Morning and thank you for being with us. Guest thank you for having me on. Host let me begin on chapter two of your book because you say quote, let me start by describing what i believed to be the enduring character, the political dna of our two Major Political parties. What is there dna . Guest they change their positions on issues over the years. These are very old parties. The republicans started off as the protectionist party and became the freetrade party around the 1970s. With President Trump they are now the trade party. The enduring character is that the Republican Party has always been founded around a core constituency of people who are considered by themselves and others to be typical americans, but they are not a majority of the population. The Democratic Party has always been a coalition of people who were supposed some time to be typical americans but who together can be a majority. They dont always hold together and we get schisms and fights within the Democratic Party. Evendynamic has continued as the composition of the republicans core constituency and the groups of the dem Credit Coalition have changed Democratic Coalition have changed. Party formed in 1832 to reelect Andrew Jackson. In Republican Party formed 1854 and opposed the kansasnebraska act in the territories. They succeeded on that in a decade or so but they have continued ever since. Host your introduction, going back to election day, writing panic is a poor guide. The 1980s. Osses in guest each Political Party has had its disasters. Youll hear productions from some people that the Republican Party in 2016 won the presidency , is about to disappear into permanent minority status. I have heard similar predictions about the Democratic Party. They persist through political disaster, much worse than either party has suffered currently. Republicans in 1932, democrats in 1920, they emerge as competitive within a decade and they have overcome thirdparty challenges of considerably greater significance than we have seen in our time with ross perot in the 1990s. I think there is something fundamental, and enduring character of these parties that has provided for political expression and choice from a population which has always been diverse, ethnically, culturally, economically diverse. Religiously diverse. Since the beginning of the republic when they were british colonies. To that point you write the following, quote, both parties have changed their policies adapting to economic and Demographic Service circumstances. In both parties, they have tended to provide a congenial though temporary political home to the large majority of americans over many years. The fact that they have been stress for so long under despite massive setbacks will provide the basis for thinking they will pass through the stress test being ministered by donald trump, his republican fans and critics and his democratic opponents since they have passed through even more stringent times before. Guest i continue to believe that. The news gives me challenges every week because there was a lot of clash. Rhetoric thatt of i happen to find personally unfortunate coming from all sides. They have gone through tougher times before. Somebody said to me, where could you find evidence there has been more political discord in america. I said how about going to fort sumter in South Carolina where the fighting in the civil war begin . We have gone through our periods of real discord, of a literal civil war and the parties endured during that and they will continue to endure in the episodes that we are seeing now. Host the title of the book is how americas Political Parties changed. You also write this. Whatever the diversions is from donald trump is from donald trump, they do not prevent him from winning near unanimous support from republican voters. Theresidual strength of american parties seems undiminished and perhaps stronger than ever. Guest you look at Public Opinion polling today. 85 to 90 identifying themselves as republicans say they support donald trump. They support him over potential opponents including william weld. They continue to be very strong. The composition of the Republican Party changed somewhat over time. Broaderseen even divergences, sudden shifts in support of a Political Party. Bryan, jennings nominated by the Democratic Party in 1896, repudiated the policies of the incumbent democratic president grover cleveland. Cleveland endorsed the republican candidate. Lots of votes changed. Many more changed. People going from democrat to republican or republican to democrat. They did so in the 2016 election when you compare it to the elections immediately prior. We have seen these revolutions before. Host could you explain what we are seeing or not seeing in this republican primary. In 1980 when senator ted kennedy put up a formidable challenge against then president jimmy carter over 9092 when pappy cannon became a formidable opponent early on to george h w bush, many attributing that to his loss in november 1992, we are seeing them a number of candidates challenging President Trump, but none of them seem to be making marks in terms of polling or traction. Guest thats right. We are seeing adhesion to the Party Leaders and i think you will see adhesion among democratic voters on the democratic side to opposing donald trump. That i callriod polarized partisan parity. Than 53 has won more of the vote in a president ial election since 1984. Ago. Is 30 something years now clearly are liberal and clearly conservative parties. The political scientists of the 1950s