The Killer B’s
01:14:05 Share

Welcome to this week's Horse Race. Today we'll look at the two biggest Super Tuesday states, California and Texas, talk Trump with my colleague at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a New York Times columnist, Pete Wehner, and go round the horn with political journalist Selena Zito. The horses are at the starting gates. They're off!

On this week's State of Play, we're diving deep into two different states, the two biggest on Super Tuesday, California and Texas. We're going to look at the Golden State first, and it's my honor to be talking with one of the most premier Democratic Party strategists of the last half century, Bob Shrum, who

who is now retired from active campaign fighting, but is the Warshaw Professor of Politics at the University of Southern California and the director of its Center for the Political Future. Bob, welcome to The Horse Race.

Thrilled to be here. So it's the big kahuna of Super Tuesday, over 400 and something delegates. Tell the reader or the listener what we have been, you've been seeing so far on the ground as most of the candidates have been spending their time elsewhere. Instead of the big kahuna, I think on election night, it may be the big confusion. First of all, California polls don't all of them close until midnight Eastern time.

We may have an exit poll that will give people indication of who won the state, but most of the delegates are allocated by congressional district. And because California makes it easy to vote, encourages voting, it can take a long time to count the ballots. For example, you can fill out your mail-in ballot and mail it on election day, and as long as it is postmarked by midnight, it has to be counted. So it can take...

a week or weeks even, to determine, as it did in 2018, who won a congressional race.

And here, because the delegates are allocated by congressional district and you've got a threshold, you have to get to 15 percent to get any delegates. So counting all of the ballots and then allocating all the delegates is going to take a little while and the process will have moved on. So I assume that the most attention will be paid to the exit poll that night, which will give us a sense of who won statewide.

Wow, it sounds like instead of Election Day, you have Election Month in California.

Well, I'm for it. You know, this state is as big as many countries and has worked very hard to make it possible for everyone who's eligible to vote. That means that we prioritize the right to vote over the media's fascination with instant results. And I think that's an appropriate thing to do in a democracy. Yeah, well...

The point is electing leaders, not making talking heads happy. But – I think that's true. So I was in Lincoln. Yeah.

north of Sacramento, visiting my parents this weekend. For listeners who don't know, I'm a California native. And I saw something I hadn't seen very much of, tons of TV ads that I couldn't turn on a television set without having presidential ads bombarding me from Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer. Is this what Californians have been experiencing? And is anybody else on the air?

Very few other people have the money to be on the air. Bernie Sanders has a lot of grassroots strength, which he's relying on, and he leads in the polls. And he may do very well in terms of delegates with just 30 percent of the vote because the center-left candidates could split up the other vote. It's hard to know whether or not South Carolina, where I suspect Joe Biden will win a convincing victory, will have much impact in California.

Partly because there's only three days between the two events and partly because a lot of ballots will already have been cast, mail-in ballots. You know, I said a long time ago that a political rally in California was three people around a television set.

despite social media and despite, say, the crowds that Bernie Sanders can attract or Pete Buttigieg had a very big crowd here at USC last week. Despite those crowds, most of the campaigning in California, if you can afford it, is done by television or by social media. So based on that, I

Does it look like Bloomberg or Steyer are going to break the 15 percent mark either statewide or in a significant number of congressional districts? If they're the only ones besides Sanders advertising, are their ads actually having impact? Well, the counterweight to that, to what I just said, is that ads are less influential in presidential contests than they are in contests for the Senate, governor, Congress, other races. And

That's because there's so much free media. There's so much coverage. I would be very surprised if Steyer broke the 15% margin in many and maybe even any places. I think Bloomberg will break that 15% margin in some places. Mm-hmm.

Well, if they're the big advertisers and you're thinking neither is going to break 15 percent statewide, it may take a month to figure it out. But it sounds like Bernie might be sitting on quite the delegate hall.

Well, but I think other people have areas of strength. Elizabeth Warren in one poll out here is at 17 percent. So she could pick up delegates. And L.A. and San Francisco, although they constitute the bulk of the voters in the state, are not the whole state. There are all these other congressional districts.

And I think a candidate, for example, like Buttigieg may do very well in some of those non-coastal districts. I'm not ruling out him doing well in a coastal district, but I think he's paid particular attention, for example, to the Central Valley. So I think he may harvest some delegates there. If Sanders wins statewide in the exit poll, he will claim victory.

We won't know what that means in terms of delegates for at least a week, maybe more. Well, one of the things, you know, looking at California, obviously, it's sheer size that you've got the San Francisco Bay Area, which alone is larger than a large number of states. The Los Angeles media market is larger than most states.

If you could guess, Los Angeles tends to be much more, the Los Angeles County's got the lion's share of the voting Hispanic population and the lion's share of the state's voting African-American population. How would you say the candidates fare for the Los Angeles County and the Orange County areas?

I think Sanders will do very well in Los Angeles. He has real strength with Hispanic or Latino voters who are a substantial portion of the whole electorate. I think that...

African American voters who actually now in the city of Los Angeles, for example, I think they're 8% of the population. They used to be more. That's a constituency that he hasn't done particularly well with, but we're going to see how that plays out in South Carolina. He did very well with Latino voters in Nevada. So I think he'll do well here.

If any place strikes me as a place where Elizabeth Warren is going to break through, it would be the North Coast, the Central Coast in San Francisco, kind of the home to famously progressive colleges like the University of California, Santa Cruz, and of course, San Francisco and Berkeley. How do you forecast that region of the state going? Is this a place where Sanders will also do well, or is this a place where maybe Warren could actually vie with him?

You're getting me to do a lot of forecasting here, so I have to enter a word of caution on the Showtime series, The Circus, the Sunday before the 2016 election. I said, no how, no way, not in this universe or any alternative universe can Donald J. Trump be elected president of the United States.

So with that caution in mind, I will go ahead and agree with you that if she does well, it likely will be the Central Coast, the San Francisco Bay Area, and maybe some strength in Silicon Valley as well. Mm-hmm.

What about the Central Valley? I mean, that basically is everything for people who aren't familiar with California geography from the Oregon, California and the border north to the Hatchipie Mountains border separating Los Angeles from Bakersfield. And it's two or three different media markets, San Francisco, Sacramento, Fresno, maybe – I'm not sure, 10 to 15 congressional districts.

How is this area different than you get up there other media markets? I mean, you know, you have to think about reading, for example, as its own media mark. I had forgotten. Yeah. Which is on the coast, not in the Central Valley. And Bakersfield, of course, has its own current county sitting out there with almost half a million people. An afterthought in California and a dominant place and almost any place else in the country.

How is the Central Valley Democratic electorate different from the electorates that we've talked about? And why might Buttigieg or Buttigieg be focusing there? Well, to the extent there are some Republican seats left in the congressional delegation, with the exception of one in San Diego, they all tend to be concentrated there.

