they would have given you 1,000:1 in vegas before the government shut down. scratch to get 50:1 today. something we have to pay attention to. if we don't include people that don't historically vote for us, we got a problem. > who's being mean to ted cruz? let's play "hardball." ♪ good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me get started tonight with this emerging war in the republican party. the surging confederate party of ted cruz and the northern mainstream party by chris christies. when you look at cruz, you can see the insurgents. he complained of the

establishment being mean to him like he was an 8-year-old in the recess yard. he presents himself as the one who's been wronged. he speaks of challenging the bosses even though they're his party's elected leaders. and he or any other republican senator is free to run against him. he speaks of people saying mean things about him as if he wasn't the one that brought the government to a shutdown. but who do the people rally that it's not true. that he's the innocent. that he's the bystander when he is the very figure who fired on ft. sumter, not the other way around. but is the right so dizzy that it can't tell up from down or north from south or victim from troublemaker. john favreau was the speech writer, and john feehery is a republican strategy. i want to start with you in the republican party because you really know it. it's your home turf.

it's made of the party we grew up with. moderate to conservative. now it has a new wing. who's winning? >> well, i think the establishment wing, if you want to say it, is not winning. they are taking on some more water. they've got to fight back in the primaries. they've got to be able to make these members honest so they don't keep on going to the right. the most important thing -- >> why is everybody afraid to challenge the hard right in the weeks of the government shutdown? so much they stayed in line until they got the permission slip from the speaker it's now okay to vote the way you think. >> they were worried about a primary. most members are risk adverse. and they worry about there is a populism going on in the country. not just the republicans but also the democrats. there's a disgust with washington. there's a disgust with new york. and i understand that and republicans -- >> what's the new york zbloinlsds wall street. >> people with the jackson attitude. >> there's this big disparity of wealth. and people are frustrated. and we appreciate that. >> have you looked out the window and seen the poverty

driving through north philly, it's not all rich up there. >> it's not. but you get my point. there's a sense of the populism out there. but they have to channel it. and being against everybody is no way to govern. >> to you see nihilistic? >> i say nihilistic. >> let's talk about this. you have been writing for the president. he's looking out for the white house right now and sees the other party, they're not in disarray. the republicans are an organized group of people. but there's an unusual division going on where you can see across the mason-dixson line. the south is insurgent right now. >> i said this in my column. i think we have to be on the side of the moderates.

i think the president wants to be working with john boehner, he has to make sure when he makes a deal with john boehner he's going to have some republicans come along with him. >> have you seen him do a good job of that? is he doing a good job of sitting down with john boehner in private and working? >> i think the two men get along well. >> how come every time something is said like i can't stand working with you, it leaks within hours? >> because that's washington. >> i might and in all due respect to john, i think the president would like to see the republicans go over the edge. and i think he eggs them on because he wants the democrats to take over control of the house and have the whole run of the thing in the last two years of his presidency. >> you think he's thinking that far ahead. >> i do. >> anyway, the republican party's conflicted about how much focus it should place on social issues. abortion, gay marriage, opposition to both. after the election the rnc put out an autopsy as we know. arguing it needs to be more welcoming and inexclusive on issues like marriage equality.

but a new report out today from a social conservative group blame the party's losses last year on the fact that too many republicans called a truce on those issues. quote, we believe the conventional explanation emerging from the rnc's autopsy report get the core issues wrong. social issues especially the life issues do not hurt gop candidates. they help them win elections. in other words, business leaders not regular people who have to get a job. you agree with that? which is right? >> there was a lot of good stuff in that report. >> the new report. >> the new report. we are the pro-life party. i think in economics we can't be the boss party. we've got to be the worker party. there's a lot more worker bees than boss. >> so you're with rick santorum. >> i think -- >> that's the rick santorum argument. >> there is an economic populism and we have to understand it and come up with philosophies that's not just let the rich be richer. that we have to understand that there is a place for helping people.

and i think santorum was right on that. >> they'll say on fiscal issues i'm conservative. you're saying the real angle is looking out for the working class guy like santorum and being concerned on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage. where's the action? where's the emerging of the country? >> i agree with john. they're not going to run away from their position on -- >> how about other social issues? do they stick to their guns? >> i think they can't run away. i think they have to run away from candidates like todd akin talking about legitimate rape. on economic issues, there are legitimate concerns about income inequality and wage differential and job security. one of the things in the report, $5,000 scholarship. >> can the republicans win the election next time. forget the names. if they run on the platform of hostility to legal abortion, hostility to same-sex marriage.

