secondly, bloody bush v. gore. but for bush v. gore, there would have been no iraq war.ry penny spent in iraq, every drop of blood of americans, our allies and on the iraqis, is on the heads of those incredibly corrupt justices that gave us that decision. host: let's let mr. zirin respond. guest: i don't know quite where to begin. i agree with you that bush v. gore was a partisan decision. it was a 5-4 decision. but later on "the new york times" recounted the vote throughout the state of florida and bush would have won the state of florida if the court had allowed the counting to continue. i don't think it would have hanged the outcome as scalia argued later if they had decided the other way. i don't think that the justices should pick the president. that's not what was intended. that's what madison wrote. i think that was an unfortunate decision for the court. as to the ethics of justice thomas, whom i have a great deal of respect for, the supreme court, unfortunately, is not bound by the cannons of judicial ethics. that's why ginsberg really didn't do anything wrong wh

bush president, even though gore won more votes than bush did. you remember the ruling, bush v. gore, that ruling was a 5-4 ruling. we think of that falling along partisan lines, the five republican-appointed justices voting for bush and the four democratic justices voting for gore, that's how we got 5-4, right? that's how we think of it, but that's not true. david souter who voted with the gore side, he was not appointed by a democrat. he was appointed by george h. bush in 1990. it's something that they've held against poppy bush, that he didn't end up being conservative. but david souter was appointed by a republican, and he didn't end up being a conservative justice. he also didn't end up particularly liking his time on the court. as soon as president obama got sworn in and settled in in 2009, david souter announced he was retiring to go back to his beloved new hampshire in order to resume his pre-supreme court practice of declining all media requests and wanting to be left alone. he speaks very rarely in public and when he does he chooses his words carefully. because we've he

it has been 16 years as we got the big wake-up call of bush v gore, where the entire election was decided by 537 votes. the pew research center says there are 4 million dead or ineligible voters on our registration rolls, one out of eight voter registrations in this country contain valid -- invalid information. i don't care if you're a democrat, republican, vegetarian, libertarian, that should can turn us area -- that should concern us. the problem with election machines mean there is the potential for fraud, and it increase with the potential that is undetected. -- do youe potential think it has spread? do you think there is a greater potential than when we had the wake-up call of push the gore? stepshink there have been taken to clean up absentee laws. are preventative measures that can and do work. i think people are hanging or attention. -- are paying more attention. , people inelection any party sometimes get tempted. inc. can happen at the last minute. -- things can happen in the last minute. the senateof that race, 1200 felons voted illegally in that election. election, where thing

if you want to go back to bush v. gorewhat occurred with 537 votes, that took 36 days to resolve. there were demonstrations but it was largely a peaceful transition of power, which is what we should always hope for in this country. and this the end, al gore wasn't happy about the result. it went to the supreme court. and he did give a gracious speech and he respected the system and the courts. and that is the way it ought to be. so there is -- if there is voter fraud and if elections in some battleground states are close, the secretaries of states of those states i think will be able to handle it and tell the american people what to do, if there's an automatic recount or not. in bush v. gore, the question was voter suppression, not voter fraud. it was about long lines of people who got caught you have. that's something we need to improve. >> that's a part of voter fraud. [ overlapping speakers ] >> this is a dangerous topic. so we cannot conflate issues. there is something called voter fraud in this country where you emper

. >> this happened in bush v. gore, only it was the male justices who were confused by -- [inaudible] what is it like, oral argument? when i first argued a case in 1983, there were not very many questions. and now justice thomas famously very seldom asks a question because he feels there's a lot of questions being asked by his colleagues. he has his reasons. but essentially eight justices, or now seven, ask questions all the time. what are you trying to accomplish when you're asking questions? are you trying to find something out about the strength and weekness of the advocate's case, or are you speaking to your colleagues? what's going on? >> both. one is to give the advocate a last clear chance to face the decision makers, put his strongest case. the question may be about a vulnerable point. the advocate has a chance to answer that. but more than occasionally it is we are talking past the advocate to each other trying to influence the way a colleague is thinking about the case. >> now, some people find that strange b

. >> that's what bush v. gorewed us the system cannot deal with such fine differences if you have 10 million votes 500 of them be the margin of victory. almost impossible to get a precise count of that and, the polls right now tell us it's not gonna be close. no single state will determine the electoral college. >> but the bush/gore example does show that you can get a race close enough where a few hundred votes could make a difference. we will talk more about that later. don't go away. latest wikileaks dump shows infighting in the party. ed henry takes us inside the mail next. when a moment turns romantic, why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction and the urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas for pulmonary hypertension, as i