But if there are Republican districts, they still have delegates proportional to their population to the national convention. So they're pretty good places to go, often neglected, to try to pick up delegates. And Buttigieg has made an effort to do that. I think Sanders has also made an appearance in the Valley. So it's very hard to predict.

how they will vote. A lot of the Democrats there are Hispanic or Latino. They tend not to vote in as great a number as Democrats would wish, but that may change in this primary and this year. And then there are a fair number of more moderate or more conservative Democrats to whom a Buttigieg or a Biden, for example, could very well appeal. Mm-hmm.

So what do you expect any of the candidates to make a personal visit to California after South Carolina? There are only three days and it is on the other side of the country. But on the other hand, it's also the biggest delegate play in hall. Do you know whether candidates are scheduled to come out or if you think they will?

I wouldn't be surprised if someone did. I don't think most of them will. I think Biden, for example, is probably going to concentrate in the South, in states like Alabama and Arkansas, Texas, where he's, at least in the latest polling I've seen in Texas, he's tied with Sanders.

Uh, so I don't think Biden will come out. Buttigieg was here last week. I don't think he will be coming back. Uh, Sanders, uh, I suspect will concentrate, uh, in states like Massachusetts where he's actually on television. It's, it's really interesting that, uh, uh, if you watch the debate, uh, the, in South Carolina that, uh, uh,

Elizabeth Warren's whole effort was to go after Michael Bloomberg. I don't understand how that gets her votes. The strategy is a little baffling to me. But...

And she rather gently criticized Bernie Sanders. She's been reluctant to go after Sanders, but he's not reluctant to go after her. He's on the air in Massachusetts trying to win that state and send a pretty clear message that if she can't carry her own state, she ought to get out of the race. So I don't think a lot of people will come out here for final events, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone did.

So kind of wrapping it up, let's broaden the focus just a little bit from California. Where do you see Super Tuesday looking generally? It's pretty clear Sanders is the national leader and leads in the polls in most of the rest of the states, but it's kind of the undercard where six people are battling for maybe two or three tickets out. How do you see that race ending up?

If Biden wins by a convincing margin in South Carolina, then I think he's likely to do pretty well in the Super Tuesday states that have heavy African-American populations.

And so I think that could become competitive. The real story of the night is going to unfold long before California's polls close as we start getting in the returns from those other Super Tuesday states. You know, Massachusetts will close at 9 p.m. Eastern time, 6 p.m. West Coast time. And then other states are going to close shortly after that. So...

We'll begin to get some real results that will tell us what the story of the night's going to be. And everybody will just be waiting on California. Even if you have an exit poll, you're not going to be able to talk about it until midnight. Which means that for the East Coast centric media, California once again will be a afterthought to be followed up upon later.

Well, I know that NBC is sending some of its top talent out here for the primary. So there's going to be an effort at least –

to catch up the next morning after you're up until late in the evening. I remember in the 2008 Republican primary, the day that Mitt McCuckie basically knocked out Mitt Romney, most East Coast people were not paying attention to the California congressional by congressional district race. And it took a day or two for them to catch on that the real knockout blow had been John McCain winning 48 of the 53 congressional districts, many of which by a narrow margin over Romney, uh,

And Republicans, unlike Democrats, have winner take all. Yes. So you can win a state or a congressional district narrowly and you get all the delegates. And that's exact – well, that's why Donald Trump became the nominee, winning 33 percent of the vote and 100 percent of the delegates. And McCain did that in winning the state by maybe eight points but getting over 85 percent of the delegates. And there's a chance that this year Sanders with –

And, you know, 30, 35 percent of the vote could amass a majority of delegates because there are too many competitors and too many people are falling under 15 percent. So it could very well be that Sanders clinches the nomination on March 3rd, but we don't know about it until April 15th.

Yeah, we won't know what's happened in California, at least for a week, I think, in terms of delegates. But I'm a little skeptical that anybody will clinch the nomination. But I think he might get such a big delegate lead that it's going to be very hard to catch up with him. The real question here is, does Bloomberg come alive, not just in California, but in the other Super Tuesday states? Does Biden win South Carolina by a big margin? Does that give him

back his momentum or Joe-mentum, as they call it? And do people take a second look and say, you know, he's the best bet? And we'll learn about a lot of that on Super Tuesday. But the contest could go on for, and it will go on, I suspect, for a substantial period of time after that. The real question will be whether or not it's a contest where somebody other than Sanders can win.

Well, you've made me eagerly anticipate the races after Super Tuesday and maybe even get my hotel room for the convention in Milwaukee. And maybe, you know, you can stay up until 3 a.m. or 2 a.m. and find out what happened here. Oh, I do that anyway.

Most people don't. No, I'm afraid I'm a bit of a nerd in that respect. I'll be digging deep on the Secretary of State's website, looking at all of the districts in detail. Well, Bob, it is always a pleasure to talk, and I'd love to have you back on The Horse Race. Thank you.

And now let's take a look at our second state in the State of Play series today, the Lone Star State and former Republic of Texas. Joining me is an acute political observer of all things Texan, Erica Greeter, a metro columnist for Houston Chronicle and author of a book on Texas. Erica, welcome to the horse race. Thanks for having me on, Henry. Well, you sure look like you've got a close Donnybrook down there on the Rio Grande, Ms. Greeter. How does it look to you on the ground? Me too.

You know, it's interesting. We just had a poll this morning from Progress Texas and Public Policy Poland showing Bernie Sanders in a tie with Joe Biden in the state of Texas, which is, as you can imagine, sort of uncharted terrain for us. Well, I guess the kinky Friedman vote is all swinging over to Bernie. Right, right. It's a natural affinity between those two, probably. So where do we, where, why is Sanders running so well? Why is Biden running so well? And are either of them far enough, you know,

ahead to say that we know it's going to be one of those two or is Mike Bloomberg's massive TV spending paying off there as well?

Well, I guess I would start by saying, you know, one way to think about it, and this way of thinking about it is probably reassuring for some Democrats in the state, is that neither Bernie nor Biden is doing super, super well. So the new polling we saw today has been tied at 24% each, with Bloomberg sort of nipping at their heels at 20%, and then Elizabeth Warren just behind that. In Texas, you know, we split our delegates, and the threshold for that is 15%. So probably what you'll see is –

A close finish for first, second, third with all three of the top three candidates getting some delegates from the state. But just sort of notion that this could be a state where Bernie Sanders could win, even if it's sort of a symbolic victory with 24 percent, 23 percent to Joe Biden. I mean, that's that's sort of a shocking and discomforting prospect for many Democrats.

Well, of course, Texas is a very diverse state and particularly the Democratic Party. We know from polling that Sanders does well among Latinos and there's a lot of Latinos in the Democratic primary. And we know that Biden does well among African-Americans. Walk us through on Election Day. Where would we be looking to see how the candidates are doing, whether they're meeting their targets in their strong demographic areas?