put on a campaign, they had commissions and things were they said we need to have a clearly liberal party and a clearly conservative party. We should not have liberal republicans and conservative democrats. They got their wish and other political scientists of today say this is polarizing, these people are attacking each other, we dont like this. It is what their predecessors in the 1950s wanted. Host this is a syndicated columnist in the Washington Post , referring to republicans in texas voting badly for the gop. The Texas Tribune festival which we covered a couple weeks ago, he made the point that republicans seem to losing 2020 in order to rebuild as part of what he had to say. [video clip] division has been a constant of the Republican Party until now. At the 500 day mark of the reagan presidency, he had the support of 77 percent of republicans. On the 500 day mark of the trump presidency, he had the support of 87 . There is less dissent in the Republican Party than ever before. It is his party which is why those of us who care about the twoparty system think what should happen in 2020 is the Republican Party gets obliterated. You get in on the old story about hitting the mule over the forehead with a two by four gets his attention. Something needs to be done to get the republicans attention. Host your thought on that sentiment from someone who has not been a fan of donald trump but was an early supporter of Ronald Reagan. Guest he has made a comment on my book on how americas Political Parties have changed. George has written that he is not a republican anymore. He does not identify with the Republican Party. He gives many people advice in many directions. He would like to see a different Republican Coalition. I think the Republican Coalition may change over time but looking back over the last 25 years since the 1990s, since bill clinton broke the democrats, the republicans suppose a lock on the presidency and Newt Gingrich broke the broke the support the supposed lock for the democrats on the house of representatives. The Democratic Coalition has become gradually and suddenly more upscale, higher education, high income people have moved toward the Democrat Party. One of the problems of the Republican Party in texas is that those affluent voters in houston and dallas which had stayed quite heavily republican decided in 2016 and more so in 2018 that they didnt like the donald trump Republican Party and they sorted voting more democratic. Republican party has become more downscale. Ernest hemingway was asked how do people go into bankruptcy and he said they go in gradually and then suddenly. The real Republican Party has changed gradually and more suddenly into a party that is downscale demographically. The Democratic Party has turned into a party which is for upscale demographic more upscale demographically. The wall street journal had an article delineating how that is happening. That is the change we have seen to the point that hillary clinton, temer credit nominee in 2016, is now boasting that the Democrat Party carries the most affluent congressional districts and most affluent counties in the country. When i was growing up in michigan, where at that stage, the 1950s, the republicans had support from affluent voters, they did not go around bragging that rich people were supporting them in there for everyone else should defer to the rich people. I found that senator clintons comments were a little bizarre. Host our guest is Michael Barone. He is a former Washington PostEditorial Staff writer. He is the coauthor of the almanac of american politics and currently a senior fellow at the American Enterprise institute. His work is available online. You, not know this about you have traveled to all 50 435 congressional districts . Guest i perhaps rank with the cspan bus and getting around the country. When i started writing this almanac on american politics, i coauthor and it occurred to me that i had not ever set foot in most congressional districts. I set about in my travels to make sure that i did and eventually when i landed at pitt stevens airport in alaska in february 1998, that was my 50th state and 435th congressional district. I have kept up with redistricting so that when they change the boundaries, i make sure i have been to all of the district once again. Host our guest is Michael Barone. Before we get to your calls i want to get to your reaction to this editorial in terms of where it leaves Senate Republicans. This from Senate Republican leader, it has been a grave mistake to pull out of syria. This is what senator mcconnell wrote today in the Washington Post. Host published today in the Washington Post. Guest senator mcconnell is ofressing what a majority House Republicans expressed by voting for a resolution last week condemning the u. S. Withdrawal from syria. A relatively small number of troops we had there and in effect, endorsing some of the arguments he is making. It is not the first time that congressional members of Political Parties have opposed a president s Foreign Policy stance. Late 1930sk to the and early 1940s, we were debating whether or not to aid britain in world war ii. Supported sevelt britain when it was standing alone against the nazis. Host our guest is Michael Barone in the book is called how americas Political Parties have changed and how they dont. Lets go to jane joining us from california, crestline. Democrats line. Followinghave been the republican mayor of santa barbara. His father fought [indiscernible] lost for lost new york, on a and he ended up in San