>> not national. >> you said they can't run away from positions. get it straight. do you believe they've got to keep it in their platform? >> it depends on the economic issue. >> no their platform. >> they're going to. >> you said they can't win if they keep it in. >> i think they can't run away from the issues. i think voters will decide. >> so it doesn't matter if they keep them. >> it doesn't matter. >> george bush won on that platform. the fact of the matter is you cannot run away on the pro-life thing but you also can't scare people. like cuccinelli on contraception. we have to have a thing -- and there's a -- >> you mean those what do you call them? unmarried women in northern virginia came to work might be scared off by someone who wants to outlaw birth control? >> you need to focus on the issue at hand. >> i'm teasing because of of absurdity. latourette of ohio is defending main street trying to take on the tea party and promote republican candidates next year.

he said quote, hopefully we'll go into eight to ten races and beat the snot out of them. when you say they're going to knock the snot out of them, you're already pulling punches. we don't usually talk like that in speech writing. >> stay away from that. >> do you think that's going to work from your view? >> i hope for the sake of the country it works. because we can't afford to see what we did the last couple weeks. >> what you need to have are republicans who believe in governance. i don't believe having the big business sector coming in saying this is our candidate. but you need the candidates that believe in rational governance. these ron paul candidates, i like rand paul but ron paul is going through this libertarianism that is not republicanism. we need to find the candidates that can make the race. >> here's one guy that will be hard to take on the hard right. rob jezner.

he's saying, quote, this conflict could be the new normal. until we have a nominee in 2016, be in the wilderness for awhile. i think he's smart, this guy. i don't know him, but he's a staff guy like we used to be. he says basically until the republican party goes head to head in their day of reckoning when they pick the candidate to run against hillary, that's when we'll know if it's a party of the hard right a la ted cruz or back to the center right. >> there is no single dominant strain of conservatism. it's all regional and based on your own beliefs. until there's a presidential candidates that sorts it all out, we're going to have this conflict. >> don't you fear that as a republican that you might go into the field in 2016 in election, you ought to be competitive in. because no party holds the white house more than eight years easily. it's always a struggle.

and you find yourself with the middle taken away because hillary clinton has moved to the senator where she already sort of is on foreign policy. and you're stuck with a hard right candidate like rand paul or ted cruz. >> i think we're going to have a governor. i think it's going to be someone who has actually made hard decisions and can understand how this all works together. and i think -- >> is that walker you're talking about? >> i'm thinking john kasich. >> really? >> i like john kasich. >> i do too. >> this debate is not unhealthy. there is this shift in the country. >> here's another moderate republican, the former republican governor of pennsylvania addressed the log cabin republicans last night. he had a stark warning for his party. for many observers, the gop has become intolerant, judgmental, and self-righteous. perhaps worthy of the pilgrims in 1620. but hardly attractive qualities for hundreds of years later. is the democratic party lucky,

fortunate in having as its opposite a party which is basically out-moded in terms of social issues? >> i think out-moded in social issues makes them lucky. but we're talking about the economic movement. >> the 47% thing. >> yeah. the 47% and the idea of job creators. >> look at mitt romney. that guy's face said i made money. and you'll never make as much. >> mitt romney was the richest candidate we've ever put forward in history. and rich people are actually very unpopular. so it was not good. >> that was odd for your party. the democratic party has always been the party of the very high, the roosevelts and kennedys and people like that. and your party -- that's your party. your party has been the middle. >> this is why i think john's right. that's why we lost. people didn't necessarily trust romney on social issues.

