the republican party was furious because he'd been a longtime supporter of the republican party. they were sure he was going to bomb their chances of winning the governor seat. holland did when the seat. what he accomplished was making the klan an issue in the campaign. it -- before, it was not an issue. he brought it to the forefront. all that remained was for the supreme court to give their

guest: most of my republican party friends think things exact opposite. you're viewing this proposal to include independence of the presidential debates as a way of bringing the system in favor of your article i can see other party, then you are doing the wrong thing. that is not my intention n. we find record numbers of people to satisfy the choices between republicans and democrats, and see this as a way of performing the system to instill greater confidence in our political system which is very important for us, but around the world people look to america as an example how to build a democracy. no small task. we find lots of countries looking to us for some example of how to build a political system that results issues only has the confidence of the public. lucy records -- when we see record numbers of people saying they have no confidence that is the way of to look at this proposal. if it is not a good idea for the system, we should not be doing it. but it should not be looked at as an attempt to write a system for or against either party. host: our m

it's the republican party nationally doing the same thing in the republican party. basically there are two theories. there's the theory that ronald reagan's pursuit which is i'm going to convince people they are on my side and then there's the theory i'm going to convince people i'm on their side. they want them to be successful and the one that republicans are pursuing is the one that tends not to be. we know you are on the left that we agree with you most of the time and they are trying to carve off the middle voter. we don't know anymore we are not in the united states. we are in the era of the turnout. they won the vote and lost by 5 million. it's about getting the base out and finding the base and having them turn out in enormous numbers. >> who do you like at this point? >> it's hard for me. i don't know who i like at this point. i know i don't like jeb bush on the republican side. hillary is more formidable. it isn't about hillary it's about what she represents to the media that has decided that they are dedicated to the idea. on the republican side there are

. >> which i think is wonderful for the republican party as well.ally, the republican party wants to know who can win, who's electable 18 months before the election. the only way you prove you're electable is to be elected. these folks who we've been told you've got to support them they can win, john mccain, mitt romney bob dole they end up losing. this time you have people up and down the ideological spectrum in the republican party saying let's not coalesce so early. this early on. and it is early. 18 months out. it's great to have a big field if you're going to have a big conversation on big ideas. and i would prefer the pro-competition republican party to have that free market competition in the race. but it's so fascinating to me that the republican and democratic parties have switched roles this time. it's usually the democratic party that's been masterful at electing these transformational young, fresh figures. jfk, barack obama, even jimmy carter was relatively young when he was elected in 1976. the republicans this time have a chance to do

republicans. this stage you can't say. neither party should feel threatened by it at this point. you look at the people, not just lee hamilton, but another -- a number of us signed a letter saying, open the debates. including many republicans and democrats who support their parties, but understand the health of the system is in question. host: you are saying the process would be completed at year from now, in april. guest: with the certainty that a candidate will be able to earn his way onto that stage. that is what is necessary. there is a lot of social science that has gone into looking at this. it says, a candidate can't raise money and recruit activists if there is not some degree of certainty about the fact that he or she is going to be on the stage with the republicans and democrats. they will not be treated as a serious candidate. paradoxically what the national commission on presidential debate has succeeded in doing is admirable. they have institutionalized debates. it is inconceivable that we would not have a presidential debate in the campaign. that was not always so ce

and so the republican party in year decided, i think, not without reason, that they wouldn't make that same mistake again. so for the 2016 cycle, the republicans announced early on in january that the official republican party would have an official republican party sanctioned short list of debates. they said any candidates who participated in any debate that wasn't on that official short list would be punished in the process. everybody can only do that short list chosen by the party. there would not be too many debates again this time. democratic party followed suit. democratic party followed there would be six democratic primary debates in total, down from 26 in 2008. the democrats set that same rule where no candidate can do a debate that isn't on the short list until they want to get punished on their primary campaign. they stepped in and said we're not going to have this again this year. democrats are going to do six debates, republicans are going to do nine debates. in the democratic debates, so far hillary clinton and bernie sanders are the two declared candidates. it's widely a