Well, certainly we're looking at South Texas, especially for the Latino vote, because you think of South Texas as a region that's heavily Latino, but it's not as heavily Democratic as perhaps California-based listeners might think, right? So there's a lot of Latino conservatives across Texas, but especially in the Rio Grande Valley area. Certainly looking at areas like Houston, Harris County, Dallas, Dallas County, California,

to see if Bernie and his coalition, and the sort of theory of Bernie is that Bernie can drive turnout among unlikely voters, right? Young voters, many of whom are voters of color. Um, so if he drives turnout in cities like Houston, Dallas, Austin, that could speak, uh, interestingly to the effects in the general election in November. Uh, we're also looking at those suburbs, which you've got, you know, a lot of, uh, Tarrant County in North Texas, uh, Fort Bend County adjacent to Houston, Harris County, um,

Those are the kind of the battleground districts for congressional races in the fall. So looking at what happens in those places will be very interesting, too. So if Elizabeth Warren and Mike Bloomberg are doing well, I'm going to presume that they're doing well in some of the suburbs of those larger cities, or maybe Elizabeth Warren's doing well in college towns. Where would we be looking at to take a look at Warren or Bloomberg on election night?

You know, Warren's interesting. She's a pretty even distribution of support. So you mentioned with, with, um, Biden gets a support of a lot of older voters who are predominantly Anglo. Uh,

Bernie does well among young voters, and really that younger generation, which is predominantly Latino, African American, Asian American, Bernie does well there. So there's a correlation between age and ethnicity. Warren in these polling we're seeing, she's the top second choice of a lot of voters, right? The top second choice of Bernie voters, top second choice of, I think, even Biden voters. So she could end up being disadvantaged by the sheer number of candidates in this primary because, you know, you've got everyone able to vote for their first choice still. Although I will say, too, kind of an interesting dynamic this time around is that

Voters are very engaged. Turnout's pretty high. Not as high as 2008, but higher than 2016. But there's a certain trepidation. I don't know if you've seen hearings in California, too, but there's a real trepidation among Democratic voters about who's electable, who's the strongest candidate to take on Trump, who's the strongest candidate for the down ballot in November. So people are voting here, but they're voting sort of, I don't want to say ambivalently, but a bit tepidly, if that makes sense. Mm-hmm.

Yeah. Well, yeah, that kind of puts Elizabeth Warren's debate performance Tuesday night into a good perspective where she tried to cast herself as the electable progressive. Did you hear any buzz about that this morning from your Democratic sources?

Yeah, I think they all did well. I think that, you know, Bloomberg did better. I mean, after that last debate, there was a real sort of win because Bloomberg had spent so much and he's invested so much in Texas, right? And not only the TV ads, but hiring staffers, opening field offices across the state, including East Texas, far West Texas. So I think after the last debate, the previous debate at Port Nevada, there was a real sort of cramping.

cringe about, oh, is this guy ready for prime time? Is this guy ready to debate? I think that he probably laid some concerns and did himself some favors. But of course, you had last night Biden having a pretty good night. Bernie not really, no one would land any blows on Bernie. I don't see Buttigieg making any inroads in Texas, really, or Klobuchar. I think Warren did well, but perhaps since everyone else did relatively well

It might not be enough to move the needle for her in the state. She'll be here, though, this week in San Antonio with former Mayor Julian Castro, who's been a top surfer for her. We have Bernie here on Sunday in Houston and Austin. We'll have Bloomberg, I think, back on Thursday, Biden here on Saturday. It's unusual for us to be this busy with elections. We're not used to voting at this kind of rate. Wow.

You know, all the eyes are on Texas. Yeah, there's TV ads, there's mailers, there's candidates coming through. It's wild. And of course, it's not just for the presidential race is because, you know, what Beto O'Rourke's near loss showed was that Democrats can hope to, you know, they've been talking about turning Texas blue for years now. And it may be a light shade of purple, but it's no longer deep red. Tell me about Democrats thoughts about the down ballot races this year.

Right, absolutely. So Beto, as you say, put this sort of tantalizing prospect in range, right? With less than three point losses to Cruz in 2018, which would suggest that in presidential year there's a possibility for perhaps even the state's electoral votes to go for the Democrat. I mean, thus far in the cycle, we're not seeing that kind of focus, I don't think. It seems like the Democrats themselves are more focused on the Rust Belt states that went for Trump in 2016. But for Texans, the Texas Democrats, a huge focal area has been the fight for control of the statehouse.

Going into 2021 redistricting cycle, if Democrats can flip nine seats in the House and hold the seats they won last time, that puts them in a much better position to, you know, to negotiate during the next cycle of drawing district lines. And of course, you've got about six congressional districts that are, according to the 2018 results, in play this time. And does that include the two that the Democrats flipped, the ones in the wealthy areas of Dallas and Houston, or is that in addition to the two that they flipped?

I mean, that's in addition to those two. And so those two that were still in place, I think that's something like Lizzie Fletcher in Texas 7, which is here in Harris County, former George H. W. Bush district. I mean, she's somebody who's been very good at being in a district, very good at articulating the district's point of view. It was a narrow win last time for her. She's been a pretty independent voice among Democrats.

caucus, I think, on issues like the Green New Deal, for example. She's been skeptical of that. She's been opposed to the proposals for a fracking ban, for example. But for someone like Fletcher, who's going to face a Republican challenge, there's a primary on that side, Wesley Hunt, who Trump has endorsed, and Cindy Siegel. So she'll face a Republican challenger, pretty well funded, pretty well backed, but then the question becomes, for Lizzie Fletcher, even if she's done her best the past two years to be an independent voice for that district, does someone like Bernie Sanders, or even Warren being the nominee, hurt

her as voters kind of turn out to vote against these candidates who are perceived as more to the left than she is. The way Texas has worked is one of the reasons why it's more competitive now is that the suburban voters who used to be rock rib Republicans

have been flipping. So all these seats in the Republican gerrymander at the congressional level that they thought were safe are suddenly marginal because of suburban flips. Does that make the concern about a hard progressive like Sanders and Warren more acute in Texas than in other states? And if so, is that something that could mean for a Biden or Bloomberg surprise on Tuesday night?

I certainly think so. I mean, as you say, there was the Republican suburbs. I mean, the Republican-leading suburbs were kind of wild, especially Republican women, right? Really, you saw a huge drop-off in their support from 2016, 2018. But then the way the district was drawn, I mean, suburbs really became the fight, right? In an urban core like Houston, the city of Houston where I live, you

You could imagine a progressive like Warren or Bernie, somebody who's sort of fiery and unapologetic, driving turnout among voters in the city. But then in the suburbs, you've got voters who have a history of voting Republican, who have voted for Republicans, who are sort of centrist, Bush-type Republicans for a generation, who are then looking at the prospect of, do we want a Republican again, perhaps even indeed another Bush? Right.