the hard core conservatives didn't like romney. he was equivocal on abortion. >> how's the president doing? >> he's great. >> is he happy? >> he is. >> is he happy? >> he's realistic. >> what's the biggest thing he wants to do before leaving office? >> i think immigration reform. and bipartisan bill across the senate. >> will he get immigration reform through? >> i think there's a good chance. >> the less he talks about immigration reform, the better to get it passed. >> i think it's going to be a congressional fight and closely run. and they better be in mood to enforce. i'm not for another joke. we passed a law, we got to believe in it and be proud to enforce it. or don't put your name on it and don't vote for it. thank you. coming up, republicans in texas are shifting hard to the right to copy their new idol ted cruz. they're calling for impeachment, no direct elections of senators anymore. and even expulsion of blue states from the union. you can be sure cruz doesn't

want what happens in texas to stay in texas. plus want to know why republicans are voting so hard to kill the affordable care act? they were wrong on social security, medicare, if they're wrong on the president's plan and it succeeds where are they going to be? and jay leno takes a shot at secretary sebelius. finally, let me finish how i got here from the peace corps. and this is "hardball," the place for politics.

well, the plot thickens about the unnamed republican house leader that told president obama quote, i cannot even stand to look at you. "the huffington post" is reporting it was pete sessions. but the white house says it never happened. and the episode was a misunderstanding. the story first came to light when senator dick durbin of illinois cited a house leader who insulted the president at a

white house meeting. "the huffington post" says now harry reid revealed it was sessions. the chairman of the rules committee in a private meeting last week with democratic senators. well, sessions denies having said it. wouldn't he? and the white house today released the statement today saying the president, the quote's not accurate and there was a miscommunication about that meeting. well, we'll see. as i said, the plot thickens. we'll be right back.

i've spent the past month in washington, d.c. and it is terrific to be back in america. >> what a cheap shot that was. welcome back to "hardball." ted cruz came home to a hero's welcome in texas as you saw last week. the only thing he achieved in washington was to become the leader of a failed strategy that left his party with plunging poll numbers as we know. and its house majority in peril next year. he took a victory lap across the state where he was greeted with

welcome home rallies and cheering audiences for as one supporter said going to the mats. under cruz's influence, republicans in texas are lurching further and further to the right to win primaries and making dramatic appeals to do it. calling for the impeachment of president obama. calling for a rollback of the 17th amendment that allows for popular election of u.s. senators and imposing benefits for illegal immigrants as well as any discrimination laws. if successful, could cruz's influence expand nationally and more so could we see an attempt to replicate this strategy and do to america what he's done to texas? let me go to the mayor. mayor brown, this cruzzism is a different strain than what we've seen. this fella has declared war on watch which he considers foreign territory. people around him consider california now foreign territory.

they're talking about getting your state out of the union, getting new york out of the union. i realize this is rhetoric, but what does it mean actually to the people who are cheering it? >> he's trying desperately to get the nomination of the republican party for 2016. he apparently believes that he needs to be as radical as he possibly can be with that collection of people that have been his traditional supporters. he hopes to marshal texas in that vain. this is a guy incredibly smart in his own assessment. he ran into equally smart people in the house and senate in this last struggle, but he's come away making his people think that in fact that collection of people did not know what they were doing and what they're talking about and for him it's

working. he's getting more contributions and more attention than he's ever gotten in his life. >> do you think he loves texas even more so far the reason you left it? >> i think his love affair with texas is he love of convenience. nothing else. >> let me go to joan on this. you're also a californian from the northern part of the state. it is unusual because barry goldwater got in big trouble and he was not a bad person. he was just a total libertarian. he got into trouble for getting in the face of scariness to his party by saying i want the generals in the field to decide when to use nuclear weapons or not. people say my god he's giving them the decision, the black bag, they decide when to go to nuclear war. that's what killed him, i think. right now we have a guy just as explosive in terms of bringing

down the government, bringing down our national debt. let's go default. anything goes in my lexicon of weapons. >> well, and i think if he ever got the republican nomination, chris, he would lead to the same outcome that the republicans suffered in 1964. it would be a profound drubbing. but the danger here, it's interesting. a lot of us blue state people from california or new york, sometimes we turn up our noses at texas. sometimes we say they're a bunch of crack pots. let them secede. they have their mccarthy-ites and crazies. but it is part of the united states. >> it is? >> yes, it is. the america that is struggling to be born is also being born in texas. >> i see. demographicicly. but not politically. >> and in the cities, politically. and there's a rising power of latinos. if we had the latino population of texas voting in the numbers they do vote in california and new york, texas would be more purple. texas is a purple state, we just can't quite see it yet. and you're going to have the

