lucky to have you for this discussion. i want to dive right in. i am really excited to talk to about this. something i am interested in. question for each of you that generally gets at the role of foreign policy in the 2020 election. how much do americans care about foreign policy, and how is that different from past elections that we have had recently, and start in this order if that works for you. >> thank you. so i think how much americans care about foreign policy is one way to look at it, and i think , foreign policy is actually standing out for leadership style, and i think in the end, leadership and character will make a big difference in this election, and foreign policy will play a much more important role, particularly as contrast is drawn about what kind of leader do you want. this is particularly poor into women voters and to suburban voters, college-educated voters, and i think there is a very, very stark contrast. tweets, you erratic have voters to think at one point, donald trump could tweet us into a war, versus someone who has experienced steady, strong, knows how to deal with our allies, knows how to deal is aour enemy, so that strong character contrast, and i will's -- i think that is how you will see it play off. sure. so i think foreign policy as discussed is not a top-tier issue. closelys woven in very to another issue, and that is covid-19. the issue of china has been one that for many elections not ,eally i many voters' radar president trump was talking about that for a long time, and that might be why he was able to stand out in the republican primary four years ago, but we have seen in recent years the unfavorable ratings for china go from, according to the pew research data at the start of trump's presidency, now you have 66% that you have people say they feel unfavorable towards china, and they were trending negative well before covid-19, and it is not exclusively about republicans. 62 percent of democrats as well as 72% of democrats say they feel unsafe regarding china. while i would not say it is a top issue or a top-tier issue, i think it is woven in deeply to economic anxieties, and then with covid-19, china has become a health care issue, in addition to being a security and economic issue, so i think that policy had significant -- the question how to deal with other nations in fighting and controlling this virus has led to having relations become a little bit more critical. this is not a u.s. domestic problem. this is a global problem, and watching how america has and has not succeeded in containing the virus as other countries or in combination with other countries, i think that is on many voters' minds. a little self-conscious. here i am on a panel talking about this from one of the great political scientists of all times, and a reporter, butl somebody has to play the role of someone who has gone to the picnic. i do not think that foreign policy issues directly or indirectly, sadly, i do not think they're going to be very important. biden -- i think this is a referendum up and down on president trump, and so many things are baked into that cake about president trump, and, sadly, america's role in the world, leadership, these are things that ought to be really, really important and i wish were topics in this debate, in this campaign, but really are not. just about donald trump, as a midterm election. they were not only about donald trump. think the policy issues are incredibly important, but i just do not think anything can eclipse whether you like donald trump, whether you love him or loathe him. i do not think any issues really penetrate their other than perhaps the handling or mishandling of the coronavirus. to red ay, somebody had jean this proposition. >> did you want to weigh in? so, thanks, charlie, for the nice words, which i will say your modesty should not be there. the best of the best. having said that, let me parse out a little bit more. i think on a larger scale, charlie is right. this is a referendum on the president. but i also think we are going to have a little bit of a choice here, that it is going to be issues of leadership, maturity, of empathy. that will play out. morepact on for policy indirectly. i think we can look at some other things. this started by talking about china. you can see from the republican convention and the other things that donald trump has said in the past that, in fact, he is trying to skirt around the coronavirus issue, the covid issue, by saying, "i had nothing to do with it. i made america great again. we had the best economy in the history of the world, and then china undermined us," and we will see a push to go after china that could have reverberations, including with some issues of foreign policy, like trade, which i think could make a real difference. because theight, electorate will be looking at whether or not they like trump or do not, but what we can see from both conventions is some farmer saying these tariffs, the way they handled the trade issue have been devastating to me, and some at the republican convention saying, "that god, now we have finally got things in order, and our orders are up, and things are going well." how much those economic issues related to foreign policy matter will be interesting. as anave russia factor in issue, not just because of what we saw especially with the republican convention, the disdain for the russia probe and the implications which came up again and again and again but also, of course, the senate intelligence committee report, which is a pretty devastating takedown of what russia did in 2016 and again in 2020, and if we think about russian interference in the election, that sure seems to me to be a