So I think that that's going to be an interesting dynamic. I think especially in the suburbs where Democrats are worried about losses from a progressive on the top of the ticket. Now, Texas is a state that doesn't have partisan registration. So theoretically, a Republican could vote in the Democratic primary. There are, of course, a lot of interesting Republican primaries keeping a lot of voters home. But do you get any sense that people on the margin might vote Democratic, you know, like these people?

I'm sorry. Go ahead. Do you think that they might vote Democratic when they're not normally Democratic voters? That's interesting. I guess there's two ways to think about that, right? They might vote Democratic if they want to just have a voice in their primary. If you're thinking, you know, maybe they're not hugely enthusiastic about Trump, but they want to vote for a more centrist Democratic nominee. I don't think I think that could be more common. I don't think you're going to see Operation Chaos type voters, like people trying to mess with the primaries. I think that, yeah.

That sort of idea, I've seen it posited on Twitter, Republicans should go vote in the Democratic primary for Bernie Sanders. I think that's not really happening. But I think certainly with the presidential primary, it's still very much a live thing, very active and very heavily contested here in Texas. There are going to be a lot of moderates, centrists, independents, Republican, historically voters voting in the Democratic primary. So take me through to Election Day. I'll be in Houston on election night at the University. March 3rd?

I will be at the U of H doing a six hour long for the students live discussion of results as they come in. And of course, you'll be, I'm sure, at your desk doing. Yeah, exactly. What are you looking for on Texas? You know, Sanders is going to win. Where's where are the numbers coming in? If Bloomberg's going to surprise where the numbers coming in, you know, go through the top four candidates and tell me what you're looking for.

Gosh, you know, I mean, I'm looking, I'll be looking at San Antonio, looking at South Texas, looking, you know, North Texas is where the fight for, I think, the control of the state house is really going to be. There's a number of competitive legislative districts there. So I'll be looking at that closely. When you say North Texas, you mean the suburbs of Dallas and Fort Worth? Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, there's a number of competitive state House races in the Houston area as well, but there's more in North Texas, Plano, Collin County, Tarrant County, Dallas County. So I think that's where we'll see the biggest fight. I think we'll see, I mean, looking here in Harris County, you know, there's some progressive challengers in Democratic primaries. I mean, it's kind of, for us, strange. We're used to Republican primary runoffs, deciding the nominee, deciding the general election, essentially. But this time around, we're seeing probably more competitive primaries in the Democratic side, perhaps even some Democratic primaries.

primary run-offs over, you know, is the incumbent perhaps progressive enough, which is kind of an interesting dynamic, and one that's new for Texas certainly. Oh my, Molly Ivins must be cheering from her grave. I know, she can only see this, right? So...

What are you predicting? Do you have any sense of... I mean, would you be shocked if Bernie Sanders won Texas? I actually put money on the predicted line for Bernie to win Texas, mainly because of the Latino vote and the student vote. But, you know, if Warren...

to climb a little bit, that could eat enough into his upper progressive vote that Biden could win with a 25%, narrowly pull out a 25%. I will lose several bets if Bernie wins, so I will say that. Oh, you're putting money on the other side? No, I'm good.

I've had some friends, you know, lunch, like, well, Bernie's not going to win Texas, you know, but just kind of the concept. Remember in 2016, you, of course, sent it to Hillary and Bernie, uh, contest in Texas, really, and I was like, I didn't even cover that primary. I was like, there's no question Bernie Sanders is not going to win Texas. Hillary Clinton ended up winning Texas in the primary by 30 points, right? So, of course...

He's not doing better than his baseline 16. I'm just basing the numbers. But I think that basic support for Bernie is very strong, very energized. And sure, at U of H, you'll see a lot of students who are very, very pro-Bernie, very excited about it. And there's some down-ballot candidates who are also, I mean, you know, on Sunday he came and he endorsed one of the Democratic district attorney candidates, Audia Jones, who's running for Harris County DA. So certainly there's a big base of Bernie support there.

Well, last question. Do you think that you say that you're not used to having an election in Texas? It's usually been a one party state. Do you think that once the presidential candidates leave, that the National Party, Democratic Party is going to continue to focus on Texas because of the congressional races? Or do you think it's kind of the end?

I think the national party knows. And actually, to be honest, I think that's not necessarily bad for Texas Democrats. I mean, national Democrats coming to state never seems to work out that well. They bring money sometimes, but I mean, they often sort of bring the national progressive ethos to the state, which doesn't go over that well among Texans. But I think certainly the statewide energy will be very, will maintain course because Democrats are so focused here on the fight for the statehouse, perhaps even more so, honestly, than they are focused on the fight for the presidential presidency.

contest, the electoral votes in November. I guess I have one short question then, since we're focused on the statehouse, which is there was that special election a month or so ago in the statehouse in suburban Houston that Democrats spent a million dollars on and they got wiped out. They totally did. But it was a very low turnout. How are Democrats thinking about that after their hopes were raised so high?

you know, that's funny. You call it low turnout. We're like, Oh, it was super high turnout for Texas, right? Um, super high energy, but actually what happens is I, you know, high turnout on the Republican side. Also, the fact is that at the moment, at least Republican voters, I mean, the state is changing, right? I mean, younger Texans, um, are, are more democratic than their, their elders. But, um,

Registered voters, likely voters, still tend to skew Republican. So I think in that case, my sort of summary of that race would be that Beto O'Rourke, who is very heavily in the district, had a galvanizing effect on Democrats, but also on Republicans, partly because they see the possibility of Texas turning blue at some point in the near-term future. So for many Republicans, voting Democrat is kind of like they said in 2004, dated, dean, married, carried. If it actually means a change in power, they may not want to go all the way.

Well, you know, there's certainly a sense among Republicans, even if they don't like the candidate they have in the ballot, I think there's a real, among those voters to talk to, there's a sense of they might not be crazy about these Republicans, but they don't want the state to turn blue. Because once the state turns blue, then it's sort of game over for Republicans at the national level, right, at the presidential level. There's so much room for Democrats to draw in the state that I think you're going to see Republicans being pretty fired up to vote this time as well.

Well, I'll definitely be following you. Do you tweet on election night, Erica? I do. I do. I'm following you also, Henry. If you want to stop by the newsroom for some pizza, we'll have plenty of that. Well, tell my listeners your Twitter handle so that people who want to know all things Texas on Super Tuesday know who to follow. That would be great. My Twitter handle is at Erica Greeter, E-R-I-C-A-G-R-I-E-D-E-R. And I'll be here all season, I guess.

Wonderful. Well, thank you for informing me and educating me about all things Texas, and looking forward to have you back on the horse race. Of course. Thanks, Henry.