candidacy of wendy davis creating this great alliance between latinos, women, young people. it may not be enough to do it, but ted cruz is taking texas as well as the country on a course of demographic suicide. it feels good to the people terrified of what the country is becoming. but not good for them in the long run. >> i remember what general custer said before the battle of little big horn. he said some day we're going to outnumber you, but not today. >> not today. >> and right now here's what's going on in texas right now. republicans running for office in texas are vying to be the most cruz-like and are making appeals to get the furthest to the right in republican primaries. all four lieutenant governor candidates support repeal of the state's landmark 2001 law offering in-state college tuition to illegal immigrants. lieutenant governor david dewhurst said that obama should be impeached not only for trampling as he says on our liberties, but what he did in benghazi.

three candidates for attorney general oppose a non-discrimination ordinance in san antonio that includes protections for sexual orientation and gender identity. and dewhurst and his challenger support repealing the 17th amendment called for popular election of senators. and they want to have new york, california, saying quote, think about how different our country would be if new york and california weren't the tail wagging the dog. and those other states. it's not america. going back to the use of the term america. it seems in the lexicon of these people to mean white conservatives. i mean, that may be a too broad a definition. how about white right wingers. but they call that america. it's almost like one of those groups in south africa that says we're going to put the, you know, the big logger around us and form a little town somewhere. these guys are unbelievable.

go ahead, mayor. i'm sure you have an attitude about these guys. >> they really are. but let me tell you, chris. one of the odd things about mr. cruz is nobody has said a word about the fact he was born in canada. can you imagine the conversation that will ultimately take place if the republican world when they find out. >> do you think they will? >> in the republican world, they will have a conversation on that issue. >> and the other part is latino. his name is rafael cruz. i think they make exceptions for their point of view politically. i think they're willing to accept anybody's papers. i think he is a natural born american. >> i wish we were going to see some integrity -- you know, i -- we as democrats are open to the broadest spectrum of people participating. i'm not going to become a birther about ted cruz, but if you had a bit of political consistency on the other side, there would be paranoia about

this guy born in canada. there's not going to be that because they don't have that kind of intellectual or political consistency or integrity. >> i'm all for his background. >> it's a great american story. >> cuban-irish. i think it'd be fun, a group of people like that getting together. mr. mayor, you think they're going to jump on this guy out of the reason when they suspect -- want to suspect the president was born in kenya for some bizarre notion of history and conspiracy that once they find out that he is in the worst case scenario, they'll jump him. do you think they're that consistent? >> i think the republican party is capable, literally, of having membership on every side of any issue on any given day. and believe me, i think when the fight really starts for that nomination, there's going to be somebody among the republicans

who are going to call him to task. and they're going to ask about all the things that are inconsistent with really good judgment. they're going to ask why is it you wouldn't study when you were in law school with people who didn't graduate undergrad from harvard or yale or one of those places. how is it that you come off as being so superior to everybody else? that dialogue is going to take place. and just as it did in the congress, cruz is not going to be able to handle it. >> what do you think that new york city immigration officer, i think his name is donald trump, checks everybody's papers. do you think he'll have a consistent view when he emerges with an opinion on ted cruz? >> absolutely sure. i'm sure he's got his researchers, his guys are up in canada right now looking for the real birth certificate. of course not. of course not. because this a cover for race and it always has been. they're not going to give ted cruz a hard time about it, i

don't think. the mayor may be right. he knows more than i do. >> there are people on the hard right that think the country should be more like us as they see it. and hawaii is suspect a bit. last thought from you, mayor brown. >> i think that -- don't underestimate the potential of the purple nature of texas to reveal itself in the next election. in spite of what ted cruz is doing -- >> please register out there and please vote. all americans should vote. register and vote and you'll have power. without it, you won't. thank you mayor brown and joan walsh. up next, you know you're in a tough spot when you're on the receiving end of late night jokes. that's what's been happening to hhs secretary kathleen sebelius on the rollout of the affordable care act. anyway, this is "hardball," the place for politics.

