this sunday -- is it possible donald trump has finally gone too far? >> you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. blood coming out of her wherever. >> the conservative backlash is fierce. donald trump joins me to react. plus, i sit down with one of the candidates who helped himself in the gop debate. marco rubio. and our new poll. wait until you see who republican voters thought won the debate. also a leading democrat says no to the iran deal. so, what happens next? i'll ask one of the president's closest senate allies, democrat claire mccaskill. finally, was this the pinocchio moment of thursday night? >> i was appointed u.s. attorney by president bush on september

10th, 2001. >> boy, that sounds great. but is it true? joining us for insight and analysis, david brooks of "the "new york times," heth mcgee, nbc's andrea mitchell and talk show host hugh hewitt. welcome to sunday. it's "meet the press." >> announcer: from nbc news in washington, this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good morning. when donald trump became a birther and insulted african-americans, a lot of people at the time said, that's it for trump. well, it wasn't. when he insulted hispanics, a lot of people said, that's it for trump. it wasn't. when he insulted john mccain, a lot of republicans started to say, that's it for trump. and it wasn't. now the latest, that's it for trump moment, insulting fox news anchor, megyn kelly. friday night still smarting from tough and pointed questioning from all the debate moderators on thursday, trump said this of kelly.

>> she starts asking me all sorts of ridiculous questions. you could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. blood coming out of her wherever. >> immediately erick erickson disinvited trump from his red state conservative gathering in nevada. >> i don't want my daughter in the room with donald trump tomorrow night so he's not invited. i'm sorry. >> trump's campaign hit back calling the organizer weak and pathetic and saying, quote mr. trump said blood was coming out of her eyes and whatever, meaning nose. only a deviant would think anything else. some of trump's republican rivals enthusiastically condemned his remarks. >> come on. give me a break. i mean, are we -- do we want to win? do we want to insult 53% of all voters? what donald trump said is wrong. >> i agree that those comments are inappropriate. >> others, including marco rubio, whom i interviewed yesterday, took a different tact.

>> i've made a decision here with donald trump, if i comment on everything he says, my whole campaign will be consumed by it. that's all i'll do all day. >> i'm joined on the phone, from new york, by donald trump. mr. trump, welcome back to "meet the press." >> thank you, chuck. >> well, you've had 24 for hours more to reflect on your comments on megyn kelly. any change this morning? do you want to apologize? >> no. there's nothing to apologize. she asked a very, very -- i thought, very unfair question, and so did everybody on social media. and i answered the question very well. i won every poll on debates, "time" magazine, drudge, news max, every poll and people thought i won the debate easily. sort of an interesting thing, they did not like the way i was questioned. and i understand that. and i just want to get on. what i said was totally appropriate. there was nothing wrong. only a deviant, and i really literally mean that -- only a deviant would think anything or than that. >> let me take you at your word on that and say you weren't trying to make a reference to

hormones. >> absolutely not. >> you're still making a demonic or analystic reference with blood in your eyes. it's still a demeaning comment, even by your new definition. >> no, i don't think so. look, she was very angry. look, i respect -- i respect people. and she was very angry because i brought up something that got the loudest applause of the day by far. and it really interrupted her when she did the question. and she was very angry. all i said was, there was blood -- essentially, there was blood pouring out of her eyes and there was blood -- then i said, you know what, i want to get on to the next sentence because, frankly, i don't have to talk about the blood coming out of her ears and her nose which is a very common statement. >> said, all right, wherever, let's go and i got her on to the next statement. all of a sudden the next day i wake up and i hear that, you know, somebody took it as something else. only a deviant would think that,

chuck. i didn't even think that. who would think it? i went to the wharton school of finance. the toughest place to get into. i was a great student. i don't talk that way. >> then why can't you just apologize for saying, you know what, i'm sorry, some people took it the wrong way. you seem to have an allergy -- >> i don't -- >> you seem to have an allergy toward apologizing. >> no, i apologize when i'm wrong, but i haven't been wrong. i said nothing wrong. it's a very common statement. i've said it -- excuse me, i said it about chris wallace. i said, there was blood pouring -- because he tried to question me. he's a small shadow of his father, mike, that i can tell you. but i said it about chris wallace. and chris wallace came out and i said there was blood pouring out of his eyes. nobody asked me about apologizing. >> you know, i want to read you a comment of someone who was rather supportive of you. a supporter in atlanta. and said this, though, her name is mira adams and it was in "the washington post." talking about blood and a woman, it was just inappropriate.