Joining me this week on Trump Talk is my colleague, Peter Wainer. He's a senior fellow with me at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He's also a contributing opinion writer for the New York Times and the Atlantic Monthly. And he's worked in each of the three Republican administrations prior to the current one. Pete, welcome to the Horse Race. Thanks. Thanks for having me on. It's a pleasure to be with you. I admire your work, so it'll be good to have a conversation with you. Well, thank you. I admire your work as well. Thank you.

And that work has involved a lot of discussion of Donald Trump over the last few years. You're notable as somebody who has criticized the president. Stepping back from that for a moment, what do you make of him over the last couple of weeks? Has he demonstrated what he's talking about or doing in any way a deviation of the course or kind of like more the same for him?

No, I think it's more of the same. I have never thought that Trump would deviate from his course. He is who he is. His mental profile is set. His approach to life, his approach to politics is set. He knows one thing to do, which is to be on the attack and to go forward and to be aggressive.

And he just never changes for any reason. So he is who he is. He is who I expected he would be. And I don't see anything in the last few weeks that changes that. Actually, what I have noticed in my estimation is that he's more unleashed than he was in the past, that somehow he seems liberated after having been acquitted in the impeachment trial.

He's now very, I think, open and brazen in terms of using the Department of Justice and other levers of power to go after his opponents to try and publicly humiliate them and to attack them. I think certain constraints that were on him, which I think were limited at the beginning of his presidency, with people like H.R. McMaster and John Kelly, Rex Tillerson, and a lot of others have left the administration. He's surrounding himself with people

who I think are more acolytes, less willing to challenge him, less willing to contain him. So I expect that he not only he is who he is, but he will be more of who he is as time unfolds. So the trip to India, that kind of a whirlwind trip, you place that in kind of the same Trump as showman, Trump as a center of attention that has been driving the presidency or driving his political career since he came down the escalator.

Yeah, I think so. I think that his acute narcissism and I think narcissistic personality disorder is probably what psychologists from afar would refer to it as. I think that's a reasonable surmise even though obviously, A, I'm not a psychologist and B, I haven't examined him. But he certainly seems to have those traits and I think that –

That that is one of the key things to understanding Donald Trump, which is just to start with a man of extraordinary narcissism. He's in politics. As you know, it's a field that draws people who tend to be somewhat narcissistic. But I don't think we've ever seen anybody, at least in our lifetime, my lifetime, who has those kinds of traits. And so so much of what this presidency is about is

is really explained by that narcissism. Mm-hmm. Well...

He is now back in the real clear politics job approval rating. He has been moving up pretty steadily since he hit a low right around beginning of October when impeachment turned from a theory into a fact. And with a couple of dips, it's been a pretty straight trend line if you were somebody drawing it up. Why do you think that Trump has been able to not only stay alive but recover from

in the face of what for other presidents, particularly somebody with his character, might have considered if not a death blow, a depressing blow? Yeah, it's a great question. Just in terms of the recent rise in his popularity, which is notable,

I think in the Gallup poll, he went from 39 percent approval rating before impeachment to 49 percent after. So I think people who warned that impeachment would redound to his benefit proved right. And I think – and you'll know the data more than I – but my suspicion is that a lot of that explanation is solidified Republican support. I think he's now in the low 90s, 93, 94 percent Republican support.

When he's dipped lower in the polls, it was when he was in the high 70s or 80s with Republicans. So I think that the tribalistic nature of American politics, when you put impeachment in that, that drove Republicans to support him. So I think that explains most though not all of his recent rise. Secondly, the economy is doing well and I think it was a Pew or Gallup poll that recently said that –

people's satisfaction with the state of the country is the highest it's been in 15 years since 2005. Well, if you're an incumbent president and you have what people perceive to be a strong economy and they're feeling relatively good about the conditions of the country, you've got a huge advantage and he does. So I think that's helped him. But to step back, it's a really interesting question that you ask, which is, you know, I was having a conversation recently with somebody who,

About all of these blows during the 2016 campaigns, it would have failed any other candidate. Remember the very crude comments about Megyn Kelly mocking John McCain about his POW status, the insane conspiracy theories about Cruz and Ben Carson being a child molester, mocking the New York Times reporter with a disability. Each of those things separately, but all of them together would have brought down probably any other candidate, and it didn't with Trump. And so the question is why not?

I don't know the full answer to that. I suspect what happened is among his supporters, those discrete dots when they were connected together, you know,

led to a portrait of him as a fighter, as somebody who was maybe crude and rough around the edges, but would fight with ferocity on behalf of his supporters. And I heard this during the campaign from friends of mine who are Republicans, evangelical Christians, who said more or less people like George W. Bush, Mitt Romney, John McCain were better human beings, better men in terms of character than Donald Trump.

But they were too genteel and that Trump would essentially what I refer to as bring a gun to a cultural knife fight. And I think that created a terrific bond with them. They view him as their protector. And also there's a lot of grievances and resentments that are coursing through the –

base of the Republican Party and among much of the evangelical world. They feel like they've been mocked and ridiculed by the elite culture, and that's not an unreasonable judgment in many cases. And they got sick and tired of it, and so they view Trump as an aggressive response to that. So my suspicion is that that explains in part why he was able, like the Energizer bunny, to keep going. That's something I've tried to

For years, I've been asked by liberals and progressives, explain Trump, explain the Trump coalition. Why do people stick with him? And one of the things I've always said is you have to understand that Trump, there are many people who feel under siege in modern life, and they have different causes for feeling under siege. The

secular or nominal Christian who is a blue-collar worker may feel besieged by a different thing than the evangelical Christian who fears another person on the Supreme Court could end their way of life. But they feel under siege. And I've always said, you want to try and deflate Trump's support, stop making them feel under siege. But yet you have a democratic field that seems intent on making them feel more under siege.

As somebody who is a Trump critic and sees flaws in him and doesn't share necessarily, would it be fair for me as an aside to say you don't feel under siege as much as many of your fellow Republicans?

Yeah, I think that's right. I think that's right. When I have these conversations, primarily but not exclusively with evangelical Christians, there is a Flight 93 element to it, a sense that there is a deep cultural darkness that's descending on the land, and that there were sort of two minutes from midnight to mix a lot of metaphors. But there is a lot of deep fear, which I think is transmuted into anger.

And so the way I think you describe it is right. And I think it's most people who would know me, I think, would probably say temperamentally, in terms of my outlook on life, I don't share that degree of darkness. I think that there are real concerns in the country. But as our mutual friend Yuval Levin says, there's ruin everywhere.

in every country at every time and every moment. So things don't go well. I will say also just apropos what you said about the left and how I think that they don't understand. But that was going to be my follow-up is why do they not see this? Why is it that since you communicate, because you are somebody who stands between worlds, you, like I do, can talk with both worlds. Why do they not see this or do they see it and do they not care?