. >> that's what bush v. gore showed us the system cannot deal with such fine differences if you have 10 million votes 500 of them be the margin of victory. almost impossible to get a precise count of that and, the polls right now tell us it's not gonna be close. no single state will determine the electoral college. >> but the bush/gore example does show that you can get a race close enough where a few hundred votes could make a difference. we will talk more about that later. don't go away. latest wikileaks dump shows infighting in >>> wikileaks just released thousands of new emails from hillary clinton's campaign chairman john podesta. fox news chief national correspondent ed henry dug through the release. >> the hit keeps coming as wikileaks dumped nearly 2,000 more hacked emails from clinton campaign chairman john podesta this morning. and they're just getting started. now wikileaks is threatening to broaden their targets. tweeting, quote: we have a surprise in store for at tim kaine and at done that brazil. hi

bush the gore. i love the people. the truckers and everybody. i love it all. i give you just two stories. bush v gore whether you know it or not was a bit controversial. right? feel that he around here. i had to take my bus down to florida the week after bush versus gore. i took security with me that time. i stopped in brunswick, georgia to refuel. you have to view it your feeling gloves on and look around like you know what you are doing. all these 18 wheelers are around and this trucker comes up to me and says, --? i said to him yeah. a second happens all the time. he went on about his business. we were recently on the road, these things happen to you. it's great. even the breakdowns are great. we were in pennsylvania and you are going up these mountains, endless mountains. the bus speed was ending, so the best -- bus was dying. we told him at the truckstop in pennsylvania and we look around and there are these two guys in this mobile van. they knew how to fix do some motors. we were back on the road. these guys were great. they were great to talk to. it was wonderful. everything about it i lo

for example, if the race is extremely close, say the bush v gore race in florida 2000, you may have to do a full recount. in most cases where is there a 5% margin, 2%, 3% margin, the way you do these calculations ensure you count as few ballots as you need to to confirm the actual result. if you can't confirm the result, you end up enlarging your sample or doing a full recount which corrects your misstated outcome. this is what you need to do to make sure -- having the paper is one thing, counting it correctly is another thing. that's something we are still lagging behind. for example, there's almost 24 states have no mandatory pan ul audit of their paper at all. nine states -- no, no, no. 13 states have some post election auditing. it tends to be 1%, 5%, things that aren't tuned to the margin of the race. so they are not very well designed. new mexico, california and colorado have provisions in the law to allow people to do these actual risk limiting audit. bring the statisticians in, do a sample and decide if you need to count them all. >> david becker said if jo stein starts winning

so for example if the race is extremely close, say the bush v. gore race in florida, you may have to do a recount. if is there a 5% margin, 2% margin, you count as few ballots as you need to to confirm the actual result. if you can't confirm the result, you enlarge your sample or do a full recount which corrects your misstated outcome. having the paper is one thing but counting it correctly is another thing. that's one thing we are lagging behind. for example, there's almost half states, 24 states have no mandatory manual audit of their paper. 13 states have some post election auditing, but it tends to be 1%, 5%, things that aren't tuned to the margin of the race. they're not very well designed. there are a whole bunch in mexico and california have provisions in the law to bring them in and do a sample and compare them and decide if you need to count them all. >> david becker said this morning, if jill stein starts winning south carolina by a wide margin, that might be a sign that something's off. the ironic thing he didn't say is if jill stein wins s

and then secondly bloodied bush v gore. there would have been no iraq war. every penny spent in iraq, every drop of blood of americans and iraqis and our allies are on the head of those justices.et >> host: let's let him respond to that. >> guest: i don't know where to begin exactly, i agree that bus5 v gore was a partisan decision, but later on the new york timesr recounted the vote throughout the state of florida and bushin would have won the state of florida if they had allowed it to continue. i don't think it would have changed the outcome as scalia argued later if they had decided the other way. i don't think the justice should pick the president. that's not what was intended, i think that was an unfortunate decision of the court. as to the ethics of justice thomas whom i have a great deal of respect for, the supreme court unfortunately is not bound by the canons of judicial ethics all the other federal judges is bound to that but the supreme court is not.ade i think the activities of thomas's wife are unfortunate because they give ground to the very cr

