Madison and james monroe were born. Grew to manhood and made their own. From this small expansive lands on the north American Continent came four of the nations first five president s and a dynasty whose members lead in securing independence, saving the constitution and building the republic. What a great way to start a book and i have said most of last night reading it and its a wonderful chronicle of four major leaders and the interconnected network that ties them together at the founding of this country and its a story that invokes the historian bill calls the story of hope and perseverance that runs straight through the American Experience and doctor cheney is a longtime member of ai faculty and let me acknowledge how much we all appreciate the scholarship and intellectual contributions to aei, not to mention the service he done for our country. This is the latest in a series of several works by doctor cheney and examine our countrys history with consideration and rigor. And James Madison a life became a New York Times best seller in 2014 and shed new light on the life of one or most underappreciated founders. And i also want to thank doctor cheneys interviewer today, Vice President cheney for his service to our country and great friendship at aei. Im so pleased to have both of you here today with this conversation today and we will be taking questions after their conversations so if you want to ask questions email her Research Assistant at Catherine Quigley with a k ai. Org or on twitter using virginia dynasty aei. But before i hand things over i want to say one last thing in a well treasured piece of ai history concerns the time the Vice President cheney conducted an interview with the current Vice President of the United States mike pence. During the interview Vice President cheney was polite but relentless and asked tough questions to challenge them and it was a great dialogue but there were some timid souls, not me of course, who worried that our questionnaire had pushed the envelope a little bit. Am sure you will agree Vice President cheney that your adversary today is far more formidable than the one face that day at at the island. I want you to know in our view have added. Give it your best shot. We are not concerned with that i want to turn it over to doctor cheney to speak about her new book, the virginia dynasty. Thank you. Thank you, robert. I thank you did lay out the context by reading the part of the preface that you did read it is where i started and it was remarkable to me that on the isolated part of what was then not very continent that certainly not an well virginia was an important colony but in the periphery of everything that in that spot these four men would grow to greatness and so i think the preface is in you read it so well it does set the context. I agree. Take it away, Vice President or will you go to the questioning now . Usually she has more to say but we will get there. I was struck that lynne just mentioned when you take the enormous consequences of what these men did and how they were able to achieve it when they were building the United States of america and all that it entails in the political systems and so forth and at the time it was a real backwater as far as the world goes. Now, the circles around what is now washington dc but the time it was you cant help but think about it and out of the way spot with some remarkable accomplishments for a handful of men who were involved in the effort. To have a question . No ass. Well, i have to forgive dick for that because as far as he knew we were very on time like five, six years it is appeared and i was writing away on my book in the far corners of the house and i thank you must have wondered what i was doing. Thats been true many times in our marriage. I will turn it over to both of you to continue to dialogue but i do want to say your presence was always felt here, mr. Cheney. We knew where you were and it was a great joy to have your work going on inside that building and with the Research Assistants you work with and your example that you set for everyone who works here so they may have missed their Vice President but we didnt. It is a mystery to people who dont write books how anyone can send five, six,s seven years writing a book but i just love it. I love the momentum that you build up as you learn more and more of it and i love the research, now the writing im not so sure about but the research particularly when you have terrific Research Assistants as i have had at aei it is one fascinating question after another. This is what takes me so long. I go down every rabbit hole, even when, you know, im pretty convinced at the outset that i will never put any part of what im doing in a book. You have to love, as i do, research. And i like writing a lot. But in order to spend this amount of time on a project and you have to love your subject to. One of the questions that comes to mind is not only were these men, you know, architects of our tremendous political system and so forth of freedom and liberty in all that entails from that but most of them also owned slaves. That was clearly a significant element as we go forward in our history in the 19th century but how do you reconcile, on the one hand, the architects of our historic political system with the fact that most of the men, most of the architects were, in fact, owners of slaves . That has become a very they question nowadays as you see statues of washington being tossed into the river. I am not opposed to taking down the confederate soldiers in the confederate leaders. They were traitors to the union and i think that to take those statues down is fine but i do, i mean, im appalled actually went statues of washington fall or when the dc government has a commission that suggests that if we dont start explaining the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial better than, you know, maybe they should be moved to some other place. They cant do this because of those statues and monuments are on private lands but im appalled at this and the book for it is usually slaveholders but they knew slaveholding was wrong. Jefferson called a stain on virginia and others have been spoke of it as a moral sin. Jefferson called it a sin against god. So they were fully aware of the dilemma in which they lived and the contradiction in which they existed but they found themselves unable to circumstances they were not such that they could achieve the full emancipation that justice demanded. That didnt stop them once they understood what a unique place they were in and what a unique time they were in. They were all educated in the scottish enlightenment and the ideas of freedom and liberty and justice and equality were central to that and the scottish enlightenment and they were all well, washington educated himself but the other three went to find schools and learned this so they were perfectly ready to start a new nation based on the very highest principles and that is what they did. You know, you write contradictions but i sure am glad they did it. I second that. How long did it take you to write the book . Im not sure hello, we are disconnected there you go. Robert, we have no sound. The producers would like me to back aside, take a backseat so that the two of you can just dialogue. We are all hanging on every word, i assure you. We can hear every word, the audience can hear every word but i think im getting the cut sign from the so we will leave it to you. I didnt want to follow that because im enjoying it so much of a like im there with you but i sometimes you know, got to listen to the staff. Im backing out so the two of you can engage in a dialogue and we are all enjoying it so keep at it. Everyone okay with that . Sure. He was just about to ask me a very tough question. Why did you write the book . Youve written biographies before on madison and we are proud of that and i know legitimately so it was on the New York Times list but this rolled on out of that experience in the time is spent on madison. Well, it was certainly the case that i saw when i was working on madison how important the relationships were between him and jefferson, in particular. They were committed to one another for life but madison was also his life was intertwined with monroes and everybodys life was entwined with washington and i really did quite a lot of research on the synergy of groups and what happens when you have people of fine intellect, welltrained in one place and it turns out that what happens is that they inspire one another. The conversations lead them to thoughts they might not have had otherwise and their disagreements are important and out of the disagreement and it was a huge disagreement that washington had had with madison and jefferson and monroe, for sure. Out of that quarrel came political parties. You know, washington thought the government ought to be run in one way and that was you left your politicians and then you leave them alone. Good idea. And the voters should leave the politicians alone and that was that how jefferson and madison in particular were thinking about it but they really believed that politicians were as subject to criticism as any other citizen that made washington crazy. That is when the original divide between washington on the one hand and the other three began. Which one did you most admire . I like to think of it this way. Which one what i like to have lunch with . The answer has got to be jefferson. I wouldve assumed madison. Thats different. What kind of experience it must have been to have jefferson talk about his experiment or have jefferson talk about his theory of government or have jefferson talk about anything and he was such a one woman he talked too early and is presently he was modest which surprised me. She had no idea he was the president elect so he would be a very pleasant and i think that i do admire madison more and he is steady stable but not subject to a whim and a very profound thinker. The most studious of them all and plus he had wonderful wife dolly and she was really an unusual person and she didnt think twice about asserting herself and she was three or 4 inches taller than madison and when they went out on formal occasions neither of them seem to care that she wore plumes in her turbine that made her a foot taller than madison and you know, he loved her extravaganza and i think people generally loved the incredible ways she dressed. She had one outfit that was pink velvet and decorated with many chains. Why doesnt she use a handkerchief . What she meant was why doesnt she talk a handkerchief and her neckline. Even look at the portrait of Dolley Madison in the white house, its the most revealing. She was just out there. Interesting. In the current environment, i i cant help it, but talk about something thats current, the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg obviously has set out the situation for a fairly apparently fairly bitter fight in terms of picking a replacement. There were times when in your book when there were conflicts between the members but i think most of those of us who have read history of the era have a tendency to think well, working hard, doing good things and not spend much time or even be very aware of the extent to which there were conflicts among them. I just wonder how that grew when you look at this whole question of appointing a new Supreme Court justice before the election and one of the first women to serve on the court being replaced, im curious how that would have been dealt with by your four president s . Could i just say a word about Ruth Bader Ginsburg . Share. I think it is been deemed politically incorrect perhaps because i heard a single mention what a great style she had picture not only a great justice, a great lawyer, a great intellect. She also had this sense of style. She was always wearing something a little exotic. Theres a picture of the Supreme Court members walking down the steps of the building, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg has on a longish skirt, and its so appropriate for that moment. She just had that. So now, my politically incorrect complement. They would have fought just as hard, and i suspect our senators and the country as a whole are going to fight. One more thing about Ruth Bader Ginsburg though. During the Merrick Garland nomination, someone this was in the New York Times, asked her if she thought that the president should wait and not the point in his last year before the election, or if she thought that the senders should hold off voting. And her answer was, look, the president is still the president in the last year, and the job of the senders is to vote. So i think it shows the kind of, the kind of changes that people in public life sometimes undergo. Undergo. Madison changed all the time. You know, he was the father of the constitution. He was a man who got the bill of rights through, but after he had struggled to make the Constitutional Convention work, he wasnt sure that the constitution was any good. But within three or four weeks he was promoting it, and he promoted it on the basis that we really needed a more powerful government. In the end he changed his mind about that, too, and became worried about a very powerful, central government. Theres a british politician, ii wish i could remember his name, who said winds, he said, sir, speaking to someone who it was i dont know who, sarah, when the situation changes, i change my mind. What do you do, sir . So i think that part of the backandforth about who is from what and when is just a part of national politics. Certainly washington, madison, jefferson had a very fraught relationship with John Marshall who, either way, had gone to school with monroe. The world of the late 18th and early 19th century is so little. You keep coming across connections. I think bernard balin once said it was like a Little Country of cousin ray. Everyone was related to everyone else in a way. So i think they wouldve bought it out hard. I was intrigued by some of the debate, discussions on the court with talking about Justice Ginsburgs contributions and so forth. A a personal friend of mine of course was antonin scalia. We knew each other well, used to hunt and fish together, and i was always struck by the relationship between nino and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Because there were such opposites in terms of the positions they represented with nino being particularly conservative and ginsburg being liberal. But they were very close, personally in terms of families and time spent together and so forth. I can remember Justice Scalia talking about Ruth Bader Ginsburg in glowing terms, how much he enjoyed the relationship. That was time to meet and obviously he was much closer to it than i, that it was based mostly on opera, on their love for classical music. Justice ginsburg said at one point, when i go and listen to the opera, the voices inside my head stop, and im just relieved of the feeling of conflict and uplifted by it. I had never heard nino talk about why he loved opera so much. But i suspect it was probably the same with him. One of the things that you touch on obviously is the inner city to which there was conflict between these men who are in some respects all involved in the founding of the nation. My feelings, obviously i wasnt there [laughing] but there is a feeling i think in the country today that the present relationships politically have evolved in the way that its not what you would expect, or the feelings between the congress and the white house, president and so forth, relationships are pretty severely strained, the battles are pretty significant, and my own sense of it is, 50 years since we first came to washington, that has evolved and theres the significance of that, that there were periods of time when the relationships were better, friendlier and more collegial as they often are on the court than is the case today. I know, just because i know you, that you had some experience with this, networkg across the aisle and no one ever really condemned to you for doing it but lets talk about jack murtha, well, he was a significant ally of yours. Jack was a democrat from pennsylvania. Sure. When i arrived here in 1966 to go to work on hill the first time, over the years good relationships did grow up. I look back on my time, four years they spent a secretary of defense, republican secretary of defense. My strongest ally in the house, a man i did the most work with was jack murtha. He was a marine, the first vietnam vet ever elected to congress, and he was my closest ally trying to put the defense bill together. He chaired the defense sub appropriation come in house while i was secretary of defense. So there were relationships like that. We would, i would call the significant given from a lot of what we see today happening on capitol hill. I have always anticipated some degree of Cooperation Among the founders. Your book shows that sometimes the down and dirty there just like it was, occasions now in congress. I think the steadiest and probably the most rewarding relationship for both men was jefferson and madison. They didnt always agree. Jefferson tried to undermine the constitutional ratification. He sent letters out to friends who then showed them on the floor of the Virginia Assembly where they were undertaking a crucial ratification, criticizing the constitution, suggesting they not ratify it. So there could be more discussion and some changes that should be made. Madison, as they say, the steadiest of all, didnt get mad, or at least not so that he showed it. Jefferson was embarrassed at this time. It took madison a long time to send jefferson a copy of the federalist papers. I just love it as an example of, you know, jefferson sort of winging it. I think i will criticize the constitution now, or the constitutional ratification here in madison just holding fast