I think they don't see it. I think the short answer is for a lot of people in American politics, the amygdala regions of our minds are dictating what we're saying and what we're doing. And I think for people on the left –

Trump is such an offense, not just morally and ethically, but also in his policies, the whole package deal that they can hardly see straight. And they – you see it in the rhetoric that they use, the rhetoric of fascism and comparisons to Hitler and so forth, which anytime somebody is playing the Hitler card, it's basically you should pull back. And I wrote a column on that, which is Trump's not a fascist. He's –

I would use a word that can't be said on radio, but he's a jerk. And there's a big difference between a fascist and a jerk. Yeah. No, I think that's right. I mean I do think he's a danger and I think if left unshacked from our institutions, he could be real trouble. But –

If you press and say what has he done specifically that qualifies as fascism, which newspapers he shut down, which court order has he belied, which political opponent has he put in prison, which election has he ignored, they aren't there. So – and I think that it's a view – we all suffer from this. We all live to some extent in our own silos and that old Pauline Kael line back in 72 during the Nixon era.

where she said, I didn't vote for Nixon. Nobody I know voted for Nixon. How did Nixon win? Yeah, when Nixon got 62% of the vote. Exactly, and won all but one state. So I think some of it is being cloistered. But there was a moment in the presidential campaign, which I think illustrates what you're talking about in terms of this cultural divide and the left not understanding Nixon

politically the damage that they're doing. And that was when Beto O'Rourke was running, and he said that he would end tax-exempt status to churches, to Christian charities and parachurch organizations and basically universities in terms of, I think, student loans, unless they agreed with him on same-sex marriage. Now, that didn't get much play in the elite media, but if you're a person of the evangelical faith,

You're going to hear that and say, there you go. They want to destroy us. They want to shut us down unless they bend us and they break us to their cultural agenda. So comments like that I think are damaging and harmful on a political level, let alone the fact that I think that they're unwise substantively and from a policy standpoint. So where do you see things going from here?

You know, I look and I'd say I can make an argument that Trump will win re-election. I can make an argument that Trump won't win re-election. A lot of which argument comes to pass will in part be who the identity of the nominee is and that bugaboo of politics, events. You know, like three months ago, who would have guessed that this virus coming out of China would be roiling the world? But under each scenario, do you, is there, can you find hope that

In a scenario where whatever happens, one half of the country will be deeply disappointed and fearful? In the short term, not really. I mean, I think I'm, by inclination and disposition, a relatively hopeful person, but I think reality just has to intrude here. The country is bitterly divided. We've had worse periods in American history. The election of 1800, the Civil War, the late 60s and 70s was obviously a very contentious time.

So it's not as if this hasn't happened before, but we are deeply polarized, divided. There's a culture of contempt and antipathy in politics today that's probably as pronounced as any time in my lifetime. It's going to get worse. We know how Trump is going to run, and I think we know if it's going to be Bernie Sanders. We know how Sanders is going to run.

And so I think the divisions are going to be deeper. The wounds are going to be deeper. The anger is going to be greater when we get out of this election. Then the question is who wins, of course. And then how do you begin to heal those divides? Politics with the right person can help heal the wounds. With the wrong person, it can deepen them. Most of what happens in American life happens beyond the political realm.

world, thankfully, and helpfully. And I do see a lot of efforts, grassroots efforts. I talk to a lot of people around the country who are engaged in some form of binding up these wounds, because I think people are exhausted and tired of this. I think they just don't like being at each other's throats like this. Having said that, when you have a presidential campaign, and I think particularly a person like Donald Trump, who's constantly...

putting a stick into the eye of the American people and I think intentionally dividing people. That I think is part of the Trump personality. I think he thrives on that. As long as that's happening, it just makes it very, very difficult. So I think we're going to have to get through this period.

I hope it passes. And I do believe that the American capacity for self-renewals is one of the real blessings of this country. And I imagine it'll prevail now. But I think in the short term, we just have to buckle our seatbelts and get ready for a rough ride.

Well, rough ride. We once had a man who occupied the White House who was a rough rider, Teddy Roosevelt. Yes, we sure did. Maybe we need a Teddy Roosevelt, somebody who can establish some degree of national unity at the end of all of this. Well, Pete, it's been a wonderful conversation, and I hope to have you back on The Horse Race. Thanks. I enjoyed it. Take care, Harry. Thanks.

This week's ad of the week leaves the presidential campaign to look at a closely fought primary battle in southwest Chicago.

Illinois' third congressional district has been held for decades by members of the Lipinski family. Currently, Dan Lipinski is the incumbent, and he is among the most conservative Democrats remaining in the House. He is, in fact, most known for his continued support for the pro-life position on abortion in a party that has virtually no one who shares his views any longer. His primary opponent, Marie Newman, takes aim at this record with the ad that I'm featuring this week. Let's listen.

While we've marched, organized, and fought back, Congressman Dan Lipinski's been marching too, with the other side. Lipinski sponsored 54 bills to restrict a woman's right to choose, voted to defund Planned Parenthood, and cut access to birth control and cancer screenings.

And just this year, Lipinski joined the hundreds of Republicans trying to overturn Roe v. Wade. There's a better choice for Congress. Democrat Marie Newman. Women vote is responsible for the content of this advertising. Like in any primary campaign, Newman can't win unless she brings the incumbent down. And the point here is pretty simple. Vote against Dan Lipinski because he is pro-life or, as they say, anti-choice.

What's interesting is how well they do this ad. They have pictures on screen of Lipinski himself, including two long shots of when he appeared at the annual March for Life on Capitol Hill and even spoke before it. It includes his name on the screen so that you have that good television technique of having words reinforce the spoken word so that people who both watch and listen can get

a better chance of remembering it. When she talks about people who are upset at Lipinski's votes, you see pictures of sad women as they put on the screen Lipinski's votes against abortion choice and also to defund Planned Parenthood.

At the end of the ad, when it shifts to talking about Newman, it's a very brief, positive picture of her talking to, guess what, women. But as important as what it says on the screen, it has her name. It has Democrat for Congress, which emphasizes her party roots in a partisan primary. And note that she never calls Lipinski a Democrat so that she's trying to identify herself subtly as the Democrat in the race. And it also talks about who has endorsed her.

And on the screen, it says that she's been endorsed by EMILY's List, NARAL, and Planned Parenthood, three well-known pro-democratic women, pro-choice groups. So it clearly establishes for the demographic that she's looking at who to vote against and who to vote for.

Newman challenged Lipinski in 2018 and barely lost in a very bitter primary, 51 to 49. She's back at her second bite at the apple, but this time she may not have as easy of a go because there's a third candidate in the race who also has significant amounts of money to spend.

