he is the one that must win the fight for this deal with iran. his goal i expect will be to prevent a senate vote to kill a feel before we even reach that point. whatever else can be said against him, no one can say this president is leading from behind. i am myself content with the belief that whatever deal he strikes, barack obama, the president and the man who will some day be the former president must standby what he's deal to. i wonder, i believe that there are those, many critics out there who don't want this deal to work. they want the iranians to cheat so they can continue to call for war. somehow, his very existence, much less his presence in the white house bothers them. let's hope the best of our

common sense will prevail and we as a people will push for an alternative to war. war being always the easiest thing to start. the hardest thing to end. thanks for be with us. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. >> tonight -- >> this has been a long time coming. >> world leaders reach a framework for a historic deal. >> what we've done is open up the tonight. >> and the president has a warning for opponents at home. >> if congress kills this deal, then it's the united states that will be blamed for the failure of diplomacy. then indiana republicans rework religious freedom. and arkansas republicans reword religious freedom. it is now law. a vast public school cheating scandal in georgia, a wage bump for workers at mcdonald's and chris rocks police stop selfies.