and that and not losing his temperature, i think jefferson mustve been a very difficult friend. Its 11 30. Why dont you ask me a couple more questions and then we will go to the questioners on, who are in the chat room. Well, when we married, you were a phd in english literature. This is true. Obviously drifted quite a ways away from that point you got involved in history, spent a lot of time on American History and on political history. I always felt i should add more history than they did political science, with even more valuable and more useful for me. But how did you account for that transition you made from literature to politics, the founding fathers, et cetera . I couldnt get a job as a literature major. I began writing and there were some very nice people along the way who allowed me to do historical writing for different magazines and outlets. I wrote history. I just drifted towards it. Theres a a sense, like i dont think i could majored in history. It was just, it was not political site and you could do that. I dont know why. The idea you could possibly get a phd in history, but i did and when i get a chance to start writing, it was really quite wonderful. This one job i had allowed me every month to go take one aspect of washington, d. C. , and describe it, explained it, really get to the underlying basis of it. Subjects from Arlington Cemetery to the column. They are all of the washington all over washington. Why . Why we had all these columns . So it was the kind of assignment that simply whet my appetite, and thats just the direction in which i headed. We do like to turn it over to the folks . Im sure they have got some questions. But i like yours. Im coming back just to say thank you. That was just lovely and we hung on every word. And to turn over to jay, our historians resident at eei to continue the question and sort of monitor the questions in the audience. I just couldnt resist coming back on and saying thank you to both. Just a wonderful conversation jay, take it from here. Thank you, robert. My name is for those you dont know my neighbors jay cost, and the Gerald R Ford visiting scholar at eei. Its a real pleasure to be with both of you today, dr. Cheney, Vice President cheney. Had some really interesting questions. The first one i want to ask you about is the quality of statesmanship among these men. I am really struck that pointed all of their professional lives, they wanted to go home for the wanted to stay home. Washington did want a second term. Jefferson carried in virginia rather than take the secretaryship of state. Madison was back in montpelier with the wife and young stepson. Monroe was in europe and he wanted to go home your bike they all sacrificed for the sake of the good of the country. Can you tell us your thoughts on what qualities of statesmanship or leadership that set these men apart . Certainly a sense of the importance of the task they were about. It was enormous. It was such an opportunity to build a country based on freedom. It was an irresistible calling to them. Now, youre right, it also was punishing and so madison went home, washington whenever he could. But i think it was six years of washington was gone from home during the revolution, and at one point madison spent far more time at a boarding house in philadelphia that he did at home. I think that reflects the feeling that they each had that they were about a great task. Feeling as though you are part of something bigger than yourself, that was very attractive to them. While they nearly all went broke, in the end, and no doubt that was part of the fact they had been absentee landowners for so long. There were many, many reasons, but i dont think, if you had asked them the choice, would u rather have had a life in which you died well off, then have had a life where you could create a great nation . Im pretty sure if they would have chosen the latter. Interesting. Another reader points out the sort of network of men that you discuss in your book, like these four titans of the region dynasty, the root of the networks as, the bostonians, adams, quincy and the hancox. You can also look in new york and philadelphia with hamilton, who with her on robert morris, philip shiloh. How would you describe the relationship of these different networks, special light of the fact that the Eastern Networks were more focused on commerce while the Virginia Network was obviously much more agricultural in its economic background . They didnt see a world quite the same way. Theres a wonderful quotation gosh, i cant remember who wrote it. Maybe you can help me, jay in which person a a set of john adams, you know, hes wonderful, entertaining, smart but he is half mad. And washington was appalled when he became commander of the Continental Army and went to boston at moneygrubbing. That we virginia you didnt moneygrubbing partly because you had slaves who didnt in the end come into and come slavery just didnt work. In the end it did not allow a profitable enterprise. They were much more polite than adams was. He was just out there kicking up dust and stirring up trouble. Very well put. Thats just one example. I think the northerners and the southerners from the beginning were very different, and part of the reason that the civil war happen is that they never really reconciled those differences, and certainly the north could not, by the middle of the 19th century, reconciled itself to slavery. Yes. Can you speak about monroe . Because the first three, the big three, all have these grand titles come the father of his country, author of the declaration of independence, the father of the constitution. Monroe was often and alert but by choosing to focus on somebody like choosing marshall over monroe, what do you think he added, and what are we may be as a 200 years later, what have we as a sort of society, what have we missed about him . Reed missed about for a long time because there was not comprehensive edition of his papers. And there is