Days, midterms around the corner, etc. If they get too caught up in the first 100 days, they will wind up like president obama did in some respects overplaying their hand. Tom has done a lot more work in health care than i have. Lawyer pass is perfect. With time, you need to revisit most of them. I dont think anybody would disagree we have some problems with Companies Pulling out of a. C. A. With costs. There needs to be worked on. I do know this. This is not easy work. It is complicated. It has a lot of moving parts. I think clearly the Trump Administration and congress will have to deal with this. I would caution them to take your time. Maybe not do this in the first 100 days. Work through how we can get better participation and how we can deal with cost. Can we add some things . President elect trump has talked about being able to buy across borders and medical savings accounts. I have been a big advocate of that and even worked with ted kennedy years ago to get medical savings accounts. There are some important things that can be added. Way to to try to find a make it more bipartisan. You are not just going to say it is over and here is the total replacement. That will take work and time. Buto you believe in general the time horizon for spending, if there is a mandate, for any to spread and out . When in the modern senate or congress does it become time to make it about positioning for the midterm . When does that start . Unfortunately, it starts earlier and earlier. It started yesterday. That is a good question. My guess is you will have time. People will look at whether washington is working better when they make their decision two years or four years from now. Is washington working better . Part of what we have seen over the last couple of years is a level of dysfunction that is so exasperating to the voters that i think they voted in part for mr. Trump because he was such an outsider and so unrelated to everything going on in washington today. This was an antiwashington boat to a certain extent and members of congress ought to understand that. I think to focus on the first 100 days is not wise, quite frankly. I remember during president bush presidency in 2001 when we were a 50 50 senate, we only had it for six months and then it flipped over to 51 49. Aring that time, we passed bush tax cut bill, a bankruptcy reform bill, a major defense bill, and no child left behind. Are significant things. But it took us six months to do that. That is still a good list of things. I hope they will not get over consumed with the first 100 days. Is. Er to it as the we need to do immigration reform. Supporting everybody . Deporting everybody . That is not what i said. We do need to deal with how we secure the border. Am not just talking about physical wall. I am for a virtual wall. I made the comment one time that walls do not work anyway. You cannot build a wall big enough that they cannot get over. Why do that . This is america. The wall concept drives me crazy. But we do need to control the flow of immigration. There needs to be a reasonable way to know who is coming and going. We do need workers. We need to do that. Clearly, we need to make some changes and reforms in the tax code. Everybody agrees we need to. We disagree about what that would mean. We have to do something about health care and infrastructure. Just those things, if they could find a way to come to agreement and get those signed into law, that would be huge. If it takes eight months, fine. One more question. Think of your questions. I will ask the last question. That if you were still in leadership, you would encourage each of your members to figure out ways to stray from the party line a little bit. I think im hearing you say we are in a crisis point because of dysfunction and also the results of the election give people on both sides some license to stray . And my oversaying what i have heard . Characterize it as straying. How do you build bridges, create chemistry within those 100 people in the senate to get things done in a less confrontational way . That is not straying. That is recreating what the senate has been institutionally. The one thing we emphasize strongly is we have got to be in washington longer. You will not be able to do anything if you leave on thursday and come back on tuesday and try to get everything done on wednesday. We have to figure out how we change that schedule. That is a function of leadership as well. I would love to see members of the senate and house Work Together monday through friday at least three weeks a month. We used to do that. We used to have votes on monday. On thursday night, we would say we finish this bill tonight we will be out tomorrow. Otherwise, i will see you on friday morning. It is amazing what you can get done in the next three hours. [laughter] did we get to go home early on tuesday because of your Favorite Tv Program . Now they like to come to town and work Late Wednesday night and fly out on thursday. I always thought when the sun started setting in the west, it was a good time to go home and have supper with my wife of 52 years. One reason i am still married to the same woman after all these years. What they do is crazy. They do not bring their families so they do not have a chance to get to know each other. , mike was in the house from ohio was on my side of the street. Anotherhe street was democrat from louisiana. We were friends. Our wives were friends. Our kids played together. We socialized together. They do not have that relationship. They should work fine days a week, three weeks a month. They should bring their families. They are being told you need to raise money and go home and campaign. The job is here. Number three, the idea congressmen or senators are sleeping in their offices is the most offensive thing i can think of. [applause] i think it is inappropriate. It is humiliating. It is a very bad form of public housing. [laughter] you are preaching to the choir. That is great. Who is at the microphone . Somebody is there. When youre talking about the Supreme Court, i wanted to ask about the lingering affect of the situation where you had an unprecedented time where the senate refused to hold hearings or a vote on a Supreme Court nominee. When there is a new Supreme Court nominee, i guess this is more for senator daschle but can apply to both, how would you address the people saying we should have had this last year . Why cant we have pay back this time . I talked a minute ago about norms being lost. I will make a prediction. I hope i am wrong. But i would predict because this is now viewed as a very successful strategy on this partse Mitch Mcconnells that you will see this happen over and over again. No president will feel confident about a nominee in the entire last year of his or her term. I think that is deplorable. I think that is wrong. That is not the way things should operate. But i think it was viewed as a successful strategy in this case and im guessing it will be applied at some point in the future. I do think the Supreme Court issue was a key issue for voters. A lot of polling showed a lot of trump that moved over to voted that way because of the Supreme Court. This situation in the senate with regard to federal judges started back when i was still there in the early part of 2000 when we started having filibusters a Federal District judges which i thought was a mistake. A lot of people think mcconnell was smart. We will get our nominee. I would not have done it that way. I think the senate does have a responsibility to advise and consent to have hearings. You might not have moved them. But at least some hearing. Maybe payback will come into play. How about a demarcation . Lets stop this, democrats and republicans. You say you want to stop it now because you got the presidency and the congress. Im talking about the institution. One of the most important things United States senators do that president s cannot do in the house does not even vote on is to advise and consent on federal judicial appointments. That is a very sacred thing. I dont think they have been doing a very good job with it for a number of years. We have time for one question that takes less than a minute. Trump wasthe vote for a repudiation of washington. How do we explain they reelected nearly every member of congress to come back . That is a great question. [laughter] im going to take that one. [laughter] part, there is this sense that people still feel some personal identification with their member of congress. They hate the congress but love their congressperson. Members aree these spending over half their time at home now and they are all over so these develop these relationships that transcend. It is not you, it is them i am upset with. I think that phenomena still plays out. They did not know donald trump or Hillary Clinton. If they did, they probably were not enamored with one or the other. But they know theyre a new member of congress. That transcends but they know their own member of congress for that often transcends the view of the way washington is working. I agree that is true. I think that was a big factor with trump, that he represented real change. Said this would be the biggest upset for the people electing trump. I think the house and senate play it smart. Some of them said they were on his team. Others tried to give it the slip. Some said i am not going to vote for him. They got their message in their district or senate races based on the factors in that state. I think the house and senate deserve a lot of credit. I am a huge fan of paul ryan. I think he handled it pretty well. I hope he and the president elect can get together and have no acrimony. He did not just jump on the bandwagon. He did what he was supposed to do. That is to look after the house first. That is his constituency beyond his district in wisconsin. I think he had a lot to do with president elect trump carrying wisconsin. I think the president owes him a debt of gratitude. Who would have believed that trump was going to carry wisconsin . It was a surprise. Speaking of paul ryan and donald trump, their lunch is wrapping up now apparently so we should wrap up as well. Thesek these i thank two distinguished gentleman. It was wonderful. [applause] we are asking students to participate in this years documentary competition by telling us the most urgent issue for our next president , donald trump, and the Incoming Congress to address in 2017. Our competition is open to all middle and High School Students grades six through 12. Students can work alone or in a group of up to three to produce a documentary on the issue selected. A grand prize of 5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. 