Francisco in 1850s. California after becoming a state, they were almost going to be on the side of the south and that is when the republican inty became small california. The call highlights the serious experiences people had in the revolutionary war and civil war, world war ii. It influences political feelings for a long time. , one of mynerations favorite subjects for a successful bar bet is what was john f. Kennedys number two state for percentage of vote in 1960 . A massachusetts catholic democrat, liberal on the issues, his number two state was georgia. We think of georgia as a conservative state. Why was Georgia Voting so heavily democratic . Shermaner is that marched his union troops through georgia only 96 years before. People were still voting against shermans march. Marchcommemorating that brought hackles of jimmy carters back. Those experiences have purchase on peoples minds long after they have existed because they are so difficult. Why did we have somebody conservative democrats after roosevelt and the new deal . One reason is that southern white voters who were descended from people who opposed the civil war, who had been supportive of the confederacy and many but not all cases continue to vote democratic off of that experience, decades and even a century before. Host that sounds like a jeopardy question. Lets go to greg from alabama, republican line. Good morning. Do you see any similarities when we look back, you saw the parties take a little change in the voting back from kennedys assassination to the vietnam war. Protests, a lot of antiamerican sentiment and we ended up going through watergate, we had a huge turnout to vote for jimmy carter. Do you see any similarities bernies and Elizabeth Warren with jimmy carter . Canal, iway the panama think i paid 14. 25 interest at our credit union for a vehicle. With the ideals that we have the lefteems progressives hating america with some of the rhetoric and we are leaning back toward that jimmy carter. Do you see any similarities in that swing . Personally im going to vote for bernie. I think we need to have a change and have a tough time and bring america back around to common sense economics. Host thank you for the call. Guest some of the examples of jimmy carters policies during his term as president in the 19 in 1977 are in line with the Democratic Party being the party tending to favor more government control, aid to people which became Democratic Party policy during the administration of Woodrow Wilson to some extent, but even more so under franklin roosevelt. Historically the Democratic Party had been less a Government Party in the 19th century when it was founded. It was against having the bank of the United States, it was against a central bank, against freetrade, lowering tariffs, balancing the budget and president Andrew Jackson a limited the National Debt for two years in the 1830s. The first democratic president. The parties do change positions over the years. One of the interesting things about jimmy carters policies on economics is while he tended to favor more Government Spending and control then the Republican Party of his days, he also was a major supporter of the regulation, communication and transportation. Frank the deregulation of freight rail and we have the best freight Rail Industry in the world. We had the deregulation of trucking which president carter supported, senator Edward Kennedy supported. The deregulation movement was bipartisan. Thehave republicans in gerald ford of administration and the Ronald Reagan administration supporting it and you had ralph nader who was not a partisan figure at that stage and is not a supporter of either party now but ralph nader argued that deregulation would be better for consumers. I think that has proven to be true. That hashe one affected most americans in many ways, airline deregulation. We used to have the days of Little Silver salt and pepper shakers and airports but the price was so high that the majority of americans could not afford going on a plane. If you ever have been at the orlando airport, get the idea that there are a lot of americans that can afford a Family Vacation by aircraft and that is thanks to deregulation. That is an achievement that president carter can take pride in. Host chapter 14 is a Surprising New political battleground in the midwest and you make the following point that of the 100 electoral votes that switch from democratic to republican votes between 2012 and 2016, 50 were in the midwest. ,0 were in pennsylvania specifically west of netra philadelphia. Of metro philadelphia. Pittsburgh,cranton, meadville. Guest another 29 electoral votes in florida, large parts of which are full of mist of midwesterners and people who were raised there and have those values. One of the big divisions in american politics, and it is new, since the 1990s, is that between our major metropolitan over, metro populations one million, there are about 50 of those and half the people in america live in them. Half of americans live outside the major metro areas and if we want to see where the largest change in votes come, if you are comparing 2016 with 2012, or with the very similar electoral 2000 and even of 1996, where you see the votes change in favor of donald trump and against the Democratic Party, it is the out statement when, the midwest beyond the major metro areas. The one state in the midwest that was soundly democratic was illinois. Why was that . Two thirds of the vote are in metro chicago and that has trended democratic since the 1990s high with high income