they think ahead of time because in the long run the republican party realizes demographically speaking, they are on the verge of not being a national political party and they will lose the ability to elect a president in that white house well into the future and frankly i think if redistricting were restructured they would lose the house band and next time around they may have trouble with the senate. >> you were talking earlier to the 2013 shelby county case supreme court case, which has really weakened the voting rights act and will have some long-term implications for american politics. could you go into an explanation of what the supreme court did and the practical impact you think it will have? >> the shelby county case was interesting. i put it in the book because from not theoretical point of view, this will be interesting to political theory guys more than the public but i saw the show--shelby county case as what i call racial shield. was a decision or pronouncement that on the surface appears non-racial but really is deeply racial and has deep racial implications for the elect

have is a republican party benefit from supporting? >> guest: this is one where they have to support religious liberty. depending on how the question is framed, framed, but i asked marco rubio and jeb bush about this. not about same-sex marriage. the court will decide that. whether or not you object to having intimate sexual relations outside of marriage between a man and woman. i just wrote a book a book and white evangelical seven reading scripture on. all the st. paul. it's a good book. if you believe otherwise, our framers fully intended that you would be unmolested in your religious belief and practice by the state. that is the core issue here. the hobby lobby case reproductive mechanisms hobby lobby one and i.out to people corporations. he goes on the "washington post" to write about the necessity of nondiscrimination against gays. i am all for template speaking out as the ceo of apple, offer citizens united , as my speech as possible. a big political speech person. let's not pick and choose winners. the marketplace of ideas. i'v

and -- so we also have the chairman of the republican party. she's going to be -- he's going to be on the panel as well which is going to be interesting. >> open to the public? >> yes it's open to the public. they can go to my website. radarjackson.com and find out more about it but it's going to be a great event. >> we appreciate your time mr. jackson. good luck with event on monday and that's it for the news now on wusa9, we'll be back on tv at 5:00. keep the umbrella handy, erica says you will probably need it soon. have a great day everybody. [ captions by: caption colorado, llc 800-775-7838 email: comments@captioncolorado.com ] >> jack: [ groans ] >> kelly: don't worry. you'll get your sea legs soon enough. welcome aboard the s.s. misery. [ chuckles ] what's the matter? no greeting? no friendly smoocherino? >> jack: how -- how -- >> kelly: how -- how -- how am i doing? oh, i'm doing pretty darn good no thanks to you. >> jack: i saw for myself you're -- you're gone.

the clinton small donors will be there. >>> keep your eye on the ohio senator, portman, as the republican partyters on marriage, and the court decision is expected next month, but with whatever the court decides, and this is an important but, a mix of republican leaders who think it's time to drop that language they think it's hurting the party and they are pushing portman. cleveland is his home state of ohio, and the senator once supposed same-sex marriage, and he switched because his son told his parents he is gay. any role in a big national platform debate would be a bold move for portman who is also up for re-election to his senate seat in 2016. thank you for sharing your sunday morning. >>> "state of the union" starts right now. >> the u.s. military on alert as isis threatens america. this is "state of the union." the senate home left-hand security chairman on isis hitting the heartland, and the point man for the fight in the middle east, jeb bush's stunning admission, and remembering victory in europe 70 years on. good morning from washington. i am jim scuitto. the u.s. military bases tod

is big money in politics driving the republican party to the hawkish side the big god fathers of candidates who say i'll give you $200 million but talk the line? >> big money drives both parties. >> to the right. >> big money is in control of both parties. >> to the hawkish party. >> big money in general for a variety of positions. let me ask you about that. matt, again, it's a tricky question, but we have well-known billionaires out there you know sheldon adelson and this guy braman behind rubio, who openly have hard right hawkish positions on the middle east very hard right, and -- and they have these candidates that are almost like the devotees. it's getting pretty blunt. money is pushing us to the right, i think. what do you think? >> well, my criticism of my party and many of its candidates is we're not doing a very good job of kind of being respectful in this conversation with the big donors. it's done in such a gaudy and public way, but we also have our -- our big donors on the right who are more libertarian so i'm not sure it's all coming from the one side. >> why are they all hawks

the difference between the primary electorate and the general electorate in the case of the republican party something making -- does that make it something of an obstacle course on issues like immigration or the future of game marriage now that 36 states have it and all the republican field are against it. >> gamegay marriage may be settled by the supreme court. you have to run to the edge whether you are a left -- run to go. as a democrat or the right as a republican and try to get back to the middle as much at possible. those are the days before google. you can't do that any jose one thing in alabama and one thing in massachusetts and the electorate is smarter than we give them credit for. when with comes to the crunch. after they get through the process of discussing who is the cutest girl at the prom, what it will come down to is who can beat hillary clinton approximate & who republicans believe can do that as the result of all of these other things we have talked about that's going to be the most important things not their particular stance on one specific issue. >> do you agree with t