100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded and shared between 150 students and 53 teachers. This years deadline is generally 20, 2017. That is inauguration day. For more information, go to our website. Republican donald trump is elected as the next president of the United States and the nation elects a republicancontrolled house and senate. Follow the transition of government on cspan. We will take you to key events as they happen without interruption. , ondemand,n cspan or listen on our free radio app. Pollsters and scholars on the 2016 campaign and election results. The senior White House Correspondent Kenneth Walsh moderated the event. This is about one hour and 40 minutes. Ruth robbins good evening, everyone. My name is ruth robbins, its a pleasure to welcome you here. Tonight, we have an excellent and esteemed panel of experts about to discuss the recent, very recent president ial election, and share their insights about the campaign and the results. Before i introduce anyone, a couple of quick details. One, if you have a phone, please turn it off at this point or silence it. Appreciate that very much. And two, Everyone Wants to sit up straight and look nice and neat and put on your nice smiles because cspan is taping us tonight. You want to look good for them. And last, we will have a q a section at the end of the program. I just ask you to please limit your questions to one. Keep it fairly short. The speakers will repeat the question so that everyone can hear. You do have a handout that has the bios of the different speakers, so in the interest of time ill keep the introductions very brief. I do have the pleasure of introducing the moderator, Kenneth Walsh, who is chief courthouse correspondent for u. S. News and world report. Ken has covered the presidency and president ial campaigns and National Politics since 1986. Our panelists tonight are jeff, bill, kasie, sarah, and aaron. Sunlen, who was in the original writeup, was called to new york. So we were lucky we brought in someone equally as expert, sarah murray. Please join me in a warm welcome for ken walsh and our most distinguished guests. [applause] kenneth thank you all for coming. I want to thank the panelists first of all for being here and the smithsonian for sponsoring this and ruth robbins for organizing it. I want to thank you for being here and for our cspan audience for watching. Its a very emotional time right now. We were talking earlier, should i show a clip or something . We were thinking of showing a saturday night live clip. It didnt feel right, it felt like too much levity there, so we decided not to do it. Im sure you are aware of the portrayals of trump and clinton by alex baldwin and kate. But we decided it didnt feel appropriate, so we decided not to do it. Instead, im going to give you a couple of quotes from Abraham Lincoln that might be more appropriate. Its a very emotional time for a lot of people. Hillary clinton supporters really sort of reeling. They expected to have a big win today. A lot of pollsters, most of the pollsters, felt that Hillary Clinton would win. Maybe not so big, but that they felt she would win. Now we have donald trump who is now president elect. He met with president obama today at the white house. They were supposed to meet for 15 or minutes and ended up 20 meeting for about 90 minutes. In that very familiar setting in the oval office and the two chairs in front of the fireplace. Hes trying to settle in as the next president. For trump supporters, this is a time of jubilation and actually not a small degree of gloating because they said this was going to happen. And it has happened. In my due diligence, i checked the numbers and at this point, a little bit of fluctuation here, but clinton has 290 electoral votes trump has 290 and clinton has 232, and 270 was needed. But the popular vote is going clintons way. She has about a 300,000 vote lead out of about 120 million votes cast. So what happened is we had an almost even split in the country in the popular vote. That reflects the amazing divide were in right now. So the question is, does donald trump have a mandate . Didnt win the popular vote, but lots of people who are elected, very close, act as if they have had a mandate. You remember in 2000, we had that long Supreme Court fight. And george w. Bush won in the Supreme Court, and he lost the popular vote by a half million votes in 2000. But he claimed a mandate, as every president does when they take office. We have protesters in the streets now saying that donald trump is not their president. We have people i just saw some emails of organizations saying were going to fight him every step of the way. So its not a very pretty picture. I know when i have given talks like this before, a lot of people from the audience have said that we would need some clarity in the election. We would need a clarifying election, and it doesnt appear thats what weve got. I would be interested if our panelists agree with this. In some ways, our president ial campaigns have become like pendulums. Elections, we go from one party to the other. From the democrats to the republicans. In my lifetime covering politics, we have gone from jimmy carter to Ronald Reagan to staying with George Herbert walker bush, bill clinton, george w. Bush, barack obama, back and forth, back and forth. Very difficult for any party to win two consecutive terms. It does happen. But it didnt happen this time. A couple of other points i wanted to quickly make. We read some of lincolns today to get into the more inspirational quality of our politics. We would be wise to familiarize ourselves with this again. In his second inaugural address, the most appropriate for this moment, he calls for the famous lines, malice toward none, harity for all. He talked about binding the lowndewounds. We have to see if that happens. This moment will be difficult. I want to wind up with a little analysis i wanted to read briefly and have our panel respond as our first question to them. This comes from a democratic pollster who has worked with bill mcintyre, who did an analysis with his associates. He said, three forces collided to elect donald trump president. First, truly clinton was a deeply flawed candidate, second, mr. Trump a brilliant manipulator of broadcast media outlets, and third, pundits consistently underestimated a large segment of our society is deeply angry. They are angry at the arrogance of the rich and well educated, who dont seem to care about the working class standard of living has been declining or a generation. They are angry about being mocked as as racist and deplorables, afraid that their children do not have reasonable prospects for advancement. That is one explanation for what happened on the trump side. And to some extent, the dynamic in the electorate. And remember Bernie Sanders, who challenged Hillary Clinton and lost, appealed to that same sentiment from the left that donald trump did from the right. I would like to ask our panel starting with jeff, if you agree with that analysis and how you see what happened here. What did happen . Jeff if peter hart said it, i agree with it. [laughter] no, obviously there is a lot to what peter had to say. By the way, your lincoln quote is not that comforting because that was after a great civil war where one side achieved a military victory over the other. I hope that is not what we go through before we have charity to all in the country. The country is divided in a lot of ways. This election reflected those divisions. The divisions are not only about economics, although there are definitely those at work. In a larger way, it is about what is happening to america. We are at a fork in the road in some ways in terms of what we make of our diversity is a country. We are changing in a lot of ways. And people have complicated feelings about that. In the work we were doing on the lead up to Election Night, we asked whether people saw her the growing diversity of the country as a change for the better or worse. There was nothing that drew a brighter red line than that question between voters. The more you tended to see increasing diversity of the country as a change for the better, something exciting, the more likely you were to be for clinton. But if you didnt feel that way about what was happening in the country in that respect you were , very likely to be for donald trump. That was being litigated. I think the other big question i was paying attention to thinking about Election Night in some ways, the defining question for Election Night, was how much risk were americans willing to take when they cast their ballot. It turns out, a lot of them were willing to take a fair amount of risk. In our survey we did on election eve, the people that voted for donald trump, 21 said he was a risky choice. And they voted for him anyway. In part because they did not have any confidence in the alternative that Hillary Clinton represented, but