megyn kelly is just so well-liked by the public. he should have made nice-nice with her. i thought the question was a little off-base but he took a mosquito bite and turned it into a skin cancer. >> i would have made nice. i have no problem apologizing if i'm wrong. when i say it about chris wallace and there was nothing wrong. now when i say it about megyn kelly, is there a double standard? we talk about everybody being the same. are we talking about double standards? i don't mind apologizing if something's wrong. the only part is, on the second part of it, i didn't want to waste time -- i wanted to get onto the next statement because, frankly, it was more important than what i was discussing. so i cut it short. but i never referred to anything having to do with the other subject matter that a couple of people thought i might have. then you had this guy, erick erickson who's a total -- he's a known loser. everybody -- >> let me stop you here for a minute. anybody that criticizes you,

you've done it to me in the past when you've not liked something i said. when somebody criticizes you, you go after them, you find something in their physical appearance, you go after them personally. >> i don't. >> why? why is this your tendency. >> chuck. i don't. part of the problem we have now is political correctness. we have a country that's in trouble. we have a country where in the middle east they're cutting off -- chopping off people's heads if they happen to be a christian and for other reasons also. we have -- you look at what's going on on the border with all of the problems in san francisco, with all of the problems we've got, you look at what's going on in the country with crime and with our inner cities. and all they talk about is tone. jeb bush said, well, mr. trump's tone is -- well, we don't have enough time top tone. we need enthusiasm. knee need something. we need a much tougher tone than we've had. it's not about tone. we have to straighten out our country.

we have to make our country great again. and we need energy and enthusiasm. and this political correctness is just absolutely killing us as a country. you can't say anything. anything you say today, they'll find a reason why it's not good. >> well, you -- >> i think you -- you know what, chuck, essentially i think we have to get back to work as a country. i heard jeb bush the other day say a terrible thing about women's health issues. he made a horrible mistake. i equate that mistake as being worse than what romney said about the 47%, which possibly cost him the election. and i will be fantastic. i have so much respect for women. and i will help women in terms of the health issues, because it's so important to do that. chuck, i have thousands of women working for me. i have women working in high positions. i was one of the first people to put women in charge of big construction jobs. and, you know, i've had a great relationship with women. and i will help women with women's health issues, unlike

somebody like jeb bush who really made a big mistake and was later forced to apologize. >> let me go back to the premise of megyn kelly's question. which was, you have a tendency of disparagie ining women on lo. we're seeing all sorts of -- i found ten instances, sometimes in your book, sometimes in your twitter feed. went after people like bette midler, gail collins. why do you go after the look? this is what some women find offensive, mr. trump, you go to looks. it's a disparaging -- it's something out of "mad men," sir. >> well, some of the things she said i didn't say. she went through a whole list. this was a hell of a first question, by the way. i will say this, i was attacked by the people that you talk about. when you mention a couple of those names, i was attacked viciously by those people. i don't mean a little bit. i mean viciously. when i'm attacked, i fight back. but i was attacked viciously by those women. of course, it's very hard for them to attack me on looks

because i'm so good looking. but i was attacked very viciously by those women. frankly, again, we get back to the words, political correctness, am i allowed to defend myself? what they said about me is far worse than what i said about them, chuck. again, i want to get back to the country. we have such problems. we have unemployment that's incredible. we need jobs. we have to take jobs back from china. that's the subject that i'm good at. by the way, during that whole debate which was 24 million people. and if i wasn't on, they would have had 2 million people, not 24 million people. and everybody aide mitts that. you would have had just another debate that nobody would have watched. so, you know, that's one of those things. but i want to get back to jobs. they didn't ask me one question about jobs. every single poll said by triple digits i am by far the best on the economy. they didn't ask about jobs or the economy. i want to talk about all of these issues. but a lot of times i don't get

the opportunity because people hit me with questions that don't relate to those things. >> maybe next time we'll be able to do issues. >> we will. i hope so, chuck. that's what i want to do, are jobs and the economy. that's what i really want to do. >> thank you, sir. we'll talk to you. >> thank you very much. >> panelist, david brooks, "new york times." heather mcgee, president of the think tank demos. andrea mitchell is covering the hillary clinton campaign, and hugh hewitt, radio talk show host, will be among the questioners at the next republican presidential debate next month. hugh hewitt, let me start with you. donald trump have the temperament to be president? >> no, he doesn't. the disappointing about this it was the 9/10 debate in a 9/11 world. we have the iran deal coming up. the most consequential deal facing probably the next 30 to 40 years in the world. it got very little attention. the russian cyber attack on the pentagon got very little attention -- >> is that the candidates' fault? or the organizers?