he does not belong in the republican party when he carries that message. >> also in his interview king says he has not closed the door on running for president. >> how seriously are you considering getting into it? >> i've been up in new hampshire about nine times. i'll make a decision in the next month. i'm still looking at it. in any event, we can't allow the republican party to fall into hands of those who are anti-defense and who would weaken our national security. >> make no mistake, he wants to run, a national security based campaign. the emotions that rand paul skirs up in that party is fascinating to see. here's another issue. the senate is coming to town late this weekend to stop what many are calling a national security nightmare. sections of the pie trot about, they expire sunday night and also two other provisions. with the house in recess until monday people admit nothing will be done before this drop dead deadline. all eyes are on kentucky senators majority leader mitch mcconnell leading the fight for reauthorization and rand paul who is preventing mcconnell from reaching

the republican party has been trying to pass laws that prevent people from voting. that is just a fact. i think what the constitution says is that this is a country where everyone can pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. moveon members share the agenda, and are about defending the constitution. thank you for your call. host: an earlier question about how much money you would accept, this is from a viewer saying if i wrote a check for $10,000 to moveon.org, would you not accept it? guest: yes. we do not accept contributions over $5,000. i would say thanks, reduce your check, and come back later. host: democrat line. caller: good morning. i'm a 90-year-old world war ii veterans, and i am trying to get something. my idea is we need clinton in the office, and i could to suggest to her a new idea. i have a plan that has been presented, and it has dvds on it. i have a highway from may using the right-of-way 95, one going as one coming. 700 mile an hour training, it is all finished and ready to go. and that i could get that to her, and she would say we need

is the republican party, are they going to be able to do any damage here? the republican senate is less than useful thus far appeared what they did passing a bill that allows president obama to new sanctions on iran was truly egregious. the bill allows president obama to lose sanctions unless republicans come up a 67 votes that will be an uphill battle. i think there are some who have started to learn about teaching moral language a very basic admin full-term people resonate to. unless they speak in moral terms on a routine basis they will try 57 tax plans and talk about everybody's marginal tax rate, i know my effect of marginal tax rate because they defend a big check to the irs because of it. most people don't know. that is your pitch for president come which by the way if your marginal tax rate or the highest tax bracket is 357 you will cripple the economy. that is not much of a page to be president of the united states. >> host: next book. what is it? >> guest: actually, i am working on a novel. i felt like changing it. as most conservatives are coming

david, i know the democratic party moves left but the republican party seems like it's become a rightwing party, and they are a right wing party on the most visceral basis. you have to be seen seething at president obama, seen that way. >> i think asymmetry is a great word to use there, chris, because i think for a while now democrats, even when they disagree with the president sometimes, you know don't mind compromise, don't mind him trying to reach out to the other side. they didn't like all the compromises say when he tried to pass the stimulus or so much of the compromises he made to get health care but they kind of accepted that as cost of doing business. that's how you work in a two-party state and a divided government while the republican position has increaseingly become over the last seven, eight years not let's work together but let's be more oppositional more obstructionist than ever. >> yeah. >> and that makes it very hard for jeb bush or other people and chris christie to come out and say, listen can i get things done. i work with democrats. republican voters doesn't want

mark: it's good for the republican party. think it is good for candidates like rand paul, mike huckabee, and rick santorum. if they do well in the straw poll, they will get credit for it. it will be very hard for any candidate to say they are not going to participate when they have taken away some of the things people criticize. they have all got to come now. john: campaigns that don't have a lot of money, this has become an expensive proposition. not just the fees to take part but the food and the organization. if you are campaign without much money, you now have a chance to win here. mark: it is bad for all the national reporters who were annoyed with the straw poll and talked it down. this is good for those of us who think the straw poll is awesome. john: while we're on the topic of republicans, let's think about jeb bush. he told an exclusive group in manhattan that his most influential advisor on israel policy is his brother, the former president george w. bush. given the score on his foreign policy, is jeb bush being br