life could be hectic. as a working mom of two young boys angie's list saves me a lot of time. after reading all the reviews i know i'm making the right choice. online or on the phone, we help you hire right the first time. with honest reviews on over 720 local services. keeping up with these two is more than a full time job, and i don't have time for unreliable companies. angie's list definitely saves me time and money. for over 18 years we've helped people take care of the things that matter most. join today.

back to "hardball."

time for the sideshow. kathleen sebelius has been taking heat from for the rollout of healthcare.gov. >> something makes me think she's not the most technologically savvy person. >> did you find it challenging? >> the product is there. the prices are good. it will not sell out and the prices won't change. >> the president did say that he was angry about this. and do you know when he first -- >> hello? >> how old is that cell phone? >> next up, mitt romney took a lot of heat during the 2012 campaign for owning a total of six houses across the country including one with an elevator for his car. but now he's building another. and some journalist dug up the blueprints of house number seven. they found something that caught their eye. it was a secret room. it sounds like something out of

the board game clue, but it's for real. just look at the blueprints. a wall of shelves labeled hidden door. and behind that wall office supplies. innocent enough. we know he likes to stock up at staples. maybe that's where his keeps his binders full of women. up next, why republicans have fear if the president's health care law succeeds, they lose. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics.

♪ welcome back to "hardball." later i'll talk about the president personifies the role of washington in american government. fdr. first, as president obama has pointed out republicans have made it their holy grail to destroy the president's health care program. there's quite literally nothing republicans won't do if it means a chance to harm the health care law. even if they harm themselves in the process. today republicans began a witch hunt in response to the rollout of healthcare.gov. it began with the testimony from the government contractors who helped build the website itself.

when it will end is anybody's guess. republicans in today's hearings used it as another opportunity to try to frighten and scare people about the law. but they took heavy fire from the law's defenders. here it is. >> how in the world can this be hippa compliant? this explicitly says in order to continue you have to accept this condition that you have no privacy or no reasonable expectation of privacy. >> once again here we have my republican colleagues trying to scare everybody. >> would the gentleman yield? >> no i will not yield to this monkey court or whatever it is. do whatever you want, i'm not yielding. i am trying to tell you the problem here -- >> protecting american citizens is a legitimate concern of this committee. >> the pre-existing conditions, there's no health information in the process.

why are we going down this path? because you are trying to scare people so they don't apply and so therefore the legislation gets delayed or the affordable care act gets defunded or it's repealed. that's all it is. hoping people won't apply. >> frank pallone is who you saw defending the law. he's from new jersey. jennifer granholm as well. what do you smell in the water? what's going on with this effort? somebody once said people don't do their best work when they're being dumped on. this idea that somehow if we dump on it enough, if we negative cheer like we used to do in high school, negative cheerlead over and over and over again, get the young people spooked, make them not apply for it, make everybody feel terrible then we can win the fight and prevent it from taking hold with the american people. >> well, the problem is that the affordable care act is dependent on people signing up. in other words, the more people you have, the larger your

insurance pool, the more effective it is, the cheaper it becomes. and so when you're looking at congressman barton where he's trying to scare people to say don't sign up, he's hoping people don't sign up. they're taking advantage. they're glorifying these computer glitches. they're trying to scare people. their privacy is going to be impacted. they're trying to do whatever they can including shutting down the government to make sure that this doesn't work. and this wasn't a legitimate hearing today. that's why i called it a monkey court. they weren't trying to fix it. they weren't trying to work with the contractors to figure out how to improve it, they just wanted to make people say this doesn't work. it'll never work. so let's delay it or let's get rid of it. that's their goal. i said they don't have clean hands. they come in here with bad intent. not really trying to fix the situation. >> governor, this -- you're an attorney and in private sector business, you can put up the sign saying don't go to the

restaurant. you can't poison a competing roerpgs. it start with the death panels. just say something, an older person might say it and say they have death panels. they're coming to get me. >> the news is, though, chris, as these stories come out about people successfully signing up whether they're using the telephone or the website, it will overcome all the negativity. even these governor that have rejected obama care and the expansion of medicaid, eventually those states will all be part of this in the same way that medicare covers everybody and the same way the rollout for medicare part "d" was glitchy but everybody signed up. this, too, will be overcome by the positive stories. yes, we've got a problem with the website. they've got five months now to try to fix it before people get penalized. it's going to get fixed. people will come on and even eventually those red states maybe not with these governors but with the next ones, they will come on too.