people voting for the Democratic Party. States likedwest ohio, michigan, wisconsin and iowa either have no major metropolitan areas in their states. None of iowas 99 counties is in a million plus metro area or those metropolitan areas are a lower percentage of the state total. Consequently, that proved to be Fertile Ground for donald trump and treacherous ground for hillary clinton. Host the book is titled how americas Political Parties changed and how they dont. Our guest is Michael Barone. A friend of this network. Joe is joining us from new orleans, democrats line. Caller good morning. Tagging on to what you were just discussing about the voters in the areas with the electoral president feel that obama described that area of the as saying they cling to their bibles and their guns. That has proven to be true. Tagging on again to , membersat republicans of the Republican Party now, their economic status has changed to lower income people and donald trump played to their privilege. Ing white the way i see it, it is fear not so much of losing white privilege, we dont have racial segregation mandated by law anymore in this country and havent for more than 50 years, jobs in somelosing cases. There has been some serious Economics Studies that show , theary to what i thought closer trade relations with chinaand the exports from cost many more manufacturing jobs in america than most of us forecast. There was some reaction to that. I know that the caller talked about the comment that barack obama made during the 2008 campaign, clinging to their bibles and guns. As she mentioned that, i thought there was also an issue of something of constitutional rights. Clinging to your bible, the First Amendment gives us a right to freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof. You are entitled to read your bible if you want to. Guns, the second amendment. The decision of the Supreme Court in 2008 and subsequent decisions say there is a personal right to keep and bear arms in this country and that some guncontrol legislation, not all of it, is prohibited by the constitution. Those things are pretty fundamental rights. They are examples of how our Founding Fathers and the framers of the constitution and the bill of rights understood that this was already a diverse society. When they were writing the constitution and the bill of rights in 1787, they were familiar with the history of europe and the British Isles were you had religious wars, wars between people of different religious views trying to oppose impose them on other people. They took the position that you had freedom of religion and they said the federal government and Congress Shall pass no law regarding an establishment of religion. Some of the states had a set religious establishment. Churches supported by state tax that persisted in massachusetts and connecticut into the 19th century. Virginia famously got rid of its established religion with James Madison and Thomas Jefferson leading the fight to say there is no established church but the counties had been settled by different religious people. Massachusetts, catholic proprietors in maryland , quaker proprietors in pennsylvania. The Founding Fathers said this is a religiously diverse country. We are not going to try to have the federal government impose a religious uniformity in this country. We will have total freedom of religion and free exercise thereof and people can choose whatever religion they want. It is one way that you make a continental size country with diverse origins from the beginning operate successfully over the years. Host we are taking your Text Messages as well. This is from Northern Virginia saying what would it take for a thirdparty to upstage the two main parties and gain more equitable power with them . Guest it would take quite a lot. History tells us that. President whoer had won a second term by the largest percentage ever recorded up until that date decided to lead a third Political Party and was allowed to run again under the constitution. Suppose that president got his party on the ballot in every state and ran congressional candidates in a majority of these nononeparty districts across the country. That actually happened in calendar year 1912. Theodore roosevelt became the candidate of the progressive party. He finished a strong number two. William howard taft finished number three. Party had just about all the political assets you could think of. Universal knowledge, very popular and highly intelligent gonees stop by 1916 it was figures. By 1916, it was gone. You had third parties operating in wisconsin. Theater roosevelt was back on the publican team and endorsing republican nominees and when he died in 1919 he was considered the favorite for the republican nomination in 1920. We might have had a different roosevelt as our four term president if Theodore Roosevelt had not died at age 60. I think we have had a test case. It is real hard. And theember districts Electoral College are structural factors. My argument is that there is also the fact that the parties have this enduring character, provide a home for people that identify with that core constituency, thought of as typical americans. They have a home for people who identify as members about groups in the Democratic Party. That has persisted over a long time. We welcome our Radio Audience on cspan radio which is streamed on the web on cspan. Org and siriusxm. Every sunday morning. Joyce, thanks for waiting. You are on the air with Michael Barone. Caller hi. Typicaldering what a republican is because from my