-- "the efforts and arguments of nebraska conservatives are part of an emerging trend in the republican party, evidenced by the involvement of conservative republicans in legislative efforts to repeal the death penalty in other states, such as kansas, kentucky, south dakota montana, and wyoming." norway is divesting from coal -- a federal appeals court has struck down an arkansas law banning abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy. the ruling upholds an earlier decision against the 2013 law, which was among the most extreme abortion bans in the country.

unanimity inside the republican party. president obama's national security parties have beendy sast -- a disaster. the reset with russia. the question for republican candidates, can you criticize barack obama's foreign policy while having to own lock stock and barrel george bush's foreign policy, are you able to make a critique of a new direction that criticizes both the obama foreign policy and aspects of george w. bush's foreign policy? that became much more difficult today for jeb bush to do. it's much easier for rand paul, for rick perry, scott walker who don't own those decisions, who don't have a lot of the members of their staff being part of the architecture of making those decisions in the first place. i think this sa big moment. and all these republican candidates are going to be interviewed by her. i think it demonstrates they better have their a game when they go sit down with her. she makes news every time she interviews a republican heavy weights. >> every republican candidate wants to take us backward. they a

economic populism has nothing to do with how the republican party governs in washington right now or any state in the country right now. if rick santorum can do it, if he can define a republican message for the country that is about helping regular people and not the rich, if he can change the view of the republican party, that is a bull's eye for the american electorate if he can do it. so, you know, the beltway writes him off. just like the beltway writes off bernie sanders, running on economic populism with an exclamation point. the beltway does not get and has never gotten economic populism. people really like it. beltway doesn't get it, so the pundits will rule these guys out on the basis of their old school marxist sounding message. people will like it if they get their message out. if anybody can get the message out, he can. on this economic populous thing which the beltway does not get, both of these guys will do better than they are expected to do. this is the field as it stands right now. 7 people officially in. it will be eight as of tomorrow when george pataki dives right

fox news, which is not just a typical media outlet when it comes to its relationship with the republican partyty go back to fox and renegotiate this? >> i think both fox news and cnn are discussing ways to be able to have a debate a and a debate b. so i think those processes are being debated and discussed right now. now, what i will say is that the party fortunately has an embarrassment in riches in terms of the number of serious minded really qualified candidates that we're able to field right now. so we do have former governors, we have sitting senators, folks that have a serious voice in policy issues. unfortunately, the democrats -- and i have a lot of friends who are democrats, it's unfortunate that they are so limited in the number of candidates that they're putting forth. they don't have a don't or strong bench. there's not a lot of enthusiasm behind hillary clinton. she's probably going to be the nominee, but it would be great to have more of a choice. >> i appreciate your admission at this point, but the democrats don't have any worries about organizing their debates. it's going to b

it was definitely disappointing, we're seeing again the republican party being lead by extremists like king who has compared dreamers to drug meals. however, for us we're going to continue to fight, because at least my dream is to serve this country and be uniform, because i do believe that service is something that is very important and i warrant-- want to give back to the country i call home. >> how do you fight back? >> we don't even need this legislation, because this wasn't even legislation directed at the department of defense, this was just a resolution saying that the department of defense do this, because you already have the power. so here the president has authority and the power to do that right now. next week we have -- we can have dreamers go into enlistment right away. so for us it's pressuring the administration to remind him he has the power, and to allow us to serve the country we call home. >> what is the political impact of this for the republican party if you are going to fight this? >> well, the reality is that we saw another vote by the republican-lead congress r

so many republicans in his own party are angry at him over. this he didn't mention republicans, of course trying to make it a fight against president obama, but of course so many republicans support this as well so we are not sure exactly what this means for the long-term future of his presidential campaign. there are libertarian strains throughout this republican party, but boy, poppy, these lines are very very blurred here essentially a political speech he was giving there on the senate there are. >> i think it's also really interesting to look jeff at the generational divide. he brought it up. he said 80% of people under 40 say that this has gone too far. he was talking about younger people younger voters. you have seen it among some other senators voting not in line you know some junior senators republican senators voting not in line with the senior republican senators from their own state. this seems to be increasingly generational. >> it is really really interesting, pop pill. and this is inside the republican party, so many debates we se