>> both. only scott walker brought up hillary clinton's server. i thought what he did was to build the audience, it was enormous. at the same time, i wanted a different issue set talked to. the republican primary voter lost in that. carly fiorina won big time. walker, kasich. rubio. but the loser was the gop. >> what can damage donald trump though, andrea? potential conventional gravity doesn't apply to him? >> he has teflon. if not this, what? i mean, gender, what could be more important? 53% of the voters, you drill down on what women care about, what women want. it's insulting. it's rude. he attacks a very popular -- the most popular star on cable tv. >> and conservatives love her. this is where -- this is why some people think this is the straw. he's insulting someone the conservatives have really fallen for. >> the circus goes on. as hugh says, the real issues --

i'm not persuaded at all with donald trump on the issue of jobs and economy is what you're going to hear because look at the way he describes the bankruptcy law, the way he talks about jobs. no one has really been able to seriously sit down and interview him about what he knows and what he does. >> david, what you just heard, i mean, he doesn't -- he seems to have an allergy to apologizing. you know, i think we all think we know what type -- you know, but it doesn't seem to apply to -- voters don't -- >> it struck me during that interview i'm listening to a religious zealot and the god he worshipped is donald trump. anybody one who doesn't believe is a blasphemer. i think he's created a fortress around himself. the 20% of republicans are inside the fortress. inside that fortress the walls get higher with each controversy. but 80% will never go in the fortress. i think he'll be in the race

with 20%. he'll be there with that position. >> what should the other candidates do? >> well, i think -- >> do you think what jeb bush did yesterday, you may not support jeb bush but that's what he should do? >> i think it is important to remember that a republican presidential nominee hasn't won women since 1988 so this is a very deep problem with the party. it is not going to be enough for anyone, a commentator or one of the candidates to just disavow trump's sort of interpersonal sexist comments. bias against women operates at several different levels. the interpersonal makes for good commentary but they have problems with institutional bias against women, health care that excludes reproductive care, the economy where low wage workers who the majority of whom are women are staying in poverty. there's a deeper, deeper problem than just offhand comments. >> hugh, how does this end?

>> carly fiorina is very happy. she won the first debate, second debate, she's won the post debate. her tweet yesterday -- there is no excuse. emphatically. she'll be on the stage when i ask questions by virtue of the bump. i look at rubio, walker, to a lesser extent kasich and ted cruz, they keep talking about these big issues. . ones that andrea is covering. the iran deal. and the trump thing, as david says, the 20% i think is going to go to 10%. >> you're wishing it away. hugh, are you wishing it away? >> i don't think so. >> i think a deeper problem, if you look at who benefitted from the debate, it was protest candidates. carson, cruz and trump. the party has all suffered from the debate. the party is not in a governing mode. it's in a protest mode. that mode is in a dangerous mode. >> that's the difference between '64 and '68. if you want to go back in history. '64 for republicans was a protest year.

'68 was a governing year. we have to pause. much more to get to. when we come back, there is one candidate a lot of people felt gained quite a bit in thursday night's debate, senator marco rubio of florida. he's next. but not every insurance company understands the life behind it. those who have served our nation. have earned the very best service in return. ♪ usaa. we know what it means to serve. get an auto insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life. ♪ [ female announcer ] everything kids touch at school sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. you handle life; clorox handles the germs. heart health's important... ...so you may... take an omega-3 supplement...

...but it's the ingredients inside that really matter for heart health. new bayer pro ultra omega-3 has two times the concentration of epa and dha as the leading omega-3 supplement. new bayer pro ultra omega-3.

welcome back. while donald trump is dominating the conversation yet again this weekend, there seems to be a growing consensus a few candidates helped themselves thursday night.

carly fiorina, john kasich, and my next guest, senator marco rubio of florida. many think hillary clinton should fear the most next year because he's someone who represents a younger, more diverse republican party. i sat down with him yesterday in miami for a meet the candidate interview. here it is. >> you got a lot of universal praise for the debate. i want to get into one specific issue where there has been some questions about a response you had. it is on abortion. i want to get this clarification. will you support legislation that has exceptions? >> i have. >> anti-abortion legislation -- >> i have. i'll support any legislation -- >> about rape, incest -- >> yeah, i'll support any legislation that reduces the number of abortions. that means a 20-week abortion ban. at 5 months a child -- you'll recognize it as a human being in an ultrasound image and i'll support that. that doesn't obviously cover the whole gamut, but it reduces the number of abortions. i'll support any legislation that reduces the number of abortions.

there are those that have that exception in there. what i've never done is said, is i require it must have or not have. >> why don't you think there should be a requirement of an exception? >> a couple points. i think, first of all, the questions that people ask about those two instances are horrifying. i mean, i can't -- a rape is an act of violence. it's a horrifying thing that happens. and, fortunately, the number of abortions in this country that are due to rape are very small. less than 1%. of the cases in the world. but they happen. and they're horrifying and tragic. and i recognize that. i also recognize that because of the existence of over-the-counter morning after, not to mention medical treatment that's now available immediately the assault, that should be widely available to victims, we can bring that number down to zero. that being said, i deeply and personally believe that all human life is worthy of the protection of our laws. i do. and i believe that irrespective of the conditions by which that life was conceived or anything else.