>> to your point, republicans on the state level have done everything they can to derail the affordable care act. case in point. take a look at the states that rejected or are likely to reject the medicaid expansion. don't forget the federal government would have paid for nearly all the expansion. yet numerous republican-controlled states chose to reject it simply because it was part of the law. look at that. it looks like a typical collection result. more importantly it's the same story for the states that refuse to build their own health care exchange which has placed more stress on the federal site. it's more of the republican-controlled states that want this to fail. on the other hand states that embraced the law are already seeing the benefits. oregon for example has cut its uninsured rate by 10% in a matter of days. congressman, this is a -- i don't want to start ft. sumter

and the guns firing, but there's an aspect of civil war, a return of the confederacy in this. these conservative people seem to think that they're representing their states by basically sabotaging this program which is, in fact, part of the law. >> exactly. it's all ideologically driven by the tea party republicans who don't believe that the federal government should help you get health insurance. either they shouldn't provide it you should medicaid or shouldn't subsidize it under the affordable care act. it's just their ideology. speaking of states that don't take medicaid, you're talking about people that can't get insurance, no way of getting insurance and to keep them out of this so they don't get coverage is a tragedy. it is. why does the ideology have to stand in the way. >> in addition to that, chris, i would just say that those governors that are rejecting federal funds, federal dollars come from their citizens too. you don't think this is a great campaign issue for a democratic

candidate for governor in one of those red states next time to say you folks in texas, you folks in alabama, you're paying for the health care in michigan. because you're refusing to accept any federal dollars to insure your people. but, i mean, you want your tax dollars going to fund people's health care somewhere else or keep our own? these governors in the last decade, they all would have said hell yes i'm going to take federal dollars because my citizens have been paying their taxes and we should get that money back home. by the way, i'll also set up the exchange because i don't want the federal government coming in here and doing it. but these new breed of governors, it is a totally different ball game. and the federal government is expanding in their states as a result of them having their hands off. >> nobody said the tea party was rational. gop's biggest fear i think may be that history repeats itself.

in the 1930s, republicans forcefully opposed social security. take a look at this clip in 1936. >> this is the largest tax bill in history. and to call it social security is a fraud on the working man. >> he didn't go anywhere. he lost 46 of 48 states. same story of the 1960s when republicans had an upstart by ronald reagan opposed medicare. >> if you don't do this and i don't do it, one of these days you and i are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it once was like in america when men were free. >> republicans have had to live down their opposition because medicare has become one of the most popular government systems ever. this is ted cruz. let's listen. >> the obama administration plan is simple. to get many americans as possible addicted to the subsidies, addicted to the sugar

because they know the simple fact that in modern times no major entitlement has ever gone into effect and then been undone. >> exactly. >> so they just want as many people receiving subsidies because once that happens, i believe it is likely that obama care will become a permanent feature of our economy. >> there you have it. the biggest fear of the republicans is it will be popular eventually. they don't want to lose again. i see you shaking your head, congressman. isn't that their fear on the republican side? >> i have no doubt. thinking of medicare part "d," when that was passed, a lot of democrats like us didn't like it because there were the doughnut hole an lack of coverage. when it finally went into effect, there were a lot of glitches very similar with the computers and the first few months. but we sat down even in our same committee that you showed today and we worked with the

republicans to fix it because we wanted to make sure that seniors have their prescription drug benefit. >> good for you. you believe in positive government, sir. >> exactly. >> good for you. >> it shouldn't be ideologically driven. they need to look at it as it's helping their own constituents. but they refuse to do that. >> thank you. when we come back, achieving greatness in a uniquely american way. "hardball" back after this.

coming up, the kind of leader democrats want today. and this is "hardball," the place for politics.

we're back. the debate over the role of the federal government is older than washington itself. no president personifies, by the way, the power of government more than franklin delano roosevelt. he's best known for pulling us through the great depression and leading america to victory in world war ii.