republican party is -- is speaking about deporting grand mothers, like when they are talking about deporting a grandmother like in my family you know, my family care about issues but when we're going to make sure we're adopt -- we're going to support can do it it -- candidates that are not deporting grandmothers. >> caesar vargas thanks very much. >>> striking farm workers in mexico are heading back to the fields with a raise. workers in bahah california had been on strike since march. the average farmer had been making about $8 a day. today the mexican ministry announced that the rate is going up to $13, and the workers will be eligible for health care. >>> in iraq isil moved a step closer to reestablishing its presence in anbar province. officials say the group seized the main government come pound in the provincial capitol of

sue evanwell a county chairman for the texas republican party is arguing that using census data to draw voting districts dilutes power. so she's asking the court to reform the current system to base apportionment not on the total population but only on the population of the state that is eligible to vote which would mean in effect if you're a legal immigrant, a legal immigrant who doesn't have citizenship, if you are an undocumented immigrant,

he said that isis exists because of the foreign policy hawks in the republican party. if president obama had said that wolf you'd hear every republican senator, and governor criticizing and condemning him for that there shouldn't be a double standard because a senator is a republican. isis is evil. it's ridiculous to blame americans for the fact that isis exists. republicans, democrats, we didn't create isis. i.c.e. is a problem that not only does isis oppose america, this is pure evil. radical islam, radical islamic terrorism is my first concern, we've had more than six years of blaming america, criticizing america, we would not have allowed president obama to say this. this is a statement that's even left of what secretary clinton or president obama would say. secondly what also troubles me from the senator's comments we can't be evil through weakness. we've also had a foreign policy over six years now, trying to lead from behind america needs to be strong. we will defeat evil through strength not weakness. i think it's ridiculous to do anything other than to say we'r

henry's book looks at the response to this phenomenon the efforts specifically in the republican party and the reason years to suppress the effects of the search for redistributing friday laws and challenges to the voting rights act of 1965 we had democrats saying time is on the democratic party's side of the other hand we have republicans who said they are social conservative and the line that they are republican they just don't know which yet. so with your polling what about that question? >> 84 that introduction. it is the pleasure to be on the panel with dr. flora as to is one of my long time mentors and trusted colleagues from the political scientists. it is a question we get all the time with the future of texas and what does that transformation look-alike? the and we saw some effort to slow the start duces of the demographics of the electorate we know they are of the states but not the electorate for the reasons henry has talked about but there hasn't been a and investment to reach out and understand a the perspective of the latino community whether in the cities is in the north

it's just going to show what the republican party is like. >> speaking of the republican party, how aboute "the new york times" headline, "a hillary clinton match-up with marco rubio is a scary thought for democrats." the thought that rubio could offer a generational contrast to the 68-year-old clinton, the kind of contrast that barack obama drew in the 2008 primaries and i actually think there is something to this one. >> i think there is too. if it's bush versus clinton, the arguments kind of cancel each other outgoing back going back to the past. rubio can also appeal to the hispanic voters and which scott walk ser a generational difference and could be a strong match-up against hillary clinton on his issue of immigration he's really going to alienate a lot of latinos. >> i think the rubio appeal is a theoretical thing. first of all, he won in 2010 with 48% of the vote. in a really strong republican year for senate races, he's running on this tax plan that has a zero rate on capital gains and it's going to be cat nick for hillary in an election doubling down on the mistakes that romney

i think i can attract people beyond the republican party, but not offend people in the republican party. i think a kid who makes mistakes with marijuana should -- should not go to jail. they did an article not too long ago, a kid named timothy tyler was caught with lsd when he was 23. 23 years ago. he is 46 years now, but he will spend the rest of his life in prison for lsd. i do not approve of that. i do not want to put you in jail. if you look at the statistics of who is going to jail, disproportionately black hispanic poor. is there racism involved? there is an inadvertent racial outcome coming from this, but it is real. if you look at surveys of whites and blacks and drug use, whites are using drugs just as much as blacks. the people in prison are black because of the way we do our policing. it adds up over time. we have a real problem with criminal justice. issues like this reach beyond the traditional republican ceiling. >> i would like to ask you about the controversies around your letters. this is a letter you put your name on. you later explained you did this to help president