also the ways that peter describes. They had so little sense of ake in the status quo that it felt like a risk worth taking even though many of them thought , and think that donald trump does not have the experience and knowledge or temperament a president should have. At that moment, people were willing to take that risk. We will see how they feel about the risk a few months down the road. The last thing i will say that was important this election is that the Republican Party and rightwing spent a lot of time demonizing Hillary Clinton. That happened on steroids throughout the election. The challenging thing for the media to know how to deal with that. But donald trump repeatedly referred to her as a criminal in a cynical and dangerous and demagogic way. At various points in the campaign, she did things either by commission or omission that may have exacerbated the concerns people had. It was very hard with that, given how much of the bandwidth donald trump had been taking up, for her to break through and provide the kind of confidence peter was talking about in his comments. Not impossible, but very challenging given the unprecedented nature of trumps attacks on her. At least since the start of the 20th century. And in light of the media environment in which he was operating. I pick up on the about risk. Point i grew up in southwestern virginia, in the county that went 81 to 18 for trump. Cole county was economically devastated. Nowhere near among the people in the high school now as grew up with me. I was talking to my wife. She said, you know, those people are buying a lottery ticket. I think to some extent that is right. If your expectation is some sort of incremental change, the situation is sufficiently devastating. That is not good enough. You are willing to risk quite a bit for the hope for dramatic change. [indiscernible] it is hard to hear. I will try and speak up. One other point in terms of historical perspective, this should have been a republican year. The last time a democrat got elected after a twoterm democrat had served was Martin Van Buren, i believe. After andrew jackson. It did not happen in the 20th century. A long time ago. Ironically, Martin Van Buren was often considered the first professional politician. On the second side, to study what political scientists might call fundamentals the movement , of the economy, how long a party has been in power, the average predictions for people who have worked these out several months ago was that the democrat would win 51 of the popular vote. If you look at the last nine elections that were open seat elections where there is not an incumbent running, the range is 54 points to 45. The median is about 49. An historical perspective, it actually outperformed. This is not a surprise from a historical perspective. It is a surprise in terms of who the candidates were and what we thought the race would be about in advance of the race. This should have been a republican year and it was. I think one of the things that has been not focused on as heavily we know about the immigration argument, we know about the economic angst underestimated by both parties. It is worth remembering that donald trump is not a republican from an ideological standpoint in many ways. I also think we underestimated the impact that an excessively brutal and deeply personal election with two flawed candidates was going to have on the size and shape of the electorate. There were millions and millions of people that were modeled to show up on election day who stayed home. Maybe those were republicans who could not wrap their arms around trump. We know there were millions that voted for mitt romney that did not show up for donald trump. And there were even more millions of democrats that voted for barack obama and did not show up for Hillary Clinton. Maybe the crooked hillary argument and the amount of time donald trump spent hammering the home the notion she was a criminal, even though that is not what the f. B. I. Decided that , stuck with people. It wasnt that they could not bring themselves to cast their ballots for one candidate, they could not bring themselves to show up and cast a ballot. I think we made a lot of assumptions about the direction that turnout moved. That it was going to go up again. That was not true. It was proof negative campaigning and so negative, so divisive. It has an impact. It does depress the vote. I would echo jeff on the change. I get to work on nbc wall street journal. One of the questions we wrote this year, how do you want to vote . A candidate that supports major change even if you do not to be or do you want to vote for a candidate that is steady, predictable, and keep going in the same direction we have been headed . That was the choice. 54 oflast track sunday, americans said i want change even if i dont know what the changes going to be. 41 said i want steady progress. I think that is a powerful underlying thing in this election. The other thing that is quite have one in said we five candidates that have an unfavorable idea both candidates. People presume that is not normal. It is not. The highest poll result was in 1992, there was a time when bill clinton and george bush had 12 who didnt like either of them. In 2012, only 6 of the population were unfavorable to both obama and romney. When you are at 18 , that is three or four times the normal. You are a voter, you just said you have an unfavorable view of the candidates, what do you do . They voted for donald trump over Hillary Clinton because that underlying change means she is the status quo in a thirdparty term. If i dont like either, my instinct is i am going to vote for somebody new. And i think we should, as we always do, respect the american electorate. If you respect the electorate we , have people that went to vote for the candidate that they thought best represented their economic interests. And in parts of the country that feel very disengaged from this countrys success. The doctor was kind enough to talk about his own county. 81 to 19 is a huge number. That is not a county that voted democrat for a long time. Even obama was probably 72 to 28. So when you go from pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, wisconsin, and you are taking these kinds of margins to that level, you start tipping. Last thing i will say because people say how could it get so , close . How did this happen . Mitt romneykerry grabbed the best carried College Graduates by 25 points. You would expect a huge vote. We had it at it turned out to be 30. 27 points. If you were a white noncollege graduate, you voted for trump by 37 points, bigger than Ronald Reagan against mondale. If you are looking for benchmarks, that is wow. If romney carries them by 25, you carry them by 37, that is net points. 12that is 37 of the electorate. The obama margin disappears in one subgroup. It is a dead even race. The states that made the difference, pennsylvania, wisconsin, and michigan, those voters matters even more. They represent a larger share of the electorate. That would be my view in terms of the reaction. The idea that trump was dangerous. Even though it was a change but dangerous that did not seem to , register . That is what everybody was thinking. People thought he was dangerous and would not vote for him. Dangerous butd risky. People knew they were taking a risk. That he was lacking in the knowledge and experience that a president ought to have when he takes office. He or she. People worried about how they them he will act in commanderinchief. They worry about his temperament and whether he will have a divisive impact. But for the reasons we have discussed, there were a group of voters that said, you know what . Everything else sucks pretty much, so lets take this risk. Can i fact check you on one thing . Actually, 120 Million People voted for either clinton or romney, but a little over 5 million voted for another thirdparty candidate. That is true. The vote is about 125 million overall. It is possible, not likely, that this will be the first election since 1948 where fewer people an in the election eight years previous. Think about the amount of population growth that occurs in eight years. That really goes to saras point of people voting with their feet. I think washington, and by that i mean its ecosystem most of us spend our professional time living in, is an echo chamber. Everybody was way too slow to figure out what was going on outside the echo chamber. That goes for a lot of reporters, pundits, and a lot of campaign professionals were frankly looking at the same sets of numbers. Going into Election Nights, you can talk to republicans and democrats who do this for a living and they both said the same thing. Democrats are going to win the senate and Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president. I think there were lessons that we learned through the course of election that the Hillary Clinton campaign in particular completely missed. When we started out, it was going to the jeb bush versus Hillary Clinton. Two giant professional campaigns with 100 million or more, 100 million for the superpac. Everybody figured they knew how to do it, here are the graphics, we will appeal to those groups together and it will be a victory. Jeb bush failed so quickly as i dynastic candidate. He struggled on the stump, even though he did everything in theory that you could ever want in terms of name recognition. Mixedd bag, but still, people knew his name, and he failed. And the clinton team did not seem to process that might matter to them later on. And they were surprised that Bernie Sanders was so strong. And they wrote him off as somebody who was on the fringe. When youre dealing with capitol hill, there is a sense that you have people on the edges that do not matter. Sometimes they hold stuff up, but they