point of view, i have lived 70 something years and was always a democrat and now i am independent but they were always more concerned about their taxes. It was always the issue i could tell you who was republican by their point of view on taxes. I live in a mixed neighborhood but if you want to go to the luxury homes, they were all trump signs. Wealthy people like trump because of the taxes and it has always been that way. Also the religious right has always been supportive of republicans and evangelicals supporting republicans. I call them radical christians because i dont think they believe anything about christianity except that trump has some kind of mandate from heaven, which i think is absurd because i need to find a new heaven then. That is my point of view. Are,ted to ask you who you asking about taxes and i will tell you. I am just an ordinary person. I believe in having women in politics and black people in politics and i dont see that in the Republican Party. I dont see the black people, i dont see the women, i dont see anything over there that is typical of americans. It is typical of a tax related wealthy person who doesnt care about people on the border, they dont care about what i believe in, the people are supposed to care about babies and children and all of that stuff. That is my point of view. Thank you. But interested in your book i dont believe it is what i see about republicans. They have to get in and protect all of their property and taxes. Guest i think the caller is identifying accurately more the past than the present. We are moving away from the kind of political alignments that she talks about. When i was growing up in michigan, the people that identified with the auto Company Management vote Republican People that identified with the United Auto Workers members and the factory workers, they voted democratic. That was a pattern that was common if not universal in america in the 1950s. I think that my experience when i go south of broad street down those beautiful historically preserved houses in charleston, one of americas growth one of americas Fastest Growing metro areas, i dont see a lot of trump signs. Certainly around the country when you look at the richest areas of the country, how does Beverly Hills vote . They vote heavily democratic. Connecticut has been voting democratic, moving towards the Democratic Party where the first president bushs father and the second president bushs grandfather was lifted a 20 a rich man living in a community full of rich people and that has been moving toward the Democratic Party. If you go to the Upper East Side of manhattan, the rich areas lived. He late david koch you go to palm beach county, you go to the very richest parts of america. Bel air where president reagan lived in retirement, going democratic. Happened hereas is americans as i have put it more often are split in politics along cultural, and economic lines. You seep splits on economic lines such as rich people voting against candidates. You see that less today than you do in the future. A better indicator is what is your position on abortion rights . Do you believe that roe v. Wade was correctly decided or do you think that abortion is the murder of a human being and that it extinguishes a human life and should be prohibited or at least limited in its availability . Powerfulues are more in determining voter choices these days then issues of taxes. Issuesn of taxes. Voters in michigan and california are voting for high taxes. They think that is good policy. It is their choice. South, we saw less of that, of high income people moving towards the Democratic Party but in the 2018 house election, metro houston, metro dallasfort worth, troy atlanta and metro phoenix out west where the high income people had stayed republican unlike those in the northeast and industrial midwest and most of the west coast, where the high income people had stayed republican, they trended toward the demo credit candidates in 2018 and they clearly dont like donald and some of the policies he has supported on immigration and trade. Host a tweet from catherine that says i am interest in reading this book. I suspect there is much of the concept of what defines the dems and republican parties is systemic and relevant from their inception and worthy of study. Susan is joining us from california on the democrats line. Caller good morning and thank you. Listening to the different [indiscernible] they arevoters listening to the media. Straight from it congress andns and cspan seems to be the only station that gives us a straight out true idea of what is going on. I think the voters are starting to change. [indiscernible] i wonder if you think voters are starting to talk to each other instead of listening to politicians. Host thanks for the call. Guest i think we are back to an cspan, towards partisan journalism. The historic is area of the internet states. Century, to the 19th the foundation of the Democratic Party, a democratic politician from new york city said to the victor go the spoils, the money from holding offices. A democratic newspaper got the ainting contract and that was source of considerable income and profit to them and they took it Democratic Party line and the Republican Newspapers took the same line. If you lived out in the midwest and you want to get the Republican Party line when the party was founded, you subscribed to the new york tribune. If you wanted to get the democratic line and why the civil war was a big mistake, you supported the new york herald. That was the partisan politics