Under Illinois' law, Lipinski wins if he gets a plurality of the vote, does not need a majority, there is no runoff. So it makes it even more imperative for Newman to drive down Lipinski and hope that she has enough residual name ID and support from the last race to outpace the second contender.

This battle is going to be fought on March 17th along with the Illinois primary that day. And it's going to be one of the most closely congressional districts watched in the country to see whether or not a vestige of conservative Democrats can still survive in today's modern Democratic Party.

Maureen Newman knows what she's for, she knows what she's against, she knows who she's against, and she knows what she's aiming at. This ad is a good example of how to build positive name ID and create a contrast, and that's why it's this week's Ad of the Week.

Joining me this week on Round the Horn is one of my favorite people, Selena Zito. Selena is a Washington Examiner reporter, a New York Post columnist, a CNN contributor, and somebody who has many more hours in a day than I do, obviously. She's also the co-author of The Great Revolt, which is a fabulous book on the coming conservative populist alliance. Selena, welcome to The Horse Race.

Thank you so much for having me. Well, you are watching this Donnybrook, this food fight, this replay of Animal House that is taking place on the Democratic side. Who do you think is doing well and how do you look ahead to Super Tuesday?

Well, I think that, you know, the polls aren't lying. I think that Biden is doing I mean, I think that Bernie is doing well.

I think he has continued to elevate his support, and he continues to form a coalition. And I think that is really, really important. I'm not saying it's a winning coalition, but he does understand that a coalition needs to be formed. And he proved that in Nevada. We'll see what happens after Super Tuesday. Okay.

I think what we'll see on Saturday in South Carolina, South Carolina has had a tradition in recent primaries in uplifting a candidate. You saw it in 2012 on the Republican side for Newt Gingrich, who

who hadn't scored a victory as of yet in any of those early primary caucus states. And I think they're going to do the same thing for Bernie Sanders. I mean, for Joe Biden. Is it enough? Hard to tell.

You know, I think, you know, I think there are three main characters in this race and it's Biden and it's Bernie and it's Bloomberg. It's the three Bs. Yep. Or as they might have said on old Saturday Night Live, the killer Bs. Yeah.

So we've been talking a lot about Democrats, and certainly that's where the Sturm and Drang and explosions are going. But there's this big battleship sitting off the coast, and it's the S.S. Trump, and they might have a billion dollars raised by the end of it. How do you see the president faring as he jaunts around the globe and tweets from his wherever he lives?

Well, I mean, how he's doing, do you mean how he's doing in, you know, if we lined him up against the other candidates or just how is he doing on his own? On his own is what I'm thinking. Is he making, is he slowly getting people to give him a second look or is this, you know, a lot of activity that's not really moving the needle?

No, I think he's actually doing a lot of things that do make people give him a second look. You know, there's a lot of voters out there, conservatives who didn't vote for him because they didn't think he would be conservative enough.

There are a lot of independent voters who were turned off by his comportment and thought of him as too much of a wild card to consider. And then there were Democrats who were unhappy with both. And so what I have seen as I go around in Michigan and Wisconsin, just got back from Wisconsin and Minnesota and New Mexico, what I've seen is a growing number of

of conservatives who still don't like his comportment but have found a couple of things that make him more palatable and that is that he has turned out to be a very traditional conservative in terms of results but he also has like taken it next level so what do I mean by that well

Probably traditional conservatives like George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, the argument can be made that they wouldn't have had Kavanaugh's back in the way that he did. You know, that they would have bailed on him when the going got tough. And also, you know, in the taking out of terrorists.

They they're they're unsure if he would have if if if other conservative presidents would have done that. But they like that he has done that. And then same goes for the Iran deal and the climate accord. Right. Ripping those up are not something they would see traditional Republicans doing. And so they kind of like that about him.

And independents are still, again, not thrilled with its comportment, but have liked the results in particular in their in their pocketbooks in the suburban districts that are sort of up in the air for 2020. So you talk, you know, one of the things that you are known for is actually talking to real people. It's amazing what you can learn by talking and listening to real voters as opposed to all your friends at cocktail parties.

And so tell me, you just got back, the states you mentioned, Michigan, Wisconsin, New Mexico. New Mexico is considered to be a safe democratic state, but one that Trump is definitely think he's got a shot at because he believes he'll do better with the Hispanic vote this time around. And certainly Gary Johnson, the libertarian candidate who's the former governor of New Mexico, got almost 10 percent of the vote there. And that held his vote down and Trump's vote in 2016.

What are you hearing from your most recent swing? Where did you go? Who did you talk to? And what are you hearing? So I was in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Drove all around Minnesota. And I was in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, Westby, Wisconsin, Verne County, one of those counties that flipped. Also Kenosha. And so...

They're a voter. What I hear is like this is a perfect example. Eau Claire went to the Republican dinner last weekend. They're called Lincoln Day dinner. And these are generally the biggest fundraisers. But it's also do you know, just, you know, a little kickoff for the campaign among conservative activists.

And typically their attendance is at about 35 or 40. And there were well over 200 people there. Wow. And the Eau Claire County Republican chairman said, OK, so.

can I have everyone stand up who's never been to a Lincoln Day dinner before? And it was more than 75% of the room. Wow. And so the enthusiasm is there. And I went to a bunch of different little county party offices. And

And they are signing up new volunteers all the time. People that are coming in to say, what can I do? How can I get out signs? How can I, you know, how can I get involved?

in numbers that they haven't seen probably since Scott Walker first ran in 2009, 2010. So there is definitely an energy there. I think Wisconsin also woke up the sleeping bear in that state was that state Supreme Court race last year where the Democrat candidate

had all the money and sort of had Eric Holder behind him. And, you know, it was a you know, it was it was it was on David versus Goliath. But the Democrats made the fatal mistake. You never make this in Wisconsin. We're going after the Republican candidates of religious liberty. And then that just opened up the floodgates of.

And, you know, a guy that was down 14 points ends up winning the race. And I think that that has reengaged those independent-leaning voters who tend to lean Republican to get back, you know, back involved, back to being excited. And also it doesn't help that the Democratic governor is not very popular, and people even wonder if he's going to run for re-election in 2018. Right.

Well, you know, a lot of the polls coming out of Wisconsin show Trump doing well, Republicans doing well. And it's very difficult to see a Democratic victory.

in 2020 if they lose Wisconsin, because then if they're going to lose Wisconsin, that means they have to do well in the Southwest and places like Arizona and Georgia and Florida. And, you know, Bernie Sanders has attacked Israel and supported Castro. So it strikes me that Florida is kind of off the table if he's the nominee.

What are you picking up when you go to places like New Mexico? I mean, did you talk to many Hispanic voters or people who are engaged in Hispanic outreach? Because any chance of Trump bringing that onto the playing field rests on a significant improvement in his support in the Latino community.