are never going to be the people actually running the country. I think the Clinton Campaign treated Bernie Sanders a lot like that. I covered him for four months. I remember feeling like i was marooned on an island. No one seemed to be paying attention. Nobody was covering him. I remember we were looking at the day after the michigan primary, which Bernie Sanders won. Getting on a conference people with everybody at the office. Everybody said we are so surprised by this, we cant believe this happened. I said, well, if you listened to what i was saying yesterday leading up to this, you will not be so surprised. We were not surprised that it happened. I think the Clinton Campaign missed the passion going on. Clearly there is an ideological disconnection between those who vote for Bernie Sanders and donald trump. They are likely to tell you they were on opposite sides. What is driving them is feeling like the system in washington is ignoring them, and people would not even listen. There was no way to fix it. The only way they could say anything to change it would be Something Like to support Bernie Sanders. I think donald trump voters felt the same way. The Clinton Campaign missed it entirely. You see it in John Podestas emails. They were trying to figure out, how is she going to stand on tpp . There was a 12 email chain figuring out where they would put her on this issue. People were rejecting that kind of politics at the time. I remember every time driving to a Hillary Clinton event, we drive through the airport, usually it is a little outside of the city or driving through a rural area, all you see are trump signs. Every clinton event was very small. It was like covering mitt romney in the final days. People cared and were invested in getting donald trump elected. True on the Hillary Clinton side. Benefit of hindsight not having worked in the campaign, it is amazing when you look back at how Hillary Clinton ran her campaign between the end of the primary and election day, how much the notion of the system being broken, how much a message of economic populism that carried Bernie Sanders totally evaporated from her message. It was nowhere in the general election. It showed back up in michigan two days before the election. She started saying hey, working people, i feel your pain, i promise i do. That is a very good point. I was out on the road to some extent. Not as much as my colleagues. But there was a tremendous amount of excitement for trump. I was brought up in the school of political analysis that you have to be careful at rallies. It is a big country. Just because people show up at rallies doesnt mean that that person is going to win. Kasie you can feel a crowd. A good Political Campaign knows how to build a crowd. Right. This was a much different intensity from what Hillary Clinton was dealing with. I was in North Carolina a few days before the election. They were all over the place. Michelle obama was at a rally, and even then, trump did one rally i dont know if you were there. He did a giant rally. Even at that the intensity was much different from the hillary rally. Maybe we have to reevaluate. And i want to come back to this a little later, the kind of analysis we do as political reporters and political strategists. Maybe the conventional types of things we do dont apply as much as we they did. And things are ok for the most part here. In washington, the economy has been insulated here for a wide variety of reasons. There are not as many people feeling this kind of hate. And i met so many people at Bernie Sanders rallies. You look around and say i should , start thinking about how hard it is for people. People working three jobs, making less money, and paying more for their health care. It defies belief. I want to ask our pollsters the gender question. There was a lot of talk about that. What were your final numbers on the gender gap . The exit polls have the gender gap slightly larger than 2012. Clinton won women by 12 points, which is two points larger than obama did. By the way, the exit polls are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. They have problems. But for the moment, they are what we have got. 12 points for clinton among women. 12 points for trump among men. That is a net difference of 24 points. It was 17 points. A larger piece of that is more than voting for trump than more women voting for clinton. What was the turnout for men and women . Again, the only tool we have to know that is the exit poll. The exit poll was 52 to 48. But it is so imperfect what will happen in a couple months from now is we will have voter files that tell you exactly who voted. That will provide a much better analysis of at least the composition of the electorate. The exit polls in 2012 we know overstated to some extent the share of the electorate under the age of 35 years old. In some states overstated the share of the state that was africanamerican. This voter final analysis that will happen later on will be much more reliable and meaningful than exit polls. But i want to share one of my controversial theories that science will prove, that the y chromosome relates to people being lazy. It is one more thing where men and where women they vote, they do their stuff, and men, and the differences get especially. Vote and do their stuff. The difference gets large between men and women by ethnicity and age. Raisingrising for you young men in their 20s, they are just a little drifty compared to women in that same age group. I think as normal, we are going to see the women number go up. I think we have all been called that before, right . Just stepping back again and looking at this amazing year and a half. Were there one or two turning points that really made a difference . I mean, at the end you had the f. B. I. On again off again investigation, trumps tape on the bus where he talked about groping women. Were there turning points . Is that oversimplifying things . Maybe we can start on this end. Kasie putting me on the spot. This may not be your question, but i think one of the things that set this whole thing in motion is what happened at the White House Correspondents dinner with donald trump and barack obama. A lot of this, especially in the beginning, was a drive by donald trump to prove that he could do something that a lot of people thought he could not do and would ridicule him for. Sarah can probably speak better to this because she spent more time focusing on the character traits of donald trump. He seems to be driven by making sure that people taken him seriously. I think voters identify with that. A lot of people that voted for him feel the same way. They feel like People Discount them, dismiss them as deplorables, or pick your word. I think there was a kind of antielitism or whatever it was driving that. I think that is how this entire thing got set in motion. I think it would be helpful in terms of balance how much of this was built in by those strong structural factors, versus campaign events. I think the comey thing helped in one regard. The news as a group, they can cover a story. There is a narrative and a storyline. Switching to the comey thing snapped the entire thing about trumps behavior to women. It just stopped. By the way, he gave him 10 or 11 days to run a coherent campaign where he spoke from a teleprompter and stayed out of the news and ran a competent and i think that that switch made the difference in terms of got in the campaign as opposed to what the dialogue would have been instead. Sunlen serfaty i would argue that started sooner. I think that one, the access Hollywood Tape about donald trump talking about women that way, the fact that he was asked if he actually ever did that to women and then a dozen women came out and said that he made unwanted sexual advances to them, that made a difference. Internal public polling showed donald trump dead in the water, down 10 points, down 12 points, dragging down the senate. There was no recovering from that moment. That is what things were looking like not far from election day. Before the comey thing happened, the obamacare premium announcement came out. That said said so perfectly into the notion that washington is building these systems that are not designed to make your life better. They sell them to you, and they say that we are doing this for you and it will improve your , life, and you find out it is not going to work that way. Your income isnt going up, but your obamacare premium is going up by whatever percent. Donald trump looked at those numbers in every state he went to, and he put on a teleprompter. He said, let me tell you how much obamacare premiums are going up wherever he was. And comey came right on the heels of that and completely changed the narrative of the campaign to questions about Hillary Clinton and questions about the legacy she would carry on as president , rather than the question about donald trump. Kasie hunt and the clinton response to that was to turn their fire on to Jean Jim Comey rather than explain why she was innocent. Think, got toont the point where she was answering questions about her email use that made people feel as though okay, shes right, she , didnt do anything wrong, or two, that they could forgive her for what she did because she was always so defensive about it, and that was right up to the end. Access Hollywood Tape turned out to be a turning point. But much more for kelly ayotte and joe pack in New Hampshire and no data and nevada than donald trump. What is shocking to me in a way, if donald trump kind of behaved himself for five days, everything that happened before those five days was forgiven and forgotten. Regardless of how horrible the thing was. In the primaries we said this was going to be the straw that breaks the camels back. This camel had the strongest u. S. N the history of