or hurt the republican party? >> well i don't know it depends, i suppose, on who gets left off the list. certain candidates have broad but not deep support. others have very deep but not broad support and so i think if you're somebody who feels strongly about, say, ben carson and he ends up being the guy who gets left off, your feelings towards the party and perhaps towards fox news may be affected. >> bruce, thanks for being here. thoughtful conversation this morning. >> okay. >>> still ahead, there's been as much debate over the lack of the use thug in waco this week as there was over the use of the world in baltimore. is there a media double standard on this issue? and does social media help or hurt? we'll tackle that when we come back. why are we so committed to keeping you connected? why combine performance with a conscience? why innovate for a future without accidents? why do any of it? why do all of it? because if it matters to you it's everything to us. the xc60 crossover. from volvo. lease the well equipe

all the republican candidates are talking about indiana equalincome inequality now. >> as far as the partiesepublicans aren't the party that is becoming more extreme. it's the democrats. >> if you look at congressional roll call votes, you see both parties in terms of their votes moving to the extremes, but the republican party over the last 30 years has moved much 30further to the right based on congressional votes. ands both parties have become coherent as voting blocs. >> it's really striking in the senate, i remember reading something talking about how far left the democratic senate had gone. they were bragging about it impact they have had over the past decade. but the senate, you used to have just tons of moderates that would work both sides of the aisle and sort of -- the ted kennedy/orrin hatch relationship was the exception raesh the rule. but those moderates are gone. democrats in the senate have become far more liberal and conservatives have become far more conservative. >> i think it's indisputable it's congress, it's the house, the senate that both parties have gone toward the e

>> i would say that the major challenge he faces trying to get nominated in today's republican party is making peace with its right wing. and he's got a couple big issues you just mentioned immigration being one of them. common core standards being another. which he's not backing away from it doesn't do him any good with the people on the right, on common core in particular the ignorance is breathtaking. but that's something. that's also part of the hill he's got to climb, if he has to explain common core and get people to go along with him, he has to make the case on that and overcome a lot of misapprehensions about what those educational standards really are and what they mean. >> having seen the whole interview now, he made a lot of news. and just observing him in that context for so long i thought was interesting from a political and journalistic standpoint. >> i agree with you entirely strengths and weaknesses much as that speech he made down there, where you saw him, that was a very interesting and compelling case for christianity he made and for religious freedom as well it wa

the republican party was furious because he'd been a longtime supporter of the republican party. they were sure he was going to bomb their chances of winning the governor seat. holland did when the seat. what he accomplished was making the klan an issue in the campaign. it -- before, it was not an issue. he brought it to the forefront. all that remained was for the supreme court to give their opinion on the case. they came back in 1927 and said there was no issue of federal law in this case therefore the kansas decision was upheld. that meant that the klan could not legally operate in the state and kansas was the first state to have a legal ouster of the klan at that time. it took about five years. >> throughout the weekend american history tv is featuring topeka, kansas. our staff recently traveled there to learn about its rich history. learn more about topeka and other stops on our tour at www.c-span.org/citiestour >> unable to anyone, 1865, president liggins buddy left on a funeral train on -- to illinois. one of the stops was baltimore maryland. we visited bno railroad museum

libertarian wing of the republican party. r the republican base overall. it's risky because god forgive something happens. he's done. it's all over for him. >> people who don't own a car don't have a house, they are not married. they have this thing. >> all right. i want to pause because i want to pay tribute to a friend. i want to say a few words about bob shaeffer. i want to thank bob being a great representative of what we inspire to do in journalism and here in washington. when i came to washington the first i met was his daughter sharon. the type of person she is tells you a lot about the type of person bob is. when you meet a shaeffer you learn they are simply good people. one thing bob the one time i'm not going to miss you is as a competitor sunday mornings. when bob announced he was standing down, i promised to emulate him by wearing purple socks on his last sunday. well, bob, i'm a man of my word. i'm wearing these purple socks. they don't watch but who cares? that's all for today. we'll be back in two weeks. enjoy t

but there was a deliberate and rational party made by the republican party this year to limit the numbertes so they don't see the candidates do damage to each other and the way they think they did in 2012. is that concern part of what needs to be balanced here? >> well i think the concern on the part of the party, and i agree with that i agree that we had to reduce and condense the calendar a little bit. but if that means we can do two debates in a single day, whether the voting public gets the opportunity to see in a single day, debate a, debate b, we have all the candidates in there and describing their positions they are able to interact with each other, you have an opportunity for the public to see the debate. >> i have to ask you the awkward question here which is about this first debate and the fact that this decision, this, i i think, irrational -- not irrational but unfortunate decision that isn't good for all the candidates and it doesn't seem fair to most people this decision was not necessarily made by the republican party. it was made by the host of the debate, which is fox n