for me to be consistent on that belief, that's why i feel so strongly about it. that being said, i recognize that in order to have consensus on laws that limit the number of abortions, a lot of people want to see those exceptions. that's why i've supported those laws in the past. as has every pro-life group in america. >> where is the constitutional line of protection between an unborn child and the mother? >> that's why this issue's so hard. there is, no doubt, a woman has a right to her own body. has a right to make decisions about her own health and her own future. there's no doubt. and then there's this other right. that's the right of a human being to live. these rights come into conflict when it comes to these issues. have you to make a decision. it's hard. i don't say it's easy. you're 15 years old and you become pregnant and you're scared and you have your whole life ahead of you and you're facing this, that's a hard situation. i tell people all the time, don't pretend this is easy. this is a difficult question. but when asked to make a decision between two very hard circumstances, i personally reached the conclusion, if i'm going to err, i'm going to err

on the side of life. >> let me ask you -- when should public opinion matter in a decision by the president and when should a president decide, you know what, public -- the public doesn't quite understand this issue. i know better. what is that line? >> i think on foreign policy in particular it matters -- i think the president's judgment has to somehow be immune to public opinion sometimes because the president has access to information the general public does not. one key to being a good commander in chief is not seeing what's available in front of you immediately but being able to anticipate a crisis three months, six months down the road. what's around the corner. the rice of isis is a perfect example. something i repeatedly warned would happen. there would be a radical jihadist group that would emerge from the vacuum in syria if we didn't do something about it. and the president didn't. in those instainses you can see how quickly the opinion of the

public moves. so the job in a president in that instance is to ask in the national security of our country, based on information a president has that the general public does not. i think on domestic issues, obviously, you can't be governed by polls, but i think the will of the voter is important to take into account. most important of all, what issues you should be prioritizing on your agenda. >> iran agreement. let me ask you about what former defense secretary bob gates argued. thought the agreement was poorly negotiated, very critical of it, but said, pulling out of it would be even worse because of the international ramifications. five other countries were involved with this. how much should you guys be taking that into account in the u.s. senate? >> we most certainly never want to do anything to undermine our alliances, two of the other five countries, china and russians, particularly russians under vladimir putin, have never acted in the interest of the united states and have taken pride in -- in thwarting our national interests around the world. >> you don't trust him at all? you don't think they should have been part of the process? >> obviously, they -- >> they vetoed the united

nations. >> my point is, what russia feels about a deal or anything for that matter should not be determinative of a national security policy of the united states. and i think that also applies to others as well. if you look at the other nations that are involved in this process, they were led into that by the united states and became a part of it. during the negotiations the french were actually much more aggressive about what the conditions should be than the united states were. >> i think it's pretty clear that even among our european allies, their interest is simply to open up the market of iran to their private sector. our interest is different. our interest has to be different because iran is developing long-range weapons, long-range missiles. if they became a nuclear power, they can place a nuclear warhead long-range capable of reaching the united states. you i think we have a vested interest in this more than the allies. >> you are something -- more than half the money that's been raised on your behalf, some superpacs, some in your personal

campaign, come from less than ten donors total. what do you owe those donors? you say you don't own them. people make this argument. aren't they going to expect something in return? >> i don't think so. first of all, i can't deal with those donors because they're involved with the superpac and i can't coordinate with outside groups. second, i've always been clear my entire time in politics, whether it was in the city commission at west miami, the state legislature, speaker of the house, running for president, i have an agenda. it's a consistent agenda. people buy into my agenda. if they like what they say f they don't, they go with someone else. >> norman, friend of your family, huge donor, he doesn't get special access to the white house? >> no. he's my friend. obviously. somebody i'll deal with on a personal level. he's never asked me to do anything for his business interest are o anything else. >> should republicans then take the clintons at their word about the clinton foundation? >> i think the concern about the clinton foundation that many people have is the influence of

outside foreign donors that have given to that. especially at a time when she was the secretary of state. >> but there are essentially a similar arguments. similar argument. this is for charitable causes, rebuilding haiti, for aids, to stop aids in africa. you know, that's not -- that's not having an influence. >> i think the concern is when you have foreign entities donating millions of dollars to a foundation for a family while someone is the sitting secretary of state. then you can link that to decisions that were favorable in those countries. there's a concern raised. >> how do you prevent that from happening in your administration? are you going to have -- how do you build a firewall? >> to know what you stand for. this is what i'm for, this is what we're going to do. you do it irrespective of whether someone donated money to your campaign or not. that's how i've governed myself. i've never allowed financing issue in a campaign to determine where i stand on an issue. >> we have a deal with facebook, final question to them. ryan love asks, how does senator rubio feel about states legalizing marijuana?