Yeah, so I talked to a lot of Hispanic ranchers. That was my goal. And I found that Hispanic ranchers that did not vote for him

and either sat it out or voted for Hillary Clinton are very satisfied and very happy with this administration. And I think the trade deal with China and Mexico and Canada is really sort of spurred this excitement. And I think that I would definitely put New Mexico on that...

The reach, sort of like when you go to college, right? What's your reach? Yeah. I would definitely put it on there. It exists. And without Gary Johnson in the race, as you pointed out, I think that makes it even more within reach. And people are excited to vote.

Republicans are excited to vote. Independents are excited to vote. And so I think that's important nuance to understand. Are they happy in their community? One of the things that people missed about the Trump election in 2016 is the people that didn't understand it kept continually saying this election was about Donald Trump and how could you vote for him. It was never about Donald Trump.

It was always about their lives and their communities. And he always asked to earn their vote. And he always talked about things in an aspirational way. Now, it's not a traditional aspirational way, but nonetheless...

That was his approach, and it was incredibly effective. But I don't think that people that live in Washington or New York sort of get that because their lives are remarkably different than the way people's lives outside of New York or Washington. Not that one's better or worse. It's just different. Mm-hmm.

You know, one of the things that I thought was notable about 2016 is that the places that have been growing, you know, gaining in population, gaining in wealth,

becoming more educated as college people moved there, tended to flip towards Hillary Clinton, even if Trump did well, you know, because the Republican areas, it was less well than other Republicans. Places where the future didn't look as bright, where the buildings haven't been, you know, there isn't a whole lot of new construction going on and hasn't been for a while, tended to swing relatively

wildly in Trump's favor. When you go through those latter communities, which is kind of one of the things you do all the time, you travel the back roads and go to places that reporters tend not to go to. Are communities looking up more after three and a half years of Donald Trump? Are people out there still interested in this guy? Do they feel that he still has their back or is that wavering a little?

It's not wavering. Yes, they do believe that he has their back. And, you know, they do believe that, you know, he hears them and he sees their community.

And, you know, even if their community isn't doing markedly better, most communities are doing a little bit better. And people that are on the lower end of the pay scale are actually seeing a jump, a bigger jump in their in their paychecks than people that make more money. You know, if we're looking at percentage wise. And so and so they look at it through that lens.

But they also look at other things, too, like religious liberty. Like that means a lot to a lot of voters outside of Washington and New York. You know, those kinds of cultural issues are incredibly important to them. And they look at them as as part of the pillars of why they voted for him. The opportunity zones that that rolled out as part of the tax cuts.

in places like Erie, Pennsylvania, those have also seen investments in their communities from within their communities. And that kind of government program that spurs larger entities to invest within their own community have helped places like Erie, Pennsylvania. It's literally transforming the downtown area.

which is the poorest zip code in Pennsylvania. Wow. I remember it's been 20 years since I went to downtown Erie. And when I was president of the Commonwealth Foundation, the Pennsylvania free market think tank, and I did the back roads and went to Johnstown and Altoona and Williamsport. And those places that I went to 20 years ago looked like

The future had passed them by. And of course, by 2016, the future had still passing them by. So to hear that maybe some of these places see tangible results for the first time since the 1960s, things are happening. That's got to even if it's not helping you directly, it's got to lift your spirits and say better times are ahead.

Well, yeah, because people think about they don't just think about their own personal lives. They also say, look, my community's better. Look, my kid was able to find a job here. That means they're not moving 300 miles away. And I see them four times a year, you know, and Williamsport, you know, is just sort of booming because of the shale industry.

And so you take a look at some of these platforms offered up by the Democrats. Yeah, I believe it is both Bernie and Elizabeth Warren who want to ban fracking on day one. That takes all that economic prosperity that sort of has boomed not just western Pennsylvania but also in the Scranton area. And, you know, in theory, it would end –

you know, on day one. I don't think people are going to vote against their own best interests. This is nerd speak here. Of course, you know me, so you kind of were waiting for nerd speak. In Canada, in the Canadian election, there was a fight over the Trans Mountain pipeline. And while rural Canada tended to swing to the Conservatives in the last election, the four

constituencies on the path of the pipeline swung wildly in favor of the conservatives as even people who would otherwise have voted liberal knew that that they had to vote conservative in order to try and guarantee the pipeline so I would expect even these areas that are strong Trump areas

If Bernie or Elizabeth Warren is on the ticket, we'll say that there'll be people who haven't voted Democrat before. We'll cast that one Republican vote because they know that their jobs are on the line.

Yeah, and it's not even, even though even if you're directly in the shale industry, but, you know, downstream of it, I mean, there's geologists and chemists and engineers and computer scientists that are all sort of part of this economic boom in both areas. Well, there's the shopkeeper or the person who... Yeah, the barber shop. Yeah.

And, you know, and all the, you know, little mom and pop hotels that have sprung up because of that for the workers. And then there's all the construction, not just for the cracker plant, but also for the roads and the bridges to support the, you know, the transportation of that. And there's the pipeline.

So, you know, there's all kinds of, you know, real live lives that are impacted by that kind of declaration. And then one thing we sort of never talk about is the insurance industry. You know, Bernie and Elizabeth talk about Medicare for all and insurance.

You know, we talk about how that, you know, union workers don't want to lose their health care. They've fought very hard for that. But also, you know, upper middle class suburban voters don't want that either. They have really great ones through their jobs. And then what about the insurance industry? UPMC, health services.

is the second largest employer in the state of Pennsylvania. And one third of their jobs are in health insurance. These are C-suite and middle management and service employees that all of a sudden, what happens to their jobs? Elizabeth Warren says they'll go to the auto industry. I don't think it works like that.

Yeah, well, you mean with a snap of the fingers and really good intentions, we can't just transform one seventh of the economy overnight? Yeah. How many controllers are going to go over to the, you know, it's just it's illogical and it creates instability. Would some of these voters not vote for Trump? Sure. But they also wouldn't vote for Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders.

So last question here. Looking forward to the next month, what do you think we can see? You know, we can see what's going on in the Democratic field. What do you think we can expect from Trump over the next month or so? I think that Trump is going to literally troll every primary race and go to every state that's having a primary contest. I think it's, you know, it's not something that's typically done, but I think that it's smart politics.

uh... in that uh... it drives up if that state is holding up republican primary it's it drives up enthusiasm vote totals i think that was really smart to do in iowa and new hampshire uh... i believe that nevada had a republican caucus

But also, you know, it gives them the ability to register new voters and to get their message across while the Democrats are battling out to find out who their nominee will be. Well, Selina, I always learn from you. And thank you for joining me this week on The Horse Race. Thanks for having me.

That's it for today. Next week on The Horse Race, we'll look ahead to the March 10th primaries and take a special look at the crucial state of Michigan. I'm Henry Olson, and I'll see you in the winner's circle.