but in between those dual challenges was a pivotal event that forged his legacy, his decision to run for and win a third term. in his new book, "roosevelt's second act," the author discovers the president's motives for seek a third term. many people say, greatest president of the 20th century. got us through the great depression, won world war ii, to the point where people like, i was thinking, who was it, one of the joseph allenes said, people never doubted we would win the second world war because roosevelt was our president. what power, what influence. >> no question about that. >> tell us why he decided to run for a third term. >> he had planned to retire. and over a period of ten months, he gradually changed his mind. and in the end, it was the war that changed his mind. he couldn't find another democrat who would support both his domestic and foreign policies and who he thought could change the election. he pleaded with cordell hall, secretary of state, almost until the end.

wouldn't run. so he -- >> he was afraid that a more conservative guy who would run, who wouldn't want to fight the war and wouldn't want a new deal to continue. >> that's right. he didn't want anybody who was about a new dealer and didn't want anybody who wouldn't support his policy of aid to britain when britain was hanging by a thread. >> everybody forgets what it was like in this country. france was fallen, england was threatened, the low countries were gone, the nazis were over -- they had overrun continental europe. in the middle of all of that, we had to pick a president, and wendell wilke got picked by the presidents. he was an ex-democrat, an independent, and he came out of nowhere. didn't roosevelt think he'd be a good president? >> he came out of nowhere, absolutely. and the fact that wilke was picked reaffirmed fdr's decision to run. because he knew no other democrat could beat wilke, and nobody else -- and fdr didn't think -- maybe he wouldn't beat

wilke, but the real wilke story was after the election, where he came to roosevelt and said, i want to support glen lease, and he did. glen lease, which made up america, the great arsenal of democracy, would not have passed without wilke's support and fdr always gave him credit for that. >> i consider that one of the great moments, in the book i've written about, bipartisan, how harry truman picked hoover to run the hoover commission. and people don't do that anymore. and the fact is that fdr said, i'm going to pick the guy i just beat. and i was afraid of him a bit. i'm going to make him my emissary to europe. three, two -- >> he had a famous dinner with wilke the night before his third inauguration. he stayed up until midnight talking, having a few glasses of wine, and gave him a hand-written note as his emissary. wilke went over there, saw what was pledge was going to london, came back, and made an impassioned plea for lease, and it passed, and fdr gave him full credit for it. >> if he survived, he didn't have good health. dead pretty much four years. if he would have survived, the

republican party might be a different party if he had won in '48. >> it might very well have. but by supporting len lease, he probably ruined his chances to get that nomination in '44, as you point out. he was ill, so that precluded it. >> you know, i've always had three heroes, jack kennedy, franklin -- three heroes. hemingway, of course, we all know hemingway as a hero, winton churchill, and more and more i find i like roosevelt. the fact that he was a bit cold and distant and tricky. what do you feel towards him, our greatest president of the 20th century. what do you feel about this guy? >> there's a duality to it. he was a very principled and moraled statesman who set very high goals, but in pursuit of those goals, he could be a little tricky. he could be very manipulative, and even duplicitous. but that's who he was. >> did he ever get -- did he ever figure out joe stalin? did he ever figure out what a menace he was, what a killer he was, right up there in the scope

of hitler? >> i don't have answer to that. >> i think it's one of the great truth, did he ever get the truth about joe stalin. >> a very good question. >> the book is called "roosevelt's second act." when we return, let me finish with my political coming of age. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. the recent increase in cafeteria prices is not cool. when you vote for flo, we'll have discounts. ice-cream discounts. multi-cookie discounts. pizza loyalty discounts! [ kids chanting "flo!" ] i also have some great ideas on car insurance. [ silence ] finding you discounts since back in the day. call or click today. i like her.

let me finish tonight. tip and the gipper, the story of my political growing up, just hit "the new york times" best seller's list for the third straight week. i even had someone tell me the other day that it's the best book that i've ever read. that thrills me, because this new book is really about how i got from being a peace corps volunteer, riding a motor bike out there in rural africa, to being right here where i'm sitting. it's about my wild inside life in politics, what i saw, what i learned, and where i picked up the spirit that i had that we can make it. that this america of ours can be all that we can be. but i sometimes feel like this guy that's forced to be on the inside of history, from the first all races election in south africa to the vote for the peace agreement over in northern ireland, which steal means so much to me personally. though i didn't put my name in the title, "tip and the gipper"