>> i said i'm open to medicinal uses of anything. particularly marijuana. if it goes through the fda process and you can come up with a proven medicinal benefit to that substance, i'm open to that. i'm not in favor of legalizing marijuana. i'm not. i never have been. >> states that have, would you then use the federal government to supersede those state laws? >> the federal government needs law. >> the law on the books says -- you can make an argument what colorado and washington state are doing, then oregon and -- >> i think the federal government should enforce federal law. >> senator rubio, thank you. >> a lot more of my interview with senator it rubio, libya, his tax plan and also a surprising support for iuds. all on the web. next up, our poll. who won thursday night's debate? somebody not on stage. where does the race stand next? >> announcer: "meet the press" is brought to you by morgan stanley, where capital creates change. i will take beauty into my own hands.

olay regenerist. it regenerates surface cells. new skin is revealed in only 5 days. without drastic measures. stunningly youthful. award-winning skin. from the world's #1. olay, your best beautiful no sixth grader's ever sat with but your jansport backpack is permission to park it wherever you please. hey. that's that new gear feeling. this week, filler paper and folders just one cent. office depot officemax. gear up for school. gear up for great.

"nerd screen" time. we're going to look at thursday's debates. you may be surprised who our voters thought won. according to our survey, among some randomly selected online, 22% thought carly fiorina won the debate because of her stand-out performance in the so-called happy hour debate. not somebody who was on the main stage. donald trump came in second, rubio, cruz, carson, huckabee. rounded out the top six. at the bottom, paul, walker, bush, christie and kasich. now, we also asked, who lost the debate?

well, guess what? while trump was second on who won, he was number one on the list of who lost, followed not so far behind by rand paul, jeb bush, chris christie, and lindsey graham. the top five on the who lost. where does the race stand right now? donald trump sticking right there with his 1 in 5 support, nearly 1 in 4 now republican voters, 23%. the shakeup post debate, cruz in second, carson at 11%. in the back of the pack, some former front-runners, bush, walker, paul, huckabee, kasich and perry rounding out the top 12. coming up later in the broadcast -- more debate. do you remember this one? >> i was appointed u.s. attorney by president bush on september 10th, 2001. the world changed enormously the next day. and it happened in my state. >> it was an impressive retort to rand paul, but was it all

true? retort did you leave behind something reliable? something that felt like... home? and now you can't connect the way you used to... because you switched wireless carriers and are getting a less reliable connection. it's okay. we're still here for you and we'll be happy to have you back on a reliable network. come home to verizon and get 10 gigs for $80 a month plus $15 per line. only at verizon. just in case you were wondering what cheerios are made of whole. grain. oats. you stay up. you listen. you laugh. you worry. you do whatever it takes to take care of your family. and when it's time to plan for your family's future,

we're here for you. we're legalzoom, and for over 10 years we've helped families just like yours with wills and living trusts. so when you're ready, start with us. doing the right thing has never been easier. legalzoom. legal help is here. ♪ [ female announcer ] everything kids touch at school sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. you handle life; clorox handles the germs.

welcome back. president obama has been making the hard sell on the iran nuclear deal this week. in a speech in washington he compared republican critics to iranian hardliners but he received a major blow when one of the senior members of his own party, senator schumer released a statement saying he would not back the deal. my next guest, senator claire mccaskill of missouri hasn't made up her mind on the agreement. and also author of a new memoir. we'll get to that later. why haven't you decided yet? what are you waiting for? >> i'm trying to methodically go through and contact all of the countries that hold iran's money right now. one of the things that keeps getting tossed out there, if we do do this deal, they're going to get $150 billion. the number is more like $60 billion. >> it's a lot of money. >> it's a lot of money. the question s what happens if

we don't do the deal, chuck? what happens? will those countries continue to respect the sanction regime? that money is held primarily in india, china, south korea, japan. i'm on the phone to those countries, those embassies, those ambassadors, asking them the question, what will you do if the united states walks away? will iran get the money anyway? that's something we have to consider as we make a final decision. >> if these countries say, they're not going to get the money if the u.s. walks away, does that make you inclined to not support the deal? >> it's not a perfect deal. obviously. we don't trust iran. but i think too many people are judging this deal against the status quo, not what the world situation would be on the world stage. remember, the world is united in this deal. the world is united in this deal. so, it's going to have to be a status quo where the rest of the world also stays united or our sanctions regime will just fall apart. >> i want to get your reaction to how the president is

campaigning for this deal. let me play you a clip from his speech earlier this week. >> you are going to hear a lot of arguments against this deal. . backed by tens of millions of dollars in advertising. if the rhetoric in these ads and accompanying commentary sounds familiar, it should. for many of the same people who argued for the war in iraq are now making the case against the iran nuclear deal. >> it's not just republicans against this deal. chuck schumer, i mean, he's making almost a warmonger argument here. is that fair? is that fair to democratic skeptics? you're not there. do you like hearing that? do you feel pressured by that rhetoric? >> i don't think any of us feel rhetoric by either chuck schumer's rejection of this deal or the president's full-throated support of this deal. i hope that all of my colleagues are doing what i'm doing, and that doing their homework. one thing that's so disappointing, the republicans insisted on 60 days to review this deal. it appeared to me that

most of them made their mind up in about five minutes. this is one where the heightened rhetoric on both sides is not always hopeful. i hope more senators keep their blinders on, do their homework and figure out which way do we secure israel and secure our country? by doing this deal and if we don't do the deal, what does the world look like? >> did the president, though, make the best case he could have or could he have done it better? >> i think he is pushing hard. and i respect that he feels very strongly about this. i think always when these decisions are hard, maybe less is more. >> when it comes to rhetoric. let me move quickly. to the presidential race. do you want to see vice president get in? you're a hillary clinton supporter but do you think it would be healthy for the party if joe biden got in? >> i would never presume to tell joe biden what to do, or bernie sanders, for that matter. our party has many primaries and we've survived and done well. we had a rip roaring primary in 2008. >> that was good for the party.

>> i think it was. i think this may end up being good for hillary clinton. >> if joe biden gets in and -- >> i think if bernie stays in, and if joe were to get in, i don't think it's going to hurt hillary clinton because i think joe biden and hillary clinton agree on almost everything. i worry about -- >> are you concerned about his candidacy? >> i am not. i think when the smoke clears and the circus leaves town, americans want strong, stable leadership and a fighter. if there's anything hillary clinton has shown in her career, she's a fighter. >> your memoir "plenty ladylike" has a lot on todd aiken. what's interesting when watching -- there's been some fear in the republican party that donald trump will become their todd aiken. when you watch this, is that what you see and is that what you're rooting for as a democrat? >> a little bit. honestly, a little bit. i think he has some aiken-esque qualities to him in terms of his mouth. but there's a big difference. i will say this about todd aiken, he was a sincere man who

held sincere beliefs. he had no filter but he was principled. that's what he believed in. i don't think that's true with donald trump. i think donald trump is bluff and bluster. i don't think the things he says are rooted in anything other than a demand for attention. >> claire mccaskill, the book is "plenty ladylike," you'll spend your august recess not recessing. >> when you read this book, you know that you'll figure out? i'm not running for president. way too much stuff in here for me to be running for president. >> now you made me really want to read the book. thank you. we'll be back with one more candidate who hopes his thursday night's debate performance will vault him into the top tier of republican hopefuls. ohio governor john kasich. can donald trump's candidacy survive? we'll go back to the panel one more time. when and why they think donald trump will ultimately go belly-up or why nothing can take him from taking his talents to cleveland and the quicken loans arena.

welcome back. thursday's republican presidential debate was held in cleveland, home of the cleveland cavaliers. our next guest, ohio governor john kasich, made the best of a little home court advantage putting in an impressive performance for the supportive crowd. been a dark horse, slowly gaining in the polls. particularly in new hampshire. governor kasich joins us now. welcome back to "meet the press." >> good to be with you, chuck. >> i've got to start with the elephant in the room here. donald trump, is he consuming this campaign right now?

>> you know, chuck, it's really funny. this doesn't seem to bother me. in regard to the issue of women, look. i have strong women in my family. i've had, you know, i have strong women in my administration and my campaign manager is a woman. i've always found that whenever women touch anything, they always make it a little bit better. so it's unfortunate what's happened here. it's up to me to tell people about me and not be worrying about somebody else. >> i understand that, but the republican party at some point -- at what point does what trump's doing damage the entire party? >> see, i don't kind of look oot it that way. i think at the end of the day, you have a nominee. the nominee is the person that reflects the views of the republican party. all the things that go on in these primaries are simply things that are, you know, that go on today but forgotten tomorrow. so, you know, take a look at the

democrat side. you got bernie sanders out there. he's hard left. he's basically a redistributionist. does he define the democratic party? i mean the a the end of the day he won't. it will be the nominee. if he's the nominee, which would be great because i think we would win 49 out of 50 states, then it's a different situation. but i don't have people coming up to me saying, oh, well, you're republican, therefore, you think this or that. i think the way i want to think. i have a right to define what i think the republican party is, chuck. >> all right. well, let's go to your debate performance. "time" magazine, he could be the gop's pope francis candidate. an interesting way to describe you. do you take that as a compliment? >> well, i love the pope. i think he's -- look, who am i to criticize the pope? i think he's wrong on the economics about redistribution of wealth because i think free enterprise has lifted more people out of poverty than any

system known to man. his inclusiveness, his wanting to say we should focus on the dos that the lord wants us to do, rather than the don'ts. i agree with all that. i like it. i think he's sensitive to the environment. so am i. the lord gave us the environment. we're not here to worship it but we are here to manage it. i'd like to meet the pope. i don't know if i'm going to be able to do that, chuck. to me, that's a compliment, sure. >> you brought up the environment. he's somebody who believes climate change is man made and man needs to do something about it. do you agree with him? >> well, i think that man absolutely affects the environment. but as to whether -- what the impact is, the overall impact, i think that's a legitimate debate. what i do think, in my state of ohio, you know, we preciously take care of lake erie. we've reduced emissions by 30% over the last ten years. we believe in alternative energy. so of course we have to be

sensitive to it, but we don't to want destroy people's jobs based on some theory that's not proven. >> what do you say to conservative activist erick erickson who did not invite you, and he is pretty disparaging about you as a potential nominee? >> you know, i don't know that i've ever met him. i was sort of chuckling this morning. i wasn't invited to this event, but i don't know why anybody would be mad at me who's never met me. that i can think of. i'm sure if he calls and talks to me about what he's upset about, i'm sure we can work it out. from time to time, people get upset. i don't hold anything against him. i'm up in new york, meeting with a lot of potential donors. i'm headed to new hampshire on -- in fact, tomorrow. >> well, that's a state i imagine you'll spend a lot of time in. john kasich, governor of ohio, big performance on thursday night. thanks for coming on for a quick check-in here on "meet the press."

>> thanks, chuck. thank you very much. >> the panel is here. hugh hewitt, is there a disconnect between how the mainstream media folks have looked at john kasich and our polling which showed no bump for john kasich? we having a disconnect? >> i have great affection for the governor of my home state. he has a reagan-esque temperament. they will play very well. i think he will have to up his combativeness with hillary, as does jeb bush. they both have combativeness deficits when they go after hillary. i want them to go after "the new york times" piece this morning. she destroyed 31,000 e-mails. they should talk about that every day. >> heather mcghee, president of demos. are you fearful of john kasich as republican nominee versus hillary clinton? >> no. but i do think that his brand of sort of compassionate conservatism, expanding

medicaid, talking about the mental health crisis in our prisons gets him in the door of where a lot of americans are right now which is really anxious about economic and equality. half of americans couldn't pay a $400 bill without going in debt or selling something today. so the republican party spent a few minutes on the economy in the debate and had very little to say for working class americans. >> that goes to the organizers, which was hugh's point about questions -- very quickly. >> i think hillary clinton in some ways, because the e-mail controversy was not explored very adequately by the questioner, and also because of the focus on gender, is one of the beneficiaries of what happened. ironically -- >> i could argue with marco rubio and john kasich seen as two strong performser in a general election, that's scary for her. >> i'll be in new hampshire with her tomorrow. i'll be surprised if at a town hall meeting this doesn't come up. it would be perfect to discuss megyn kelly. >> general election message, what john kasich has, which is why there is this universal

going, hey, that's impressive. >> he has a growth agenda. every time he deviates to religious voters. he does it in the context of faith. that's smart. when all the dust settles you go with who has the best political skills, who has the best political skills. right now that's marco rubio. he's the most talented politician. we saw it in your interview. handled tough questions. maybe he's too polished, too young. you got to think the up side there is higher than anybody else. >> one thing very apparent in jeb bush's reaction at red state last night, he said this is going to lose us the election. he didn't say it was wrong. he didn't criticize donald trump on the merits. i agree marco rubio is the most politically skilled actor on the stage. whether or not he's the best general election candidate? i don't know. i think kasich showed some chops and that it may not be with this kind of -- >> kasich rubio? rubio kasich?

>> keep them all and vote for scott walker because he's doing very well with the base. >> we'll get back to you in a second right after the break. we've got more. remember, if you can't see "meet the press" live, we're always available on vod or some call it the vcr button you push to record us all the time. even if it's not sunday, it's still "meet the press." coming up, our end game segment, more with our panel and why some people are calling chr christy's claim that he was appointed u.s. attorney on september 10th, 2001, may be one of the most inaccurate factual moments of the debate. that's that new gear feeling. this week, filler paper and folders just one cent. office depot officemax. gear up for school. gear up for great.

♪ [ female announcer ] everything kids touch at school sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. you handle life; clorox handles the germs.

end game time. panel is here. so much to get to. heather, i want your reaction. bernie sanders. still getting the largest political rallies of any presidential candidate. disrupted. let me play a little clip of what happened. disrupted by a black lives matter protesters. >> seattle's been one of the most progressive cities in the united states of america. >> it is unfortunate because, among other things, among other things, i wanted to talk about the issue of black lives, of the fact that the american people are tired of seeing unarmed african-americans shot and

killed. >> heather, why is he taking the brunt of black lives matter protest movement right now? >> today is the one-year anniversary of the murder of mike brown. and so i do feel a certain responsibility to make sure that this issue is talked about right now in a way that really is worthy of the sea change that activist citizens all across the country, many of whom were not politic political, many of whom were 22 year-olds -- >> whole new generation of civil rights activists, social just sis activis justice advocates. >> there's always been a debate whether the goal of progressive politics is to regain the right working class in a race neutral way and be fine absorbing some of the racial biases there, or if we're going to expand and create a new multi-racial progressive movement. that's why bernie sanders is so important. >> bernie sanders still got 12,000 people at the rally that he eventually held in seattle.