of the day. We had an era particularly with broadcasting, radio and television regular did by the government where the broadcasters accepted the idea that they should provide an objective and nonpartisan point of view. I think increasingly as time went on, in the 60s and 70s and 80s, socalled objective point of view became less objective and thankfully your long Team Longtime colleague brian lam had this idea of presenting a genuinely nonpartisan bipartisan open to all, not endorsing candidates idea with cspan and i think your success was in part the fact that as the caller said, media has become more partisan. Tople seek media that tends view the world from the same perspective that they do. That makes a certain amount of sense but it is always useful to get a reality principle of getting subsets of what people some sense of what people are saying on the undersigned. I would endorse one other idea that lay behind with the caller said which is that it is easy to criticize ordinary people as not or not much ideas people not much knowledge about these things. If you listen to people, they not in an organized fashion, perceptions that are pretty accurate of the country or at least some perceptions and some knowledge and they have some rational basis for the way they vote and it has something to do with not only with their own perceived self interests but also to do with perceived best interest of the country as they see it. Every vote counts and i think every vote is entitled to respect until proven otherwise. Host we thank you for those kind words about cspan. If who wants to be a millionaire ever goes back on you need to be a lifeline because you know so much about politics. Keep those comments coming in. Lets go to bruce in pennsylvania. Good morning, democrats line. Caller thanks for taking my call. I am a conservative democrat and i tend to see what my social changed over the years mostly the republicans have my social values now. Get back over to syria if that is ok. I am just wondering, like with france and england and germany, the united nations. We have to have the burden with our soldiers and everybody is blaming the president , what is going on over there. Where are these other countries . They are supposed to be allies. Do they have soldiers over there or are they taking the reins . All we hear is about the and the fact that he made a mistake but where are these other nations . What are they doing . Host thanks for the call. The editorial from the Senate Republican leader Mitch Mcconnell in the Washington Post calling the president s decision engraved mist a grave mistake. Mistake is not an ambiguous way to put it i guess. I note that the caller in some ways exemplifies one example of why donald trump won the 2016. On in he says yet edifies as a democrat but tends to take more conservative decisions on the noneconomic issues and seems to be a supporter of the president. Himself as a conservative democrat, ive got chapters in this book about how the liberal republicans tended tended to disappear and how conservative democrats tended to disappear and the caller is one example of those. Attempt tof i could make a bipartisan critique perhaps, i think that the policies of both our current president and his predecessor in some ways resulted from impulsive statements that perhaps were not a good idea. I wrote a couple articles in the Washington Examiner on president thats declaration in 2012 the use of poison gas by the Syrian Government would be a redline. Thesed some of that on reporting that peter baker did on this issue in the new york times, excellent reporting. That that was not a prepared statement, it was a statement made in the campaign , you are about to have the Republican National convention and president obama did not expect the syrians to use poison gas which they then did and gave us the choice, are we going to get in or get out and he basically decided not to get in but then eventually we had troops there and you have President Trump announcing on a sunday night that we are yanking the thousand or troop thousand or so troops we have in this zone near the turkish border. That looks to be a little impulsive. I find the basis on which some people criticize both our recent democratic president and our current republican president on this issue. Host a couple things to share with you. The president talking about the wall, saying the wall is making a very big difference, even dems in the area are happy. This from Kevin Williamson in the New York Post on the topic we were discussing this morning, he writes republicans are victims of their own success. They succeeded with trumps nationalist agenda and 2016 and a very will succeed with that again in 2020. That becomes the playbook. They didnt win on balanced budgets, constitutionalism or george w. Bushs Foreign Policy. The question Going Forward is whether they will build a wall in the top radio drum circle will be able to carry them forward without the novelty and celebrity of donald trump. A smaller question is whether the reagan conservatives can be kept in the public and coalition and whether there are enough of them to bother with. On the republican line from pennsylvania, our next caller. Caller a quick question. That with the president soninlaw being part of the israeli Peace Process and is tied in with the syrian move as well as how has affectedhat politics, particularly with the President Trumps policy on israel has been very supportive of the israeli government. He has moved the American Embassy from tel aviv which is the largest