now, and so i expect in the years ahead we will see a lot more of of monroe scholarship. He was such a curious man. He angered perhaps more than any other of you know, washington had a formidable tempera, but monroe and one of the people he was angry about most of the time was washington. Monroe would sit down and write these scathing letters, memos to washington telling him what a worthless person he was and how he was leading the country into monarchy. This is fascinating, and i dont think we have been able to pay enough attention to it before. But to see this aspect of his character and then realize that despite what seems like a flaw, his ability to anchor so quickly and deeply, he was a good president. He didnt preside over great events like the Louisiana Purchase, though of course he was there at the Louisiana Purchase doing some part of the negotiating. But his achievements were great nonetheless. It was monroe with John Quincy Adams help that made the United States i continental nation. The era of good feeling people always make fun of this description of monroe does terms in office, his two terms, was in some sense real. There was a calm in the country and there was a calm in the presidency. He had the most stable cabinet of any of the president s. Thats sort of a security and continuity that people felt. Interesting, thank you. Want to talk about the revolutionary war and helped shaped their character. Because all four of them participated in some sense, right, washington and monroe in military sense. Jefferson, governor of virginia, and fled from the capital much to the delight of patrick henry. James madison of course being short and slight as he was was not cut of military cloth but was in philadelphia struggling through the problems of public finance, especially. Can you talk about the ways in which the war shaped their character, shaped their understanding of the union . Just how did that affect them . In madisons case he cannot become a warrior because he had epilepsy. This was a theory i think i pretty much substantiated in my madison book. He would simply have a complex partial seizures once in a while, and as he described it, the intellectual functions would be suspended. It seems as though he had such an event when he was practicing to be a soldier. He was out on the field, and the story is not told entirely, but it sure seems as though thats what happened and he then of course didnt feel he could serve in the military and the military probably didnt want him at that point. So that was madisons story. I think a few of being a little left out, but then turned to what he knew best. He began studying habits and constitution. He was interested in it even as a young man. And that study became more and more important to him. Lets see, so jefferson. Well, jefferson spent his whole life try to prove he wasnt a coward for having first led richmond and then fled charlottesville. The charlottesville exit was very humorous in a way for us looking back so far. He basically try to act like he didnt come he wasnt worried, you know, and simply with two charlottesville. He was at his home, i believe, and invited legislators to stay the night and supply them with food and drink are a young man came to warn him that the british were coming, and african some food. Finally people begin leaving and jefferson was certainly one of the last to leave, and he tried to do it very casually. But in the end he took his fastest horse and galloped away. Right, right, very good. I forget washington. Well, monroe does argument with washington, and i think with washington in particular, his big target was washington didnt appreciate what he had done. Monroe was nearly killed at the crossing of the delaware, taken out of action, not given the commission he thought he deserved. And i think all of those things made them feel as though washington was turning his back on him. So the war did that to monroe, and washington of course. It was an opportunity for glory, but is also a tough slog. One of the things i admired about him is that no matter how tough slog, he conveyed an aura of confidence. Not at the beginning. Its very interesting, at the beginning his troops were worried about his indecisiveness. But as the war went on and the people came to maybe understand him better, it was that rockhard confidence, or the ability to appear confident. That was very important. Right. It speaks this idea projecting confidence just more broadly, all four of them had a very distinct ethos dash that i dont what the right word is, but their public appearance. Washington obviously having to lead men in what was a very difficult situation. Even madison, one of our viewers right skin and points out that madison versus pit in College Debate societies. He was in the week society at princeton. And prepared them in ways for public life and how they comport themselves in public. In this age where i personally am so chagrined icing politicians pop off on twitter all the time just with such a lack of quorum, is there a way that we can recapture that particularly preparing young people for engagement in the public sphere and expectations of what it means to participate in those . The virginians certainly a very distinct sense of public dignity, which seems to be lost today. Well, i do think that the atmosphere in virginia encouraged people, encouraged and then from a very young age to participate in public service. And so when they were 24, 25, 26, 26, when do very young they became members of the house of burgesses. And took part in actual legislation and saw older men who impressed them greatly. I think that helped them. Probably we shouldnt overestimate the amount of composure and politeness that you know where im going at a later demonstrated with their debating societies which often involve very rocketed lyrics that you would not want repeated in front of children. You know, they had a lively time at princeton as well as learning a great deal from