republican caucus process in 2012. they've kicked the ron paul people out of the state party leadership. whether or not you think that's a good thing, iowa republicans feel they have some semblance of the party establishment back in charge instead of the ron paul folks they felt not only didn't do a good idea but were unpredictable and working at pros purposes to the rest of the party. they promised the caucuses will be less thunderously corrupt and chaotic and there might be a winner people believe really won it. also, they want pem to take a straw poll seriously again. they moved the straw poll for this year out of ames iowa to boone, with aiowa. they did that so that it would be cheaper. they also stopped charging campaigns something like ed$35,000 for a tent at the straw poll as of this year. the new party chairman wrote an op-ed saying it would no longer be a pay to play event. they're getting their act together at this straw poll as the kickoff of with aiowa being first in the nation for 2016. they expected all the major candidates to take the straw poll seriously even if they didn'

marco rubio is trying to strike the balance between one leg of the stool of the republican party, which are national security republicans that hawkish wing of the party, that's sort of a vein that marco rubio is trying to tap and be the foreign policy national security leader in this entire republican field so he's not willing to walk away from the sort of muscular foreign policy that was the george w. bush administration foreign policy. yet he needs to square that, of course, with the fact that last fall 66% of the country said it wasn't worth fighting the war in iraq. >> it's not a surprise to a certain extent that iraq is complicated for politicians because iraq is a complicated issue. it was a devastating war that had major effects on this country and will for years to come not to mention effects it had in iraq and it already has had political effects. in 2008 you could make the case that more than any other issue perhaps sunk hillary clinton's campaign for president. >> that's right. we have seen this before. i mean, war is sort of -- to borrow from the book title, war is the force

is it a sign that parties, the republicans, democrats whatever muling luz -- mean less in the 21st century the parties are degraded from a point that they were in the past. they have had this very mixed relationship with the post citizens united world of money and politician. on one hand it benefits candidates serving as an elimp ir who may not be the strongest, facing a difficult opponent or the encum pant someone with money on the other side. at the same time it's a double-edged sword. when you have outside organizations running the show and being at the vanguard of what is happening, your role as a political party is diminished to some degree. important but diminished. >> before we go does it make a certain amount of money opaque. >> two organizations like the center trying to keep track of federal election reports, keeping track of who is giving money, who is backing which candidate. we have seen it in previous elections. it will happen in 2016 where there's an odd chain, situation where you an a train of money. you'll have a nonprofit giving money to a super-pact that will support a c

it's also disconcerting to see the republican party and beltway press settling on an explanation whatppened that is not what happened because of the war in iraq. the war did not start because of an intelligence failure. it was not an intentional oops by an administration that had no idea the intelligence was wrong. that's not what happened. when president bush said saddam hussein was buying uranium in africa that was a discredited claim. when he said iraq and al qaeda was working together. and one of the terrorists was meeting with them it was pretty well confirmed. not only did it never happen. the intelligence community did not believe it hand but vice president cheney said it anyway. said it was pretty well confirmed and who are we to question him. the bush administration made a decision they wanted to go to war in iraq. they built a public case that they thought would provide a good protect for going to war in iraq. it was not the cia that cooked it up. it was political folks. they told us the smoking gun would be a mushroom claude. if we didn't invade iraq there's a possibility o

same-sex marriage and want to see that in their states and those people should have a place in the republican party and a presidential candidate needs to embrace that while also recognizing that there are those who will oppose that. and they also have an equal spot in that party. now, that does kind of sound like splitting hairs, but they're going to have to move forward with the very inclusive message, one that recognizes that ultimately families and two people coming together in a loving, committed way, that is what's at the cornerstone of our society and we should do everything we can to make families stronger. nick, do you think a republican could get the nomination by going back to the old state's rights position and saying, look, i think marriage is an issue for the states? and just leave it at that? >> i think it's hard to get through without -- you know, an affirmative declaration that they think that gay marriage is unconstitutional or at least that there's no right to it in the constitution. it's just a litmus test. i think it's very hard. we saw rand paul for a little bit try and play wi