or george bush had agreed three weeks before the election to concede the results and waived their right to a legal challenge or a recount, then there would be no supreme court case and no gore vthere have been numerous other cases. in effect, i'm being asked to waive centuries of legal precedent designed to protect the voters. [applause] but listen to this. according to pew -- highly respected -- there are 24 million voter registrations in the united states that are either invalid or significantly inaccurate. okay. i think the people in this room understand it more than our leaders. although maybe our leaders understand more than we think they understand. listen to this. 1.8 million people are dead, but they're registered to vote. some of whom vote even though they're dead. which is really a hard thing to do. [laughter] but it's easyfraud is involved, right? so you've got 1.8 million people who are dead who are registered to vote, and some of them vote. one was a republican, and after death became a democrat. [laughter] it's true. 2.8 million people are are registered many more than one state -- in more than one state. so you've got 2.8 million people that can vote in ohio an

gore contested it. as all of us who covered the 2000 recount -- >> he called bush. >> it's bush v. gore. james baker and the bush team was the first team to file that action. it's an entirely different situation. in the runup to the 2000 campaign there was no suggestion from al gore or george w. bush the election would be rigged. that's why so many republicans were so alarmed by this last night, brooke, i can't remember something that has set off john mccain as much, at least recently, as this. he said he conceded in 2008 because it was his duty as an american and we all remember that speech as gloria and i were talking about earlier. it was a gracious concession speech in every way. so this is one way donald trump got in his own way here in what was a pretty good debate for him. he was making his point, perhaps not enough to turn the tide but an entirely situation than 2,000. >> all right let me move off that and ab on women. how do you think donald trump did with women watching last night? >> well, i don't think -- first of all, he talked about the allegations against him as being debun

. >> bush v. gore, the endless election. [ cheers ] >> we want gore! we want gore! we want gore!> it's after 3:00 in the morning on november 8th, 2000. the war memorial in nashville, tennessee. vice president al gore is inside getting ready to publicly concede the presidential election to george w. bush. >> it was total chaos as we were trying to get into the war memorial, pouring rain. the vice president and lieberman's family and that whole group had gone in. the secret service, the police, everybody was on edge. >> they're on the phone with bill daly, and he said, "what's up, mike? " i said, "billy, we haven't lost, this is going to be an automatic recanvas. this is too close to call." >> i was seeing my life flashing before me, breaking out in a sweat. what do we do here? >> that's when he contacted david morehouse. >> everything was ringing and vibrating. told him, grab the vice president, get him into a holding room with joe lieberman. everybody freeze. >> michael feldman was trying to get hold of me. he said, you know, you need to stop the vice president from conceding. >>

. >> you spent a lot of time looking at the 2000 election, gore v. bush, the recount, the supreme court eventually got involved. i was down in tallahassee covering all of that as well. trump spoke about it just a few minutes ago. let me play the clip and we'll discuss. >> i was asked a question about whether i would agree in advance to concede the results on election night if for some reason we should lose, which we're not going to lose. and that was sort of an unprecedented question. if al gore or george bush had agreed three weeks before the election to concede results, and waive their right to a legal challenge or a recount, then there would be no supreme court case and no gore versus bush or bush versus gore. and there have been numerous other cases. in effect, i'm being asked to waive centuries of legal precedent designed to protect the voters. >> all right, so gloria, you hear what he's saying. your reaction. >> well, this is like comparing an apple to an elephant. they're two completely different things. first of all, al gore did not charge the ele

it was passed in the wake of the 2000 debackle, the bush v. gore p p out of florida. it was intended to provide disabled voters, voters that had hearing or sight impediments to give them the ability to vote without assistance in the polling place so they could have a private vote. federal government allocated about $4 billion to states so they could purchase accessible voting machines. instead of buying one or two that they considered accessible, they decided to go on a shopping spree and replace all of their voting systems with touchscreen voting machines in many precincts. they are also called direct recording electronic machines, dre. they didn't have a paper trail until academics and voting activists made an issue of it. there was no ability to check the vote and verify it record the vote that the voters intended to choose. we now have some that produce a paper trail and states that have opted for optical scan machine. you are choosing your choices and it gets scanned into an electronic machine. that is problematic in the same way dres are when you don't have an a