a great man named john witherspoon. A question for you, mr. Vice president. Thomas jefferson was among his many accomplishments, served for four years as Vice President. How would you assess his tenure as Vice President . Well, he didnt do a thing. I dont think he did much. And he did get squared away, set up, so to speak to be president. No mean achievement though. No main achievement and i think, speculating, that that is a hope for outcome for awful lot of my predecessors. Not many have made it. A couple. But its theres a sense now that its taken on more significance and so forth, that the jobs, its a legitimate job. You are earning your pay, so to speak. I think thats true in the last, oh, that probably at least john [inaudible] but thats an interesting question. I dont think of jefferson as Vice President. The way i thought of myself as Vice President , you know . But the history is such that its clear that the job didnt amount to much for awful lot of the people who held it over the years. Right. I guess as a followup of course because jefferson became Vice President , having finished second in the Electoral College to john adams. If you could reenvision American History in a way in which the secondplace finisher in president ial elections become Vice President , how would you react to that . In other words do you think the 12th amendment was an improvement . Boy, i dont know, thats an interesting question. I dont think most recently harry truman and what a tremendous present he made, even though he was i haberdasher from missouri and his involvement though we he took over, his lack of, i mean, roosevelt had really included in anything in the period of time when he was Vice President , and he came in and ended world war ii. He won the cold war. Truman was in my mind democratic, but a strong president. It was his time as Vice President that really set him up to perform that task. I have to just interject a note here because this makes me laugh. The vice presidency, from the beginning, was an afterthought. In order to establish voting in the very first instance, as you pointed out, everybody just ran as a pack and the person got the most votes, as long as those a majority, as president and the person got the second number of votes was a Vice President. Now it is really an afterthought. The question was, well, what do we didnt going do with him . You know, weve got this new president. Now what . They could only think of one job. They gave him the presidency of the senate, and they did that largely because it wanted to keep him out of trouble. [laughing] i like making sure dick remembers that story. I remember when i was the president of the senate. I stood up there in one of those in wheelchairs in front of the house chamber. Did you cast a tiebreaking vote . Oh, yeah, seven or eight times. Interesting. I was busy. [laughing] yes, you were. We are just about at a but i one final question because we talked a lot about the history of these men and especially your question, mr. Vice president , talking about contemporary politics. I think everybody agrees this is very unsettled age, difficult times for our country. What do you think would be maybe one or two lessons that the virginia dynasty can we, today, can take from the sort to guide our politics moving forward . Gosh, you know, a were a raucous bunch, fighting with each other. They were smart. That may be a very important element. Jefferson was smart in a kind of flight he way. Was smart any kind of practical way. He looked at other people like madison and said, how do i succeed in a way he did . Washington had kind of innate natural intellect and i think that kind of attitude, the kid of interest towards intellectual issues helped make them successful. I do have one more question, a late arrival, somebody is running late. They ask, what you think about the musical hamilton and the way members of the dynasty are remembered therein . Well, i loved hamilton. We saw it a long time ago when it was still offbroadway, and i had heard about how i got us tickets, had the hardest time in the world persuading dick to go to a rap musical. But any did andy really admired it as well. Fantastic. I cant, well, i got washington was well into musudan. Madison was one i found most disappointing. Now, i know they were not supposed to try to look like the fiddles that you impersonating, but madison was kind of a big old hunk of a man who walked over and that seems to me so far from that one, intention and i thought i might of change that a little bit. Right. Wonderful. Thank you so much for your time. This is been such an educational, enjoyable opportunity for me to speak with you and based on the questions i think our viewers enjoyed. Good luck with the book. Just best wishes to you both. Antisemite. Thank you. Weeknights this month were featuring booktv programs as a preview of whats available every weekend on cspan2. Tuesday night our topic is science. It all begins at 8 p. M. Eastern and enjoy booktv this weekend of the weekend on cspan2. Election day is here novembe. Stay with cspan to learn who the voters selectively the country as president and which party will control congress. Our live coverage starts tonight at nine eastern and continues through washington journal at 7 a. M. Eastern. Join the conversation, share your experience as the results come in and youre from the candidates. Watch live on cspan and cspan. Org or listen live on the cspan reader at. Election night on cspan, your place for an unfiltered view of politics. Usual laptop or phone to follow the result of the historic 2020 election. Go to cspan. Org election for interactive tools giving you realtime voting results, a national map to track the president ial race come see the pocket of ocala, Electoral College count map as well as about whats the powerful the u. S. House and senate. Stream live or ondemand anytime on Election Night at cspan. Org election. History and biography is sponsored by wells fargo