metro area in israel to jerusalem which is the capital of israel. Many experts on the middle east have said this would have a lot of negative consequences. I havent noticed any lately and i think the idea that other arab countries, saudi arabia, the gulf states, each would react negatively to us if we supported israel in this regard, that doesnt seem to be the case. It may have been the case 25 years ago but it does not seem to be the case this year. That the caller referred to a large number of jewish people who are billionaires and so forth. I dont think his figures are accurate but there is no question that you have many jewish people who have been very successful economically in this country and have contributed very positively in my view, not just our economy but to our arts, our science establishment and so forth. I dont think that american support for israel, whether it has come from President Trump or from other republicans or democrats is a reflection of money from jewish interests. It is a reflection of widespread american Public Opinion. You look at the Public Opinion in most of the United States and you see overwhelming majorities in support of israel for a variety of reasons. Israel is a democracy. It has the rule of law. It provides equal rights for all of its citizens and including those of air up of arab ancestry and background. That is the kind of country that the United States tends to like. It has also become one of the high Tech Innovation leaders in the world. 7 Million People producing advancesc technologic that we in the United States can profit from in a trading world economy. Host the president talking politics overnight in another tweet after 10 30 p. M. East time east coast time. On the democrats line, in baltimore. Caller good morning. Isquestion this morning regarding the statement your guesstimate about your guest made about how the framers came to the conclusion that it would to allow everyone to practice their religions freely in this nation, but ive always , separation ofse church and state, the call for the separation of church and , the call for the separation of church and state. I would like to know exactly where that comes from. Guest separation of church and state, i think it is a fair conclusion from history that the idea of separation of church and state comes from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to a baptist congregation in connecticut where he said there should be a wall of separation between church and state. That was jeffersons first that was jeffersons personal opinion. Stronglysts had been and still are strongly against the idea of entanglement of religion with the state, the government. That,ad been strongly of so perhaps jefferson was catering to a constituency, saying that he had the same view. The First Amendment is not exactly a separation of church and state. The law says, the First Amendment says Congress Shall make no law prohibiting freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof. Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion. What that means i think is there is not going to be any federal established religion. A religion that the state supports and your tax money finances. Most of the colonies did have established religions. Congregational in connecticut and massachusetts, and so forth. They had State Government support. The massachusetts and connecticut establishments continued until 1818 and 1832. They were not considered at that time to be a violation of the First Amendment. They were voted out by the state legislature and the governors of those states just as virginia voted to get rid of its established church in the 1780s. The advocacy of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who was strongly against the established religion in virginia, that was a big change from the european heritage that most of the colonists had. You had established church in england, scotland, ireland. You still have the established church in england and scotland. In have established churches most of the countries in europe. Countries, many of the german states were lutheran. The king of france was his most catholic majesty. Spain did not recognize anything but the catholic church. Change that the founders made, not something made,an the founders something that they considered very seriously and it set a new tone. Washington goes to newport, rhode island and he is greeted by the synagogue there, he makes a special point of visiting the synagogue, saying are not jewish people given tolerance as an exercise but simply as other equal whereduals in a republic freedom of religion applies to all. Host we have about a minute left. How do you explain the republican disdain for social programs, health care, decayed and red states like West Virginia consistently voting against their ability to survive . Guest people decide what their own interest is and if they think abortion rights or a right to keep and bear arms is more important than putting more money into medical care plans, that is their right. Not athat think that is good decision can make their arguments. You see a lot of modest income people voting against more federal spending, a lot of high income people voting for more federal spending and higher taxes. Those are the decisions people make. Host the book is called how americas Political Parties change and how they dont. The cover includes the American Flag and a sand castle. Guest hourglass. Change as hemingway said about bankruptcy, gradually and then suddenly. Donald trump is i hope everyone had a good lunc lunch