let's say we get another bush v. gore like in 2000. how on earth would that work this year? because happy first monday in october. this year, the united states supreme court has an empty seat. there will be no 5-4 rulings to settle the presidential election this year like we had in the year 2000. as traumatic as it was to have a 5-4 decision choose the next president of the united states, how about a 4-4 decision where the supreme court deadlocks, divide on roughly partisan lines. what happens there is that the supreme court ruling would not be binding. if that happened this year, the next president would end up getting picked, what, by one state supreme court somewhere? maybe it would be one where they have partisan elections for judges. i don't know. maybe it would be some lower federal court in some corner of the country that nobody has ever intended or expected to have the power to choose the next president. the names that we're going to scroll here, these are the names of the chief judges in all of the federal appeals courts circuits around the country. do you see any f

bush versus gore and gore versus bush. i'm being asked to waive centuries of legal precedent designed to protect the voters. >> allen, you would know a lot about that because you're involved in bush v. gore. >> that's right. >> so is trump on solid ground here? >> of course not. clearly what happened there is that it was a recount. bush versus gore, not gore versus bush. there were lawsuits filed by both of them. that's a legitimate challenge, everybody understands that. trump is talking to two audiences. to his audience, to his group, he's saying i will not accept the election because don lemon, it's rigged. he says to the media, i wasn't talking about that only if there's legal challenge. he's talking to two different constituencies. >> and watching this last night and this morning, and the surrogates and the campaign people and they're like doing cartwheels and back flips, i'm like what are they talking about. that's a whole lot of spinning going on, douglas brinkley. a lot of people are comparing this to the bush episode. >> absolutely not. it's crazy for donald trump to be talking like that. i mean, al gore did something -- you know, actually al gore conceded to george w. bush

that's why bush v. gore is a disgrace, and i have some essays on the disgrace that is bush v. goer gore. i'm coming to a close now. the basic thought here is we, the people, actually are going to, in effect, have a referendum on that open court seat. and if you want garland, you have to vote for hillary clinton and republican -- excuse me, and democratic senators. and if you don't want garland, you have to vote for donald trump and republican senators. i had one suggestion that i put forth that has not been adopted. i said, listen, if this election is a referendum on the court, why not have the hearings now? let garland make his case. let his supporters make their case. let his detractors explain why they actually don't think he should be on the court. let's use this as an opportunity, because we do have an election, to educate the american citizenry about the court and its future. and if we do that and if hillary clinton wins, we can confirm him in no, and now -- in november, and the supreme court won't limp along for another term short staffed. that was the solution i put for

. >> in any other election where you didn't have bush v. gore and hillary clinton would be the first most important story by a long shot. >> if and when his wife will actually be appointed to that job. >> it felt like the third most important story. >>> i've been told there's an ongoing federal investigation, and they've asked for our cooperation by not commenting. >> even farther from the media glare in tiny wamego, kansas, a suspect in a massive dea drug bust is on the run. dea summons local law enforcement to assist in the manhunt. >> the chief of police came across the police scanner. all police officers and all reserve officers. i figured that someone had walked away from the nursing home next door. when i first drove up, i realized the dea probably wasn't here to help locate someone who walked away from the nursing home. >> when we went to the hospital that night, they briefed us. and at that time, i believe we were told how big it was. >> one of the dea agents turned around and asked who i was with, and i introduced myself. i said, hi, i'

. >> this is going to be bush v. gore of 2000? >> kramer versus kramer. i think you just get whatever ticket you could find at this point. >> i would fall in love all over again. >> we are done talking, richard is not your turn to talk back. >> go to our facebook page, spend a lot of time, doodle around, have fun, john hook fox 10. >> have you ever had buyer's remorse on a -- go to my facebook page, kari lake fox 10. >> if my team made it to the world series, i would be like, baby, why are we fighting? come on. world series. we check in on the charges. the cards doing all they can to in a world where one hungry boss. there better be food up there are you're all fired! can cost an entire office their jobs. who ordered the food? and time, is running, out. tom orders on tuesday's. today isn't tuesday. it's not tuesday!? we're all fired! it will take one intern and his trusted mobile app to save the day. freaky fast. >>> you're watching fox 10 sports with richard saenz. >> this is not just another game for the arizona cardinals. championship game as the cards

people were absolutely outraged more so than when the supreme court decided for george bush in bush v. gore so nation in the public survived and continued so it gives people who end they think if the patterns are the same it will be okay regardless who is elected. the idea that they've been able to work their way out in the past i think what it says about the voters is that basically the passions are always there and always ruling what's happening with an active reason. so that is what leads to the unpredictability because we always have to analyze it in a way that seems logical but then the voters behave in ways that have more to do with their internal humor than what is going on in the brain. >> guest: it is a combination. you've mentioned how they could have an impact on the power structure affecting their lives. they have a sense of betrayal in the way they've been treated. >> guest: that is a healthy thing. there were two worries at the beginning of the american experience. it's not always a case that thet the emotions of the voters are wrong. that's what they see that they've lost the

. >> in any other election where you didn't have bush v. gore and hillary clinton would be the first most important story by a long shot. >> if and when his wife will actually be appointed to that job. >> it felt like the third most important story. >>> i've been told there's an ongoing federal investigation, and they've asked for our cooperation by not commenting. >> even farther from the media glare in tiny wamego, kansas, a suspect in a massive dea drug bust is on the run. dea summons local law enforcement to assist in the manhunt. >> the chief of police came across the police scanner. all police officers and all reserve officers. i figured that someone had walked away from the nursing home next door. when i first drove up, i realized the dea probably wasn't here to help locate someone who walked away from the nursing home. >> when we went to the hospital that night, they briefed us. and at that time, i believe we were told how big it was. >> one of the dea agents turned around and asked who i was with, and i introduced myself. i said, hi, i'

justice ginsburg: if you have in case,he one of a kind bush v gore, i don't think it decided the electionecided it sooner, but the outcome would have been the same. the election would have been thrown to the house of representatives, which then had a republican majority. it would have been a victory for bush anyway. it would have come weeks and weeks later than the supreme court decision. charlie rose: after the decision, which was 9-0 in the watergate case, everybody understood the court had spoken, and that was it. justice ginsburg: yes. and the president turned over the tapes and resigned from office the next day. it is in the first example. think of harry truman, who seized the steel mills in the korean war. when a court said "you don't have that authority, mr. president," he immediately told the secretary of commerce to give the mills back to the owners. in many places in the world, the fact that a court speaks does not mean that the executive or legislature will follow or accept the decision. charlie rose: one thing that you disagree with antonin scalia was that you should take a lo

could there be another bush v gore? could there be something akin to the hanging chads? know. he's not willing to concede anything yet because that is the way he is. mark has probably the same character traits. >> no. >> somebody said, you accept something you don't know all of the information -- you don't do it. >> the american election. >> vladimir putin says the american election is rigged. you cannot trust the outcome of the presidential election. what do we say? >> do you know what i thought was powerful tonight? donald trump needs to get on e-mail saying you changed that. >> we're talking about the substance and the debate. every time -- >> talking about -- >> hold on. every time something wikileaks exposed was brought up, but oops there was a wikileaks sting she made to a bank saying her dream is open borders paradise. russia hacked e-mails. it's not a substantive response. >> you do see that moment is going to trump perhaps the good moments donald trump had. >> we don't know it. if russia did hack those e-mails they exposed things the american voter has the right

. >> this is going to be bush v. gore of 2000? >> kramer versus kramer. i think you just get whatever ticket you could find at this point. >> i would fall in love all over again. >> we are done talking, but richard is not your turn to talk back. >> go to our facebook page, around, have fun, john hook fox 10. >> have you ever had buyer's remorse on a -- go to my facebook page, kari lake fox 10. >> if my team made it to the world series, i would be like, baby, why are we fighting? come on. let's get back together, and oh, by the way, let's get to the world series. we check in on the charges. the cards doing all they can to make sure that this guy, john brown, gets to play in carolina. the details coming up right >>> you're watching fox 10 sports with richard saenz. >> this is not just another game for the arizona cardinals. it's a rematch of the nfc championship game as the cards go to charlotte to settle the score with the carolina panthers this sunday. it is going to be a great game. we have got great news. play. they call him smoky, because, yeah, he'll

what she was referring to is that yes, president bush was elected, the supreme court came down, bush v. gore, we all remember. i think what she's suggesting is that al gore did get 500,000 more votes nationally than bush did, but he wound up because of florida got more electoral college votes. we don't have to go through that, but let's talk about a lot of people heard what trump said last night when chris wallace asked him flatly, are you ready to accept the results of the election? he said i'll let you know, i'll keep you in suspension. almost everyone, historians, a lot of republicans, john mccain, they couldn't believe that. they were really upset. i assume you were, as well. >> no, i wasn't. i come out of the business world, and as you're going through this process, i think donald trump has every right to say, regardless -- in regards to what happens with the media over the next 19 days, what happens on election day, and that as we finish election night, and it's a clear and a fair process, i expect that he will accept the results. if there's questions about the process leading up to it