the [laughter] and hillary was the opposite of that. As short as peoples memories or were about donald trump, they were just as long for Hillary Clinton. But i mean, i know there is an argument in the media that we dont from things too quickly and did not focus on these donald trump issues. It was like dripping from a fire hydrant, there was one every hour it seemed. But you guys were on the air putting these things out constantly in the battleground states, right . You are advertising about trumps remarks on women and one group after another. That did not vanish from the radar screen. It is just that people were paying attention to other things. We spent a lot of money reminding people in different ways. Priorities super priorities usa the super pac for hillary , clinton, reminding people about the Different Things he said about women and did about women in his life. The other kind of point of focus for us had to do with his temperament as commanderinchief, which was truly worrisome to people. Came up organically in focus groups. And then just his general , divisiveness and trump tenor. Wasne of the things that amazing in talking to the donald trump voters, it serves your point how quickly they forget for gave him for things. He really became a vessel for whatever voter issues were. You used to vote as democrat but you were getting ahead or your obamacare premiums are going up, then donald trump became your economic vessel. You found a way to say i dont , agree with things he says about latinos or muslims or about women, but he apologized and he has the right message on , this. We have heard people say that time and time again about whenever their core issue was. Geoff garin kenneth can explain this better than i have in, i can, but there is a phenomenon in social psychology called cognitive dissonance. If people really want to do something, and they really wanted to do something in this case they find a way to do it , and explain it to themselves. It is a powerful force. All eyes point to you now. Trumps candidacy completely changes the race. And what i wonder about is given , the nature of the historical dynamics, it seems certainly plausible that another republican could have won, might reasonably have won, but it would not have been the same constituency. This goes back to is this a , situation where you continue to double down with constituencies that are becoming increasingly smaller, decreasing populations of the electorate but you get more and more of , them . Or more of a position towards the party, or you dont get White Working Class without a College Education as much as trump does, but you do better with latinos, you do better with women overall. In essence, you win, but you win with a different constituency. I think some people would say, that would never be possible. It was only going to be this. You are looking like that would be your nightmare. [laughter] for a democrat that is really troubling. I know i have talked too much but it really is my anxiety about donald trump. The states that made the difference for, in breaking what people thought of as the wall pennsylvania, michigan, and wisconsin. Donald trump is a much better candidate for those states than mitt romney. What connection to some of these like scranton, pennsylvania does mitt romney have . He is more culturally alien, more culturally alien than clinton or barack obama. Kasie he kept saying things that reinforced that. Geoff garin but donald trump was their guy. For change in the complexion of the vote in those three states in particular, donald trump was probably a really good candidate for them to have and all the , republicans have been much more vulnerable to the big blue wall aspect. What does it say about Hillary Clinton or the electorate are about donald trump that donald trump, who lives in a penthouse in manhattan, who grew up with a cushy life, whose father gave him a multimillion dollar loan for his business captured the was able to capture sort of the essence of the workingclass american more than Hillary Clinton, who had an upbringing that looks a lot more similar to those people . The answer is issues matter. ,where i agree with jeff the , Republican Party that existed before tuesday hasnt changed. The republicans every party becomes its president. Donald trump in substantial ways has shifted the orthodoxy of the Republican Party, both on immigration, on the border wall in terms of its priority, on trade, and saying we will be less involved around the world. We will reform medicare. Those are five incredibly powerful differences from the previous republican parties. Is i agreey with jeff those five policy positions, when bonded together, uniquely fit the noncollege white voters across the state in a way that they said it would. To be fair to him in his campaign, they said we are going to do this because no republican has ever said this. These are things we think we should do. And hes going to try and get those things done. And so the donald trump , Republican Party is going to be a very differentlooking vehicle than it has been from reagan and bush eras. Those are unbelievable changes in what it means to be a republican. He has won the election because of this, and the thing about this country that is calibrated, the country is going to have a twoyear and fouryear decision about the direction they think it is going. And the media in the , immediate issues where trump has redefined the orthodoxy of the Republican Party, does that mean that the Freedom Caucus and the members of congress will roll over for him . They have been on the other side of these issues. I think they genuinely felt this for a long time. Do they say, never mind, we have a new president who redefined the party, or are we in for the same kind of stalemate that obama thought . Fought . When everybody is feeling their worst, we had that shift in 2009. Republicans woke up and said wow, the democrats run everything. There is a reason the u. S. Senate, because the constitution is the genius of people in what in terms of what we have done. Take 60 votes. Obama was operating temporarily with 62 votes. Those votes things are not going to happen as radically as quickly as we think if every , vote became a 60 vote. The Republican Party historically has been pretty responsive to its president and in a way i think, and here is the other thing that happened. Geoff mentioned two candidates. Just to feel in the blank, those are republicans who withdrew their endorsement after the access hollywood story. And the point he is making is, those are the two republicans who lost. Mccain who washn on for years withdrew his , endorsement. But kelly ayotte was a senator, but john mccain was a personal brand. In a red state running against a candidate who was not terribly strong. Net connect races. Neck races. Bill mcinturff the point being that in the Republican Party, that it catholic it tells you how much hierarchical the Republican Party is, and they can observe themselves into the congressional leadership. Where does this leave the democrats . Great question. I think that do you want me to speak . [laughter] you know i think there is a , shortterm answer and a longterm answer to that. The shortterm answer is that s is a party that needs donald trump is going to do a lot of things that are harmful for people that democrats people represent, and harmful to the values the democrats hold dear. And so part of it is in the near term how being in the minority of democrats most effectively can stand up against that and rally the country against that. There will be opportunities for democrats to do that. People did not sign up for all including the people who voted for him people did not sign up for all the things that donald trump is going to do as president. More people in our election at the polls said that Hillary Clinton gave them a clear idea of her priorities than donald trump did. And so he is going to do things , that will really test the country and test the depth of his support. That happened to president reagan early on. Then theber back, and longerterm i spoke at the center for American Progress a week before the election, and said there that i was haunted by the brexit election. In some ways, this was our National Identity election in a same way brexit was. But the remaining campaign was a campaign entirely based on fear. So the people that felt that things were working for them, there was nothing about the campaign that was giving people hope. What i said at the meeting, i am haunted that we are in the same position. We are not giving people hope, who need it, who are really looking to us for that. And for the longer term, that is what the Democratic Party needs to figure out. I mean the things happening to , the country are real. The things that make people anxious arent fantasies, they are realities. And so, really the emergence of new voices and new thinking about how do we address those. Looking at polling of the most and least popular institutions we in the media by the way and the press i think media was at the bottom. We were right about putin. [laughter] [indiscernible] so what extent was this notion that trump embodied, as you were saying, he was the vessel for anger and resentment . To what extent was this a repudiation of wall street business, washington, congress . , kasie it was entirely that. 100 that. It is the whole process. Kasie hunt you look at i forget , who was making this point. I apologize, because i should be giving them credit. There was somebody who pointed out at some during election point coverage on tuesday night that both Bernie Sanders campaign and Donald Trumps campaign had enemies. There was an entity that was causing the case that it was making your life harder. For Bernie Sanders, it was wall street. In the case of donald trump, it was fear, the people coming across the wall, muslim immigrants you name it. , those things were absent from Hillary Clintons campaign, and i think for most of the primary challengers of donald trump. There was no acknowledgment that people wanted to be able to say that guy is scaring me over , is screwing me over and i want to fix it. Wase all agree on that, it a repudiation . I want to be a little different spokesperson for what we hear, and listen to people. Our job is to listen to people. We wrote a question in 2014 and said hey, we just survived a Great Recession. How much impact did it have on you and your family . 64 said so we asked, when you say that, what do you mean . And we got i lost my job, i lost , my pension, i lost this. Amid not have a job, but i making half of what i used to make. Page after page in which the lives have been interrupted and not fixed after that horrible economic episode. So we asked again in august two 2016 years later, how much impact did it have on your family . It quote dropped. It dropped to 61 . We read the same stories. , when you talk to people about what you do when , you read 80 pages about how the Great Recession affected your life and what it meant, these are and you said it these are profoundly personal difficult stories. Was 60 of the country, and that is years after we think the recovery has taken place. That kind of economic dislocation, and what that has unleashed is, i think, something that we need to speak to. I dont i am not being difficult with my panelists. I dont want to look at it as being antielitist. I want to look at it as people , are expressing this profound dislocation economically on how they felt and how they want that addressed in their lives. Sara for me antielitism is not quite right. It is frustration with people who built the system and seemed to be using the system to a rich themselves. To enrich themselves. But if the assessment. Stand your ground, you were right the first time. [laughter] you know i would not suggest , that i predicted donald trump. And we did a lot of 2015, research about trust in government. One thing they were two things that we were learning. One thing is the collegeeducated whites, all of america believed that washington works for special interests that can afford to pay for lobbyists. At theworking for them expense of other americans, other, regular americans. The other thing is that there were a lot of americans who felt the economy was not working for them. That and you know there is a , group of people who expected years, eightght years after the crash, they would have been made whole by now. And the fact that they hadnt been made whole and is not just about their incomes, it is about their assets. Their homes are not worth as much. The retirement accounts are not worth as much. The fact that they have not been made whole when other people are making off like bandits. May make other people look like wall street, sort of the center the eye of hurricane. , the combination of those two things of kind of the economy not working for people, and the government not working for people is toxic. ,it really kind of, it was the backdrop. For democrats, barack obama was on the campaign trail saying hey, i saved us from the Great Recession. And there are some people who say, yeah, ok. Clearly this was a bad situation, and he made things to make it better, but a lot of people were not feeling that. Certainly when Hillary Clinton tried to make that same argument she did not say any negative , things about the president for fear of alienating her coalition. But on the other hand, her other voters needed her to Say Something about the fact that the president did not fix it entirely. Maybe did not do a good job. Years of talking to consultants and strategists, americans want to be rich themselves, so they dont mind if people are getting rich in the country as long as it does not pull them down. So when people start to feel someone is getting rich at my expense is that what happened . ,people just received they were being hurt by others in the economy . I worked for some very , very wealthy candidates across my career. They follow two camps, people who were given the money and people who made the money. When i have had, when i worked for candidates that are very wealthy i worked for a mayor of houston who has literally started working when he was eight years old. He was working in stocks, and he is one of these never finished college, dropped out of high school collated into the oil , industry, and was conspicuously wealthy. People said that is ok, he worked for it. He got it. I dont mind that. That is the wealthy candidates where they are given money, where there is resentment. What i would try to convey, which is why i am agreeing with jeff i dont think americans , mind that you worked hard and you found a way to make a lot of money that is ok. , when you have been given the that, or if you believe our entire system is so twisted , that people who already have the money are the ones getting angere money, that breeds and resentment where it is palpable and accountable a powerful force. I was just thinking part of , it is what you have, and where you think you have been and where you think you are going. The polling i have seen suggests that latinos had a very different idea of what is ahead than what is behind than white americans if they had the same amount of money. So to some extent, you have got to ask yourself, why is it there are certain groups they can feel like there is promise in the future where other groups dont. I guess i see from campaigning standpoint how important it is groupntify a particular or individual who is to blame for what most would say is a severely complex problem. That can particularly become a danger if you actually get elected. There is some expectation about addressing that particular individual or that group of people to solve a problem. If the problem does not get solved, where does that leave us . A couple of other quick quick things. For many years now we have had from the census and other things that we are becoming a majority minority country. That is by white people will no 2040, longer become a majority in the United States, roughly around 2030. And then the feeling that the , republicans are on the wrong side of the demographics, that latinos in particular were going for the democrats. That trump was stirring up latinos against the Republican Party himself. And africanamericans were solid democrats for a long time. How did this election strike you as far as race goes . Is there just a quasipermanent divide with minorities . What has happened with that . It is not just now that it is developing. I think it is a central feature of the election. It showed that before we started about how people felt about this exact change, whether it is change for the better. You know white people are very , divided about this. The ones who and it determined peoples votes, or at least predicted peoples votes. It did not determine peoples votes. There is another side of this from the democrats. It is that we work, you know, kind of going into this election saying oh, weve got this big wall, plus we have got demographics. We cant lose with that combination. The world is changing in our collection the electorate will , get younger. Over the long haul, that is definitely true, but it is not good for any given election and was not true for this election. Well, look more than half the , kids being born in the country today and younger kids will be aging in the electorate. This country will be going through an incredibly sharp change. We have according to the u. S. Census the highest amount of people born outside the country since 1880. We have the highest number of people speaking other than english in literally the last 80 years. I believe in the american ideal. I believe america is founded on a principle, and we are a country infinitely stronger because of this incredible influx of new people. But guess what has happened in every wave of immigration in this country . Every wave has led to social tension, dislocation, kind of a battle as we assimilate people. , andthe irish and italians guess what has been a happy outcome over a generation . Our country capacitys to function as a nation. I believe that will happen over time. And were watching the same dislocation that took place with each different time of these immigration waves. And i think there is a right side to history. The right side is no party is going to survive in this country for very long as a white party. If you do not find a way to have some inclusive message and some capacity to motivate people around these divisions, you are not going to survive as a majority party. Can i add one thing quickly . You asked about turning points. I think the emergence of the black lives Matter Movement actually was a turning point, especially around when black people were being killed by police, and when police were being killed by assassins. It sort of came front and center for people and their way of thinking about the world. And it to me donald trump did a , lot of unforgivable things in this category. A lot of them. But the most unforgivable thing he did in the campaign was to rub these racial divisions raw. And to run a campaign that was designed to exploit them for his political benefit. That happened, and it made a difference. He won votes on that basis. But it is an unforgivable thing. He has got i dont think he can , make up for it. But if hes got a job to do as president , that is making up for it is a good one. I think that is a good question for president elect donald trump. I would love to know what is going through his head as we watched people spilling into the streets and cities and protesting. Weve heard from africanamericans, from muslims, from latinos, from young women, who woke up the next morning and cried and were afraid. That is something we have not seen in this country for a long time. You know, we saw a lot of strong feelings when president obama was elected, but this is a different story of sentiment. Republicans will say it was because democrats spent a lot of time casting donald trump as an unacceptable person to be president , but the reality is that donald trump supported stop and frisk. He called for a muslim ban. He said horrible things about women, and you know he did a lot , of things that gave all of these groups of people real reason for fear. But the difference is he is the president elect now, and when you see these people having these reactions, how do you handle that . I think the question is, if he wants to be president for all people, does he understand the amount of work that is going to take . I think though feel free to ask about this in the questions, but the final point i want to make is governing. What is possible here . Are we headed for more stalemate and deadlock . Is anger going to paralyze everything . What can happen . Is there any insight into what can be done . I think it is very smart to focus on infrastructure. I think there is a consensus around that. [speaking simultaneously] know, there is sort of these, but when you get past that the list gets long. , i think for, i think one of the more interesting things is how the Republican Party on capitol hill responds to how donald trump changes the traditional orthodox pillars on which the Republican Party is built. It has happened for decades, the pillars upon which the Republican Party is built on. Mitch mcconnell probably embodies what the Republican Party has been. Now he is going to have to figure out they were on capitol hill today. I encourage you to look at the photo. It is quite illuminating in showing what the Republican Party in washington has been, and what it is becoming. And i think you talk to , republicans, and they have no idea. [laughter] we have seen gridlock before and we were probably see more , gridlock going forward, but it that president obama welcomed into the white house on man who has questioned his birthright to be president. Hillary clinton told people you need to give donald trump a chance to govern. We were on top of the chamber of commerce today with the white house in the background. The white house is still standing. The peaceful transition of power still happening. America is still america. Right. We will see if he gets his twitter account back. [laughter] if he hangs onto lowenergy mitch. What was the relationship between the special equation like questions like legalization of marijuana and assisted suicide with the people coming to the polls, even if they did not like either of the candidates . Did you hear that ok . The question was, we had a lot of initiatives on the ballot, marijuana and assisted suicide. What would that effect turnout . I do a lot of those initiatives, i did the work in arizona, defeated the legalization, the only state where we defeated marijuana. It does change the composition of the electorate. So for example in arizona, we had a higher turnout with 18 and 29yearolds. So, but what happens is a lot of times in a president ial election, the impact of the differential turnout in an initiative is muted because we have such a high level of turnout. You see it much more dramatically in the off years. I dont know jeff does a lot of work, so i am comparing it to people who run campaigns. I dont know of a state where i think the initiative changed the composition so much that it is a different person running for president because of something on the ballot. I dont think it happens, but i dont know a state, i do not think of a state where the elect the electorate results is different for president because of something that was on the ballot. Are any of you troubled by the fact any of you troubled over the last 16 years there have been two candidates who have won the popular vote but not the Electoral College vote . Im sorry. Let me, if i can answer that. , when i talk about the founding genius of the constitution, it was a document that was meant to create legitimacy and a mandate for the president. And so they deliberately and let me defend the Electoral College. It is a passion of mine. I think it is a piece of genius in this regard. They did it so that california and some california and new york and some states, could not elect a president because of votes. They wanted to create a president who governed with some kind of majority. They made up the Electoral College for that purpose. 69269 26o 9269. There were 15 minutes where that was possible. They put in the house of representatives where we go one vote per state. Maine and california get the same vote because they want the president to serve with some majority creating that presidency. So, i believe that has worked to create the capacity for every president to say i have a functional majority that elected me. I do not think the popular vote would do that. And if you talk about New Hampshire and some of these smaller states, i mean New Hampshire god knows, there must , be 300 or 500 counties. Nobody would ever go to some of these states. So i will see if other people are troubled. I believe powerfully that we should not change it. Purposes the process of every president to say that he or she starts with a majority that provides the power to govern in the country. I wonder what you think of that notion of the electoral i mean, there are all kinds of issues with the Electoral College. I tend to be on your side. But im also a pragmatist. So, i think it will get changed when both Political Parties see it in their interests to change it. Which will probably never be at the same time. [laughter] [speaking simultaneously] and the problems associated with it can you imagine this year if you actually had to deal with recount issues . Because the actual popular vote, half a percentage point. You have got to recount everything, literally . I mean real quickly, it is never going to happen because the constitution requires a constitutional amendment that requires 3 4 vote. Ok. Do you think south dakota, north dakota, any small state would ever vote for it . It is never going to be changed not because of what happens here, but because of the process you have to go through to amend it. One of the things we saw i , think the biggest divide, you guys correct me if you think i am wrong, it seems to me the biggest divide in this election was between Rural America and kind of the rest of america. One thing i think you know for , democrats it is very clear, a lot, especially in these blue wall countries countries . States. It was people who used to be part unions or white bluecollar workers who had one job to carry their family. And they went for donald trump because the Democratic Party got completely disconnected with those people and their priorities and what they were going through. And instead, they fell to demographic density in cities. You can see it when you look at the map. It is very dangerous for any Political Party in america to get to the point where they are ignoring the wide swath of land in between. Lets give someone else a chance. Yeah, you had your hand up. Go ahead. So, we know that trump won a lot of solid blue states like wisconsin and michigan. So my question is why did , hillary perform really well in like nevada . Ok great question. You know, part of the theory of building a new Hillary Coalition that would be slightly different from the Obama Coalition was to do really well with hispanic voters. And those voters really matter in nevada. And they turned out at a very high level and at a very high level for her. Some organically, some organized through their labor unions that they along to. But in the states you mentioned, michigan, wisconsin, hispanics represent a much smaller part of the vote. That wasnt compensated that bill put some information together the other day about the lower turnout in some key democratic counties and states like that. So, the composition of the nevada electorate worked very much in her advantage in a way that was not true in those other states. I think one thing to remember, blue states are only blue states until they are not anymore. And red states are only red states until they are not. And voila, what we saw was the beginning of a change in the map of a lot of folks who work a lot of data and new polling, what was going to happen. It just happened faster than we expected in this election. They expected democrats like Hillary Clinton who do better make inroadsoters, better in places like nevada. Be able to make places like arizona competitive or maybe republicans appealing more to white voters and begin to make more inroads in places like wisconsin and michigan. I just dont think anyone expected it to happen this quickly. And with such a break from the data that we were seeing publicly. Go ahead. So, several members of congress, including republicans, have expressed doubts that trump will [indiscernible] i am curious from those of you that spent time on the campaign on the campaign trail what is , the feeling on how his base will respond to some of those goals not being achieved . Do you think the ability to forgive him quickly will extend into his administration . Yes. I do think that i do think that , ability will extend, because when you talk to people, specifically about a lot of these goals, they will say things people have told me, we know he is not going to deport everyone here illegally. We know he is not really going to ban muslims from coming to the u. S. Were angry, and he is filtering that anger. And you need this is of the people have said over and over again. He is a negotiator, and you need a starting point. And he is going to make it feel like this is his starting point in that negotiation. I think one of the things that will be interesting looking on capitol hill is who he works with to get these things done, like you guys pointed out some , of the things that donald trump is talking about are not pillars of republican ideology. So it is possible we see, you know if he wants to be an , effective president , will we it is possible we see him siding with democrats on some issues, siding republicans on other issues. That is something republicans on capitol hill are already raising with me today. They said yeah, we are really interested to know actually whether donald trump is willing to have a conversation with elizabeth warren. You read what Bernie Sanders said after this election. In his words, he is going to use racist, xenophobic misogynist , policies. I have no interest in that, but if he wants to do something that is going to help working and in middle america, then ok. I will work with the guy. Lets go somebody in the back. Lets go with you next. Lets go with the gentleman in the middle. First of all, can you repeat the questions because we are not hearing them . My question is to what extent do , voter i. D. Laws reduce voting times, have any impact on the results of this election . Has any research been done into that yet . The question is, how much do voter i. D. Laws and other voter effortsand suppression i presume have an impact on the election . Anybody . Well we think they have a , substantial impact in North Carolina in reducing the africanamerican vote. You have seen the pictures of the long lines at polling places. That when you set out in a deliberate way to make it harder notpeople to vote, it is shocking that fewer people end up voting. But and, you know courts , mitigated some parts of the most blatantly racial parts of the North Carolina voting law, but not all of them. Not things related to voting hours and access to polling places. And those things matter. They were done with an intent, and the intent was accomplished. Did it determine what happened in the state in the end . That you have a governors election in North Carolina where currently the democrat is ahead by 4000 votes. It was 4000. If it ends up going the other way, it clearly would have mattered. Yeah, ok. Lets go to the gentleman in centerfield back there. You talked a lot about the trump voter and who he is. Who is the clinton voter . I mean, they are slightly more. Who are they . We talked about the trump voter. The question is, who is the clinton voter . Who turned out for her . As you heard, she did better with women. There tended to be more female, they tended to be better educated. A lot better. If you poll the numbers from postgraduates, it is stunning. I have a question. Did anyone in this room vote for donald trump . Raise your hand. One. Two. Anyone else . That is the shy trump effect. You all are Hillary Clinton voters. [speaking simultaneously] i dont vote in elections that i cover. So that, i think you just , answered your own question, because the country is so divided and so, i think it was pew who did the work on whether you had a friend, you knew somebody who voted for donald trump or you knew somebody who voted for Hillary Clinton. Hillary clinton won people who live in cities, won people of color, won people who are well educated. She won the kind of people you you come across in your daily lives every day. And this is a particular kind, and obviously you walk into hispanic community, it is little bit different. Potentially this is, you know so theres a difference there. But i just cannot overstate the degree to which people who voted for Hillary Clinton and who assumed and thought there was no way she could never end up president of the United States differed in kind of their outlook and the people they were talking to and surrounding themselves with than the people who voted for donald trump. It does make me wonder of those democrats that did not stay home, how many of them stayed home because it was unfathomable that donald trump would win. It was unfathomable to the Clinton Campaign that donald trump would win. They were flying on the plane for three days having a party. I think it was a couple weeks couple months before the , election, the latenight shows you cannot imagine a donald Trump Presidency . Did you ask everyone in your yoga class . Did you ask everyone [indiscernible] you know. We live in our own bubbles. Our bubbles do not look like the american electorate at large. That is the danger that this divisiveness and lack of understanding between those two groups. [inaudible] [laughter] [indiscernible] the Childrens Health care plan. Law enforcement, and many think things she did, and yet you barely heard them on her advertising or i think in her speeches. Unemployment went from 10 down to 4. 8 . While most people i think in the rust belt think it is 40 and worse. You know she, if she highlighted , that, i thought she might have done better. But i mean a lot of people in , the rust belt feel the economy in their lives in this negative way, independent of the numbers. There is always controversy about that Unemployment Rate. Underemployment, people do not look for jobs anymore. So a lot of people you are describing, yeah, they Pay Attention to the positive numbers nationally, but a lot of the trump people, that did not reflect them. It must of felt part of this whole elite world does not understand them because it does not reflect their lives. I happen to come from a workingclass background myself. Which is very rare in the editorial meetings in washington, these days, i must say. That is part of the diversity we need in the media. Right. Right. But the, i think a lot of people have not been living those unemployment numbers below 5 . And i think that is a problem that the Hillary Campaign did not address properly. Income has trended down since the end of the recession. So i mean, there is good numbers, and there is not so good numbers. Its not like income has been up five points or something. She did run a number. Her advertising was a pretty good mix of positive and negative ads. And she had some very good positive ads. , the difference between her two minute closing ads and Donald Trumps closing two minute ad was night and day. Almost literally, hers actually was quite hopeful and positive. His was really quite dark in terms of its view of the world. But you know, in terms of her, im interested in what sarah and casey has to say. In terms of her speeches, it is very hard to communicate a positive message in this environment and this media environment, in particular. Do you think that that is true . I think it is true that its hard to convey a positive meaning, but i dont think Hillary Clinton was running a positive campaign. I do not think donald trump was running a positive campaign. And i you know its hard. For herifficult to run on the legacy of barack , obama. And to be out there, the positive things you want to say are the economy is getting better. The Unemployment Rate is 5 . People are not feeling that. Let me we have some people in the balcony. The lights are in my eyes. I cant point to you. You will have to sort it out yourselves. Lets go to the balcony. My question is this, first of all, lets face it, two identical products, one costs 12, one costs 24. I think we would all buy the 12 one no matter where it comes from, if it comes from china or somewhere else. We will always buy the lowerpriced products if all other things are equal. But then my questions are this. , how do you what do you account for the fact that the polls were so wrong, number one . And number two is do you think , it was a good idea for hillary to sort of switch towards the end of the campaign to advertise more on the senate races instead of concentrating more on her campaign as president . Thank you very much. I think we all heard that question. Bill why do you think the polls . E not mcinturff i have a popular point of view on this. , jeff and i will keep our clients because our private polling was correct. And helped direct the campaigns we did. I think what people understand, and let me speak up for nate silver. When nate silver did his final prediction, he said no there is , a 30 donald trump can win. What he said is shes three , points ahead. In these three of the last four elections, the last result has been three points different than the last track. Three points is a blink. And what he said is, and i think he is right, it is in disguise because either it was tied, three points better or the person or one to three points person who was ahead was one to three points better and no one noticed. The reason there was this meltdown is because people said, my gosh, everyone said clinton is going to win. How could trump win . As i said let me give you i , will give you my small example. She is three points ahead. You carry white, noncollege voters by 10 more points and win them by more than Ronald Reagan and that is 3 , 10 more, 3. 4 . And it is tied. And polls, by the way, im sorry, polls are not great at saying, i know for sure that we are going to get lower brand in these areas and there will be higher turnout in these areas. And even by the way, all these analytics. I have made 100,000 phone calls. I do all these predictions, they are not all that great down to one or two point, couple points level. So what i suggesting is there am is, i understand, i also understand, believe me im getting it, i understand all across america, people are saying the polls were all wrong. The polls were all wrong. I just think that if you do this for a living, the internal clients in each campaign were not shocked. As i said, i did not have jeffs poll. But i had a poll in michigan four days out that had trump ahead. My client said, that cannot be right. I said guess what