foreign policy issue. finally, let me say it often becomes an issue when it comes to specific stitch wins, so i do not think it is a coincidence that we have a deal just reached with the united arab emirates and israel. it is very much the timing of it tied to an attempt to try to sway votes, and we may see other actions here that will also impinge on our ability to deal with actors abroad, adversaries and others, that are tied to an attempt to sway voters one way or the other. in the larger sense, you know that foreign policy is not the top-tier unless we are in the middle of a war, and, of course, we can talk about afghanistan and both parties struggling over how many troops we keep in the least and what we do there. it will not be the most significant factor. could weigh iny with marginal voters. how itnt to talk about is more a character issue rather than a specific policy issue. what is the mood of the voters? they prefer trump's unpredictable style on the world stage? do they want to lean towards a --e and, who is status quo do they want to lean towards a biden, who is status quo? is it having any impact on voters, whatsoever? >> a really interesting question. first of all, it depends on which voters. same for the republicans. there is a trump base who like his style. people in general tend to see him as pretty patriotic, and you see that reinforced at the republican convention, that this is a guy who loves his country. women are much more troubled by it than men, and this has been true for at least two years, and what is really interesting to me is i think covid was a bit of a shifting point, because what we saw with covid was that -- it was kind of an idiosyncratic, personal style. he is not a politician. we knew what we were getting. we saw him on "the apprentice," and it became a governing style on the tv for your family every day, and that profoundly influenced women. it is an interesting issue, right, because now we have the republicans trying to elevate "proteststy threat, and violence," and the democrats elevating the security threat of having such an erratic leader in the world and that we need our allies. we need to work together. it depends on who you are talking to. but for the vast majority of women and four non-republican or non-trump voters, it definitely matters to them. something they do not like. carol: i wanted to ask norm. has the coronavirus, the pandemic, how has it shifted public opinion on america's role in the world, the changes in terms of the view of multilateralism versus unilateralism and those sorts of things? what is your take on that? norman: remember, this came up with a discussion of the wuhan virus as the china virus, but it who, spilled over to the world health organization, and internationally trying to combat this. it has played out in another way, as well, it is the contrast of how the united states has handled the coronavirus and how other countries, especially our allies, like australia, for example, have handled it and european countries, whom the president has harshly criticized, the european countries, but we know where countries moved very quickly to shut things down and to use masks and testing and contact tracing, this had a different implication. this is going to come up, i think, in another way. one of those areas where we see contention in congress has not yet played out because we have not had this new recovery bill. we will get it coming back to the board in september, the issue of whether we are going to provide some relief for especially the poorer countries around the world. as we move towards a vaccine or a set of vaccines, we know that some of those vaccines are going to be expensive enough that they will only be useful for richer countries. are we going to subsidize other with those respects, our withdrawal from the w ho and the ways in which we have separated ourselves out from other countries, this will play into the election. it is not going to affect large numbers of votes, but will will if wevotes more see a resurgence of the virus as we headed to flu season right at the time of the campaign hot moments in the election. what that will do to turn out. whether people return against trump. one thing we know is in terms of handling covid and our public opinion experts can say more about this, the public as a whole is not real happy with donald trump on this. it is not clear to me it has shaken many of his voters. those who like him and are with him even if they don't think he has done a particularly good job with this. >> on that point, charlie and kristin, how has it changed? particularly in the battleground states? is there any movement over this issue? >> i think we have seen a dramatically different situation than what we were looking at for the first four months of the year. about a month in, starting in april, you started seeing the president's numbers flutter with doubts about his handling of the coronavirus. then we saw the ballot numbers starting to move in june. it is just an up or down about president trump, but it's about culture and identity politics. my wife and i are sequestered on the coast of maine. i am looking over at a dock and empty fish house for our neighborhood lobster men had been until he went out of business this winter because of tariffs with china. i think it is hard to find a farmer, hard to find a lobster man, people adversely -- this was early in the administration. are you worried about tariffs? he said i am really worried about tariffs. the next thing out of his mouth was, but i think every thing the president is doing, what he believes is in the national interest and i support him 100%. i am going -- i can't believe. anybody that stