-- former u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york -- is standing by to break it all down former trump attorney and start witness in this case, michael, cohen is also here with his take. plus, we are now 364 days to be exact away from the presidential election. brand new polling has everyone freaking out. steve kornacki is

that the big board leader to tell us what is actually happening. pennsylvania governor josh shapiro is also going to join me later on the show. but we do want to start tonight with what was a truly surreal and wild and crazy scene and lower manhattan today. apart from the fact that the former president on trial, a big deal on itself, today began like many other court cases would. the defendant took the stand, raise, hand and swore an oath to tell nothing about the truth it was all standard in the beginning until the defendant opened his mouth. that is when things got a little crazy. suddenly the guy on the stand acted like he was at the campaign rally, not in a courtroom where he was the defendant. trump took shots at the case saying this is a very unfair trial and a disgrace. he took shots directly out the judge saying, the fraud is on the board, not me. he took shots even had attorney general letitia james calling her a

political -- reminded trump this is not a political rally this is a courtroom. at another point, the judge told trump's lawyers i beseech you to control if you can. i love that word. of course there's no control of him, even when the word prestige as you. read what trump actually did answer questions, he made several big concessions that turns out. for instance trump conceded exaggerating the square footage of trump tower by three times could have been a mistake no kidding. he also failed to explain how incredibly value mar-a-lago more than 75 times it's -- that is a big over examination there. and despite downplaying the importance of the financial statements to lenders he admitted today he indeed played a role insecure favorable loans. a concession our friend of the show and shoot weisman calls key. very key. remember, the

judge already found a blatantly defrauded banks and jurors, this trial and we are watching now, is about how much the trumps will have to pay damages it. is about money, and has got a businesses. things the former president whose entire identity is wrapped up in his brand very much cares about and probably should have taken the chance today to try and stop the bleeding over but instead trump logic that happens over and over. this chaos was not even an accident it was on purpose although what we saw today in the courtroom, we knew this was going to, do we knew this was what they were going to do as rolling stone reported yesterday, trump and his lawyers doubled on a strategy to quote, built on spite and unbridled untied newsome that included deliberately trying to provoke the judge which again is what we saw today that was their strategy according to that same report -- a so-called torment order to put him in custody from reportedly the judges rulings

might be a good thing both legally and politically as part of the strategy as well see trump is betting his typical attack on aggression we have seen for u.s. will continue to help him politically he leaned into that today, even as a clearly black fight in court. if you can kick and scream all you want, you may see more of it. a decision is coming in this case. there are several more showers on the way. he can be in court all of next year. so much, here are the facts. his money is at stake. pretty soon his liberty will be as well. known mount of gaslighting or political gamesmanship like we saw today is going to change that. joining me now is -- former attorney for the southern district of new york. i've been thinking all day today, what were you thinking about this trial. so let me start, this was clearly a campaign rally watching it. but whether or not that works for him politically which is arguable, what is the impact on actually the legal side on the court yeah that is not how you

conduct yourself as a defendant in any trial civil or criminal that is not the way you conduct yourself when you are dealing with a judge who is pretty much been by the book in a case like this which basically says to the world trump and his team are no longer trying to win the case as you put it out in the and show there has already been a substantial ruling on summary judgment but the former president is liable and there has been fraud and largely what this trial about is to determine what the penalty should be so if you win the case as a legal matter you don't do all the things he did and if you try to make a political point then you do the things you did but you can't attack the charge again and again and again, and behave the way you behaved and think you are going to get a favorable ruling from the judge. they have given up on, that that much is clear. >> they have given up and clearly that is not going to work well with the judge. he did have some omissions there, i mentioned some of them, but as you are watching, what

was the starkest substantive admission or -- the former president made. >> you mentioned at least two of them. one is that he was involved in various statements and providing information about evaluations. the financial statements or made for the purpose of inducing lenders to land. so you have a basis for finding that he had what laura has called -- the intent to engage in fabrication and overstatement. also the purpose of those statements was. he said that multiple times during the course of his testimony which again to me is a function of both -- and their plan to persuade the court of public opinion and within the court of public opinion a subset of his supporters, not the court of law itself. >> everything and it a little bit earlier than we expected today, we expected for 30 or, something it ended

earlier because his lawyers decided not to cross examine him. what did you make of that strategy? >> that is unusual. usually it is the case when you have the hostile party examining -- when you have the hostile party examining your witness, your client who's the defendant in the, case you then want to clean up some of the things that were said before, you ask a lot of questions, allow your client to modify the things you said, to improve the things you said. but maybe it's an active bravado because sometimes somebody will say i have no questions because you think our client did as well as you possibly could, and it's signaling to a jury if there's a jury, as we know, it's signaling to the judge that we stopped that are guided great. there are multiple times during the course of the trial today during the course of trump's testimony that the judge said can you control your client? ?

can you do something about? this the lawyers speaking to an audience of one, their client, the defendant in the case said things like he could give great answers, their review -- but as the future chief executive of the country, they were just coddling him, and i think they thought that for public purposes, the spectacle that was donald trump's testimony stood on its own, and was fined enough. . >> it seems like these lawyers were participating in a political strategy, not a legal strategy. they agreed to this according to rolling stone and others which seems, were you surprised by that? >>, yes i guess it's mostly a political strategy, donald trump calls the shots. it probably dictates some of the things that they say. these are loyalist to him. the only sort of legal strategy that i can discern here, is to the extent that donald trump is being outrageous and provocative and attacking the judge. was there some strategy to go to the judge into doing something that might be

reversible error, or get so angry that he might do something extreme, which might help him on appeal. -- people up and evading on cable television all day, and probably for years to. the week i'm not sure that's, true that's probably an incidental potential benefit of trump acting outrageously, he believes when he acts in his life that he's always had a political, rally whether it's on cable news stations, or in a court of, law or in actual political, rallies i don't think he can help him by himself, i don't know how -- political strategy. >> there's clearly a lot of judges, a lot of prosecutors who are watching today. one of the things that still hangs in the balance out, there is the question of his appeal over gag orders. he just attacked a judge, hear he attacked the u-turn -- how do you think that plays out, or does it on his gag order appeal in the federal case? >> well you, know it's very fascinating that people are talking about how much of a

wide berth or not donald trump has been. getting we can talk about a gag order in this case, and in the second case in which a guy is a criminal case, they are very limited. you have here a gag order in the new york civil case that mostly applies to their charges will staff and other lawyers of the president of the united states, foreign parts of the united states, but he's allowing the defendant in the, case a party in the case to specifically attack the judge himself again and again and again, so i think the other judges and the four criminal cases, one of which who was -- are going to be looking very carefully at the way in which control, your court room and -- one of donald trump's lawyers said to the judge, you don't control, maybe you don't tell me what to do, you control the courtroom. for people who actually practice and, court that's a subtle distinction that is not understandable. >> that's true, watching this criminal trials are entirely different. what did today tell you, or what should it tell all of us about trump is likely going to approach his upcoming, criminal trials. can he do the same kind of crazy behavior he did today in criminal trials?

>> i think it's a much different animal. in a civil case you can take the fifth and decide not to testify because it might incriminate you with some other criminal investigations, but if you do that, the judge can draw an adverse inference against. the judge said today when trump was not asked answering questions in a direct fashion, he said i'm going to make adverse inferences, in other words assume that the facts are bad for you based on the facts you're not answering questions. in a criminal case, it behooves someone who is actually guilty, and can't testify credibly, and he would be cross-examined by the prosecution in a case like that. not to testify. i think donald trump does not have the ability to testify in a criminal case because i think he'll be chewed up on cross-examination, and it will be more likely to found guilty if he does in that circumstance. >> before that, you go i do have to ask you about this, what i found to be a completely

crazy story in the washington post. i've heard it three times and i can't stop thinking about. it's a basically outlines, and it was kind of overshadowed by everything today, it outlines the plan that trump's allies have to use the federal government to punish -- a second term, they're drafting plans, they're talking about invoking the insurrection, act reading, that what did you think, what concerns you the most about what you saw in that story? >> so it's bonkers, i'm not sure what words apply to the things that are said in that article, and the way that it's characterizing donald trump's plans. i seldom kherson twitter. i did a couple of hours, ago in response to the article. it's ironic that donald trump says things about his current legal predicament, including the case we're talking about.

it's a banana republic, but it's not. the things that are being talked about, if you're the article to be true, and the reporting to be accurate, and correct he wants to weaponize his next attorney general if he gets back into the presidency, all the people under him to specifically go after not only political enemies of, his people who he employed who had been disloyal to him without any evidence, without any basis at all, that's the banana republic. i think people should read the article, i read it twice, i can't stop thinking about. it he read it three. times people read it at least once, and understand the consequences for the rule of law and for democracy and for justice in america, and one standard of justice in america, if trump becomes the presidents again will be a thing of the past. >> anyone out there washing, you can -- seven, combined thank you so

much for joining me this evening, i'm talking about all these legal, issues we're trying to. understand donald trump's former attorney michael cohen blew the lid off of the trump organization's fraudulent business dealings back in 2019. he was the states star witness in this trial, and he joins me next.

>> for all of donald trump's talks about witchhunts, it is worth remembering this entire fraud investigation only

started after trump's own former lawyers spoke out. -- all the way back in september of last year. >> mr. trump's allies may say that these penalties are too harsh, or that this is part of a witch hunt. i will remind everyone that this investigation only started after michael cohen, the former lawyer testified before congress and shed light on mits misconduct. joining me now is trump's lawyer former lawyer michael cohen, he's now the principal at crisis, acts he's also -- an author of the book of the root, for i don't know where else to start, what did you make up his behavior in the courtroom, what is going on? >> it was no different to, and over at the trump organization. most people at the trump organization if you had any dealings with donald on a day-to-day basis, you had to do

exactly what chris kise, alina hobby, and chris blabbered to did which is whatever it is to struck eagle donald's a, go in and out all day long. that's what the real job. is their job was not to lawyer and to ensure that whatever the best possible outcome that could be derived from his taking the stand would be achieved. no. their entire goal was to create theatrical. donald thinks that the theatrical is the way that he's going to win the election. it's the way that he sees with more theatrical that's going on. the higher he's climbing in the polls, i've seen him do the same thing when he made the allegations that barack obama was not born in the united states, but rather kenya. he wrote that all the way, front page, he thought it was the greatest gift in the planet, and he thinks that all of these

cases are going to propel him back to the white house. >> let me ask, you there's been some debate about this, whether his lawyers just agreed to this political strategy, or whether there's some legal strategy here about trying to get an, appeal trying to provoke the judge to do something that would help him in an appeal. what do you think? all politics? was there legal strategy here? >> no, there is no legal strategy -- he told them what they were intending to do, and being the sycophantic followers that they, are they just acknowledged it. the second that donald walks out, and he did it when i was there, he did it again today, he did it on his posting. a victory based upon, what that he corroborated exactly what i had stated while i was on the stand? he not only corroborated what i

had said, he actually placed himself into the center of the scenario, so acknowledging that he knew what he was doing, and that he is the one that signed off on. it's like alina how about comes down the, stairs and she starts attacking. meet michael cohen crumbled. i schooled him and he's a liar. this is what donald trump tells them to do. >> look, i was going to ask you about this because you've been around for so many of these, meetings and obviously as laetitia james this would not would have -- a lot of people are speculating out there, does donald trump know his fraudulent business practices are legal? he sort of acknowledged a lot of knowledge today, or do you think he actually believes that he some how brings this business in an acceptable way? what does he think? >> i think he knows exactly what he was doing, he does not think about consequences. when you think about the todd, was he thinking legal, not legal, yes he knows what is right or, wrong he just does not care. that is the big difference.

what donald always does is he uses the same play. that's why when i was testifying before the house oversight committee, it was so eagle -- they were never be a police peaceful transfer of. power it's also easy for me to understand how they were going to attempt to attack me when i was on the stand. in all, fairness i certainly did not crumble, and in fact every thing that i had turned out not to be -- defended himself, i was interested in going to adore, today and i came across this document, and no one has seen this document before. he does the same thing over and over and over. for he's using this, give us a little rundown on what that document has to be? >> what it says is obama ramps is looking -- eric schneiderman to target political. enemies all you have to do is remove eric schneiderman from it, put it into laetitia james,

or put it into jack, smith or put it into anyone. it's the same language over and over. he thinks that it was beneficial to him than, which we all know it was not. he ended up paying close to 20 some odd million dollars for the special university case. it did not work, there and it's not going to work here. the theatrical said he and his lawyers are doing every single day, it does not benefit him. instead of schooling me, they should have schooled him on the proper way to answer a question. one, you don't make a full out of, yourself and then you don't get hit with a six or 700 million dollar bill at the end of the day,. >> i should note that that document you just showed, me we have not independently verified, that that is a document you

have, it certainly does give you like to think, about do you think knowing everything up you know about trump's company, and his cash on hand, it's liquidity. can he even -- the -- that's what she's asking for. >> yes, he is going to have to sell and remember, one of the things that they've already done is they've started the process of installing a receiver in order to handle the potential disposition. what's interesting is you may remember in delaware, they tried to open up trump corporation number two, and then they were looking to try to transfer so high pawtucket, in the -- he saw what he was going to do, donald thinks everybody else is stupid without acknowledging that they are not smart than

anyone else that's, he thinks he's more, devious it's just not. so she foresaw that he would do something like, this and they ended up preventing them from doing any of the transfers or high politic a shin. >> michael cohen, i love that phrasing, i've got it too, he treats everybody like there. stupid thank you so much, you always keep things a little spicy, so thank you for joining us this evening. pennsylvania governor joins me now, i wonder what he thinks of anything that happened and lower manhattan today, a lot of other things after a very quick break. dick stay with us. it was the pull that democrats

this is stella. sfx: [ding] she has big ideas for this year's tree. real big. so they went to michaels and found inspiration in the one holiday shop as expansive as stella's imagination. because sometimes the best way to find a little holiday magic is to make it yourself. together they turned that little holiday magic into a seven foot tall... [roar] untraditional tradition. turn ideas into i-did-its. sfx: [ding] ♪

curled up in the fetal position -- numerous from the new york times show donald trump leading joe biden and five out of six key swing states i have to say, i'm of two minds about this. on the one hand, it is one poll. 364 days, i promise you is an

absolute lifetime in politics. ticklish at the freak-out inducing hard-line some hesitant to walmart from september, november, and even the summer of 2011, the year before he won reelection. i was there. i was working on that campaign. believe me, i remember it well. in the conventional wisdom was definitely not that block about would win 332 electoral votes and become the first president since reagan to win a majority of the national popular vote more than once, and he first omicron to do it since fdr. so my first instinct about that new york times poll, that i've been telling friends and family, do not, forget there is time. there are plenty of contrast for -- plenty of material there. trump is going to spend a lot more time in courtrooms, that is not good. not a good thing for him. on the other hand, need four times indicted donald trump is now openly using about locking a political opponents and using military force against american citizens. he is still leading in the polls. when you think about it that way, that is pretty concerning, right?

joining me now is the democratic governor pennsylvania josh shapiro governor, great issue, i want to start with politics. so many things i want to ask you about but pennsylvania is one of the swing states where donald trump is leading. i think we are all trying to figure out why. >> yes, look, i wouldn't pay halawa tension to the polling at this point. that pull certainly isn't gospel. i have seen a lot of pulls all over the place. i think we have to acknowledge there is real worry out there. if you are pennsylvanian across this country. worried about the economy word out about immigration and crime. i think it is also really critical to note we are at the beginning of this campaign. we have a year to. go this race is going to join and you will see a clear contrast between the president of the united states who here in pennsylvania has delivered. he has delivered on -- high-speed internet on two hydrogen hubs who will help bring about a clean energy future here in the commonwealth

and across the country he has protected our freedoms and stabilized our democracy on the other side of this very clear contrast in this race you have the former president who just -- disconnect in the public. someone who has brought total chaos to the united states. you are seeing it play out in the courtroom right now, a guy focused more on himself, and his own fraudulent ways and less on benefiting the american people. we will have a clear contrast in this race. as you point out that the beginning, it is the -- matters most. we have a long way to go. a clear contrast in this race. and, in president biden, we have a guy who has delivered for pennsylvania, and that will be proud to be campaigning for him and supporting here in the commonwealth and across the country. >> so you referenced the former president in the courtroom, i'm not going to ask you about the specifics of the fraud, case you have plenty on your plate. but broadly speaking, your former state attorney general yourself, why is it important for fraudulent behavior like this to be called out, and to

be prosecuted? >> you know when i was attorney general, we talk about the people before the powerful the powerful are ill is able to cut corners, make deals for themselves, and -- the little guy. donald trump has spent a career doing that in business. and during his four years as president of the united states. i think what is playing out in this courtroom, and other courtrooms across the country in the future, it shows a clear picture that the former president is for himself. he is not for anybody else. knew kind of chaos we are seeing surrounding him is not something the american people want to invite back into the white house, invite back into their living rooms every day. i think we need to move forward in this country, not backwards. i think joe biden and the work he has done has been clear, he puts the american people first. not to be clear there is a lot of worry and concern out there and a lot of heartbreak. i think the president of the united states is doing his best to address those challenges.

nydia we will go back to donald trump and somehow that is going to be a correction for this country is absolutely not the direction this nation -- once they see a clear contrast in this race as it is put together. >> one of those contrasts governor, is rule of law. i know you have a great deal of respect and value for given your history. there is new reporting from the washington post that basically says trump and his allies have begun mapping out specific once or using the federal government to punish critics and opponents should he win a second term. i have read the story sometimes and i can't stop thinking about it. what is your reaction to that suggestion, and even that piece? >> first off, jen, i believe it. second, it should scare every american. the fact that this guy is going to be completely -- keys to the white house again, a guy who is going to be driving down the road with no ill o-line, new guard, we'll

see nothing to hold him back -- the idea he is that as an enemies list and wants to take it out on them, again it is more of the same. he is focused on his own grievances, his own interest, his own selfishness. is not focused on helping the american people not building a single road, not bearing a single bridge. new covered -- and we did that with the partnership of president biden who cared deeply about the people of pennsylvania and the folks along the east coast who travel along that road. the former president does not care at all about, them he cares about himself and we should all be -- the rule of law when he was president, got four bid if he gets the chance to do that again >> before i let you go, i do want to ask you about the war and hamas, and --

antisemitism, and dealing with this in your state. there is a great deal of anger and outrage at the number of civilian casualties and lack of humanitarian assistance that has not yet made his way to gaza. there's also been statements made of language that have deep roots in history, and recently congresswoman -- referenced and defended the phrase from the river to the see. what would you want the congresswoman to know, or anyone who's using that phrase or retweeting about how any member of the jewish community in this country, or anywhere in the world hears that phrase? >> i guess the deeply troubling moment that we are living through in the middle east right now should not be used by anyone as a justification for their antisemitism, nor should it be used us hate, islamophobia, or -- sentiment. i think it is critically important that you speak and act with more clarity

right now, that goes for the congresswoman and everyone else. there is no moral equivalency between hamas and -- a pluralistic democracy,, hamas an unprovoked attack killed over 80,000 multinationals including the vast majority of israelis. they took over 200 people hostage, including americans. israel should not have to live next to that terrorist organization. they have every right to defend themselves, and that region of those -- that we need to do everything we can to save innocent lives. i condemn the loss of all innocent lives. we have to be very clear on college campuses or even in the halls of congress, to not use this moment as any sort of justification for antisemitism, islamophobia, or any other forms of pain. the congresswoman should know better, others should know better. they should study their history

they should understand what has led to this. they should understand what is clearly wrong, hamas a terrorist organization, and what is right israel's right to defend itself. >> governor josh shapiro, thank you so much for joining me this evening. i have been waiting so long to say this. steve kornacki is standing by at the big board, he has numbers an incredibly high stakes races tomorrow. he joins me next. we will be right back. ght back

(aidyl) hi, i'm aidyl, and i lost 90 pounds on golo. i struggled with weight loss and weight gain my entire life. with all the yo-yo dieting i did in the past, i would lose 20, 30, 50 pounds just to gain them over and over again. in one year, i've lost five sizes, and i'm on my way to lose another three. with golo, i can do it. (announcer) change your life at golo.com. that's golo.com. okay here is something to

actually be excited about. motors are going to vote tomorrow, and they're some incredibly important races we are watching. now our governors races and -- they will decide whether to shanghai and compulsion rights from state constitution. that is a big deal. in virginia, control of the legislature is up for grabs. the results that will have an enormous impact on abortion rights moving forward as well. joining me for the first time ever on the show is the great steve kornacki who is at the big board. steve, so excited to see you. why don't you tell us what you're watching for in these races tomorrow, what we should all be looking out for. >> as you mention, jen, thank you for that introduction. for states we are looking at tomorrow, to governors races, kentucky, mississippi, each has the potential to be making an eye on, those but let's take an eye on the two other states in the role of the issue of abortion. what we might learn from this. now of the ohio, that would be,

virginia there is a constitutional event on the ballot in ohio. it would enshrine the right to abortions, state constitutions, it would also give legislatures the power to restrict it after that point of -- about 24 weeks. in virginia, their state legislative elections where essentially the republican governor glenn youngkin controls one of two chambers, is trying to go for full control. he is advancing what he thinks is the path forward for republicans to win over moderate voters. of course let's start on ohio where this is the most recent polling on that proposed constitutional amendment. at least according to the polling, there is healthy support for this. there is also something of a test in ohio over the summer, where opponents of this initiative are put a question on the ballot this summer -- the threshold for constitutional amendments between 60% threshold to passes to the simple majority. that went down to defeat by double digits the summer, meaning it is a harbinger of how this is

going to -- certainly if it does passed more in ohio, it would be consistent with basically every referendum, every initiative we have seen on state ballots since roe v. wade was overturned. on top of the screen, you see here, these were initiatives that were advanced by the -- to the very blue states, one is more of a swing state michigan, they all, passed they all passed by double digits. on the other end of the spectrum, pro-life, side the initiatives as you the in three red states they right now to defeat -- that has been the pattern we have seen in every state so far. again, what they are doing in ohio has not been done in every state. it is saying abortion should be legal, but setting a point the point of viability, there is the potential there to set a restriction after that. if that passes in ohio and, passes big-time, it would give plenty of margin for supporters to do similar initiatives in red and

swing states in 2024. arizona, florida, nevada, south dakota, you'd have legal abortion would have that point of viability language in there. in the blue states -- maryland, new york, that doesn't exist. we get to virginia, as i have, said republicans control the lower, house democrats control the upper house. a republican governor glenn youngkin wants to control the votes. he says on abortion, the compromise on the 15 weeks, he says that is the cut off he would favor if republicans could get power they would push for that 15-week limit on abortions, how does that pull, basically here is a recent poll out of the state of virginia. basically right down the middle. 47 opposed, 46 support. -- in this election tomorrow they think he can -- they have a good day, it is only going to reinforce their desire to make -- for 2024. if youngkin side as

well tomorrow, he might be giving republicans a pathway on this issue. >> steve kornacki, i hope this is the first of, many i want to come play around with that white board, but thank you so much for joining me this evening. joining me now here at the tables in walter, publisher and editor in chief of the -- a political strategist and former president of emily's list. we have a super women powered political panel which i am so excited about. amy, i want to start with, you steve gave us a good rundown of how abortion rights is basically on the ballot tomorrow. everyone is always looking for tea leaves. this is why everyone is always asking me. what does this mean? what could this mean? >> i do think steve said it up really well, because it is really about messaging more than it is results. especially if you are republicans, when you talk about why after 2020, to mix and, yes we absolutely were on our heels on this issue. we surprised everybody, but especially surprising many republicans who had to go

through primaries, many of their candidates move very much to the right on this issue. now they say, we have learned our lesson, we have to go on offense, and we can't let democrats define this issue for us. this is what youngkin was doing. like how it pulls, it pulls much better than six, weeks or completely, we have exceptions. what is interesting if you watch those of us who are here in the d.c. media market, we are seeing a lot of these ads. many of these ads. it is quite remarkable for legislative races the amount of money that is being spent. what you will notice is, there is only one race down enrichment where a republican is basically taking the advice of glenn youngkin at going -- glenn youngkin going on offense. all the other republicans, they are just sticking to -- >> that is all they have. >> so, this is really as much about youngkin and his theory. a lot of legislative candidates not taking that same advice. >> so

there has been this new york times poll that people are freaking out over, i think it is safe to, say but one of the bright spots for democrats and the biden team is on abortion rights. they support for biden's position on that. what turnout is going to be a big issue as we watch of course in 2024, what are you watching for stephanie in terms of how people are responding on the abortion issue tomorrow? >> i'm just going to say since the dobbs decision abortion is on the ballot every election and will be on the ballot as a decisive issue until we figure out what to do. it means that some point in time the american people are going to have to rise up and say we need a better national law that protects abortion access -- so tomorrow it will drive it youngkin knows it had a big deal that is why he is trying to change the topic and try to find middle ground. amy's right, the republican party and legislators, they are ready to pass full bans. that is why it is not like democrats are running that message. that is

actually what the republican legislatures are doing. so we have examples over and over again, and that is the problem. so we will see what the turnout looks like, i'm in shock to see what it is, but this issue is not going. away >> i'm especially intrigued on turnout because a couple of the senate races are taking race down in the hampton roads area where you have significant black turnout, critical for democrats. youngkin did well in some of these areas, in 2021 when turnout was lower, biden did much better in the presidential year. so that is going to give us maybe some needs about the motivation and what this means. >> let me ask you about -- because what jumped out to me was the alarming things, or that we have 364 days, but there is a huge shift among young voters, and also base voters. young voters specifically in 2020 biden won

59% of voters under 30, right, now there is only a one-point gap there. again we have lots of time here but should people be freaking out about that, should they not be? what was most alarming to you, or not in the poll? >> what the poll said to me is, basically what we will be talking about for the next 364 days, we all kind of note right now, which is president biden has an enthusiasm problem with his base, donald trump has a ceiling problem. if you look at all the head to head numbers in those states, i go in my soapbox and we'll do it again. do not talk about the march, and talk about the vote share. what share of the vote is biden getting, what is trump getting? trump's share of the vote is exactly the same as what he got in 2020, every one of those states. so he tapped out. if biden is dropping so what this says to me is for donald

trump to win, he is doing one thing right which is he is keeping his coalition together and he probably needs something else happening which is for biden to chop either because people stay home, or because third party candidates helped -- some of that off. >> very quickly before we go -- will republican debate coming up on wednesday. my bet is that if youngkin does well here, the person we see with that language is nikki haley. who is the candidate you think might? >> you know, maybe it might be a step too far because let's face it, this is a republican primary debate. they have to win a primary to be in the general election. so you cannot go very far to the middle if you want to call that the middle in a republican primary. so if i were any of those candidates for a republican presidential race -- >> you would not do it? >> amy walter, thank you so much, let's do this again many

times over the next 364 days. up next, i just sat down with stacey abrams, i'm something she said really stuck with me. i will show you that right when we come back.

>> on the eve of another election it is important to remember what we expect from our elected officials, the best extended they should all be held to. i was reminded of that when i sat down with stacey abrams last week when she spoke about her for more rival down in georgia. >> brian kemp did not commit a crime. it is what donald trump called on him to do. i applaud his refusal to commit a crime. i applaud his refusal to overturn an election that was rightfully conducted. but that does not create a hero. doing your job is the expectation we should have. one of the challenges of the last eight years has been a lowering of o threshold for what we expect of public officials. it is insufficient that you are lauded for simply doing the job

you are hired to do. and then, you get to erase the, bad you continue to do. >> not committing crimes does not make you a hero. apart for elected officials as to be higher than the bare minimum. we can't expect more, and we have to expect more. that does it for me tonight. the rachel maddow show rates right now. hi rachel, welcome back. >> that was fantastic. i just had an event with stacey abrams where the book tour where i had to cancel everything for getting covid. she is so impressive every time i speak with her. i can't stand it. >> i know, i just kept thinking about what she said. the and i just kept thinking about what she said, the lowering of the bar of elected officials. we need to raise the bar. it's so important to remember it should be they're making peoples lives better, thought they're breaking the law. >> to be clear-eyed what this is, what public service is and what