bush-v-gore. that election was effectively challenged by al gore. it demanded a recount. in fact demanded a much more extensive recount than was provided for in florida statute. if you're talking about someone who attacked the election process, gore absolutely did. the sad fact of the matter is defeated candidates are like jilted lovers. sometimes they don't have the best judgment as to what happened. >> mark braden, thank you for spending time with us. have a good saturday. >> thank you very much. >>> coming up, the latest on that massive hack that brought the internet to a screeching halt yesterday. with just 17 days to go until the election, the candidates begin their closing arguments amid a last-minute push on the trail. liberty mutual stood with me when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. liberty did what? yeah, with liberty mutual all i needed to do to get an estimate was snap a photo of the damage and voila! voila! (sigh) i wish my insurance company had that... wait! hold it... hold it boys... there's supposed to be three of you... where's your

. >> that is actually a great example, right, bush v. gore because people felt they should have contested it longer. one of the weird things about watching the trump phenomena happen. you go along taking certain parts of the framework of american democracy for granted but all of a sudden it's thrown into relief. do you feel that watching this happen? >> this is certainly a different kind of election, but again the system we were just talking about, does have elements of proof in it. now we're in the rhetorical stage before the elections, but if you do want to contest an election after, there are proof points. >> ultimately -- >> you got to be able to prove it. >> right, right. when the numbers come in -- and i also think the other thing i keep thinking about is this sort of social pressure. we remember this sort of famous moment when they walked down to the white house to tell nixon he was sort of done, i would imagine there wouldn't be a broad buy-in in the republican party for some sort of wildly contested claim should trump not have the so

up next, a lawyer who worked on bush v gore tells us what trump's challenges would look like and whathe chances are it would succeed. >>> plus, there's a lot of talk about donald trump being a drag on republican candidates around the country but what about hillary clinton? how do democrats feel about her? we will put that to the test coming up. you both have a perfect driving record. perfect. no tickets. no accidents. that is until one of you clips a food truck ruining your perfect record. yup. now, you would think your insurance company would cut you some slack. right? no, your insurance rates go through the roof. your perfect record doesn't get you anything. anything. perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. and if you do have an accident, our claims centers are available to assist you twenty-four seven. for a free quote call liberty mutual at switch to liberty mutual and you could save up to $509. call today at liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. liberty stands with you™. when you cook with inc

available any legal resource, recount, recourse, court recourse, in case you get a 2000-like election bush v. gore it was this morning, think it was in real time last night, you saw them trying to. that would have been a good way to say it. the parallels to 2000 are entirely different. as things are going now, unless something massively changes here, this is not going to decided on a couple votes here. you know, perhaps too little too late. >> this is progress. he's now in line with his surrogates. so last night they all were out of line with what he actually said. and now everyone's on the same page. >> all before lunchtime. >> i think this kind of thing is going to come down to a candidate's judgment and his aide's judgment on election night. we saw in mitt romney in 2012 when they had planes ready to go to battleground states and twabs the candidate who said this isn't going to happen, like, we're not going to take this extra step. we're going to go out there, i'm going to give my concession speech and move on. at a certain point, you have to trust if that is a scenario that donald trump would

>> we're not going to relitigate bush v. gore. i did not hear complains about the republican primary. you know, trump was far ahead of many of his candidates and seemed fine. did not argue the outcome was rigged. this conspiracy theory suggesting that elections are rigged seems to be one that candidate resort to when they feel they are on the losing side and that the american people are not on their side. familiar tactic . if we care about strengthening american democracy, let's talk about the real issues and problems that lock people out of the ballot box. let's talk about the fact in 2014, only 37% of americans participated in the midterm election cycle. and a lot of that low voter turnout is attributable to voter suppression. but rigged elections -- pure fiction. pure mythology. a cast a dark cloud over our democracy. let's talk about the real issues. nermeen: let's go to one of the issues that was raised last night, this is debate moderator chris wallace. mr. wallace: what i'm asking you, do you want to see the court overturn.