although bernie sanders came out of the traditional civil rights movement in the '60s which did include a lot of white people as well, his whole message has been on income\s and has not focus on race and he did not pick up early on on those issues that you are addressing. >> let me get it back to the debate. quickly we got a little fact check issue with poor old chris christie. here's what he said during the debate a couple of times with rand paul in a point that he kept making to beat back some national security questions from rand paul. >> i was appointed u.s. attorney by president bush on september 10, 2001. and the world changed enormously the next day. and it happened in my state. >> pretty impressive claim, if true, but it turns out christie wasn't officially nominated by president bush until december 2001. his own website notes he didn't take office until 2002. is that a bad moment for governor christie or is this just a little pinprick? >> that's a bad moment. i'll ask him the next time,

because he said the same thing on my radio show. i'm surprised to learn that, because i took it to mean that he was in office with the authority of the u.s. attorney. that is a big deal. >> the back and forth with rand paul he was talking about the hug, and his retort was i was hugging people on 9/11. >> you know, one of the things that was so strange about that is i said right after the debate, we learned something about him we didn't know before but bob mueller, fbi director who actually took over right before. >> that was a crazy argument -- let's end with where we started. donald trump, how does it end? >> he's the -- there's something compelling in watching a guy who's unashamed and unembarrassed. i think he'll go on and get ratings. he will not be the nominee. he's not a political candidate. he's the presence in our deep unconscious that we can't get rid of. >> do you buy that? interesting analysis that i don't know if i disagree. >> i think he's going to run into the romney problem. he was talking about how he took advantaged of the laws of bankruptcy and bragging about it at a time when americans are

being crushed by debt and can't use the bankruptcy laws on their own mortgages or student loans the way a corporation. it's so pin-eared. he's a billionaire at a time of rampant economic inequality. >> why are people gravitating to him? >> i was surprised the bankruptcy issue didn't come up more because i thought it was so, exactly right. as an independent candidate, perhaps, i know how hard that is because he's got the money and the celebrity, but i don't see him as the republican nominee. i don't think the party can go down that road. >> what about all this awful nexus -- he doubled the ratings. let's not -- people tune in to fox to see the debate. they tuned in to see the donald trump show. >> i hope the audience comes back next month. >> you want donald trump there as a guy who -- >> yes, and talk about the iran vote that follows the next day. >> that's what these debates are

supposed to be about. the republican primary voter and the fact we live in a dangerous world where we need a leader -- a commander in chief who will not say to the opposition that they are part of the death to america crowd. that's what we need to focus on. not the id of america. >> well i think the narcissist in donald trump is so extraordinary because it is like watching a train wreck. but i just cannot see the republican party choosing him as the nominee and him being back on that stage next summer. >> does the next week define -- do we see a moment -- does he have an exit ramp? i think "the apprentice" used to be his exit ramp. what's his exit ramp? does he just get fed up with all of this? >> i don't think so. what the candidates have to do is talk about america. even john kasich's interview, there was a lot of "i" and "me." you have to unite the party and uniting the country. if you go to republican events, there is an intense hugger for patriotism because of the fear

of national decline. if i can tap into that, that can compete with the anti-passion surrounding him. >> well, it is just -- it is one of these things, it's fun and frustrating to follow at the same time. is that wrong? >> it's right. scott walker tapped into what david just talked about when he talked about polling, nato and the need to get more troops on the front line with russia. and rubio does it, too. that's where the party needs to stay. i don't know that donald trump can go there. he doesn't have that background, he doesn't have that factual ability that the others bring to the table. >> what do you make of carly fiorina? >> i think she was the standout in the first debate and i think she deserves to be. i think she has great debating skills and a lot of confidence. do i think she's right on policy? do i think she's going to able to really change what is the big achilles heel for the right which is their economic position? >> is it as easy to attack hillary clinton than the men? >> we'll have to see.

>> i will leave it there. that's all for today. we'll be back next week. gosh, who knows what will happen in the next seven days. but if it's sunday, it's "meet the press." we have a program for you tonight! "the daily show" may be fake news, but it makes a real impact. >> oppression. just because it makes him feel uncomfortable doesn't mean it has to change. >> it's fresh and new and original and smart every night. >> for a decade and a half, the force behind the money was jon stewart. >> did you watch jon stewart last night? >> you're getting into a bad place, my friend. >> he'll always be be revered as someone who blurred the lines between news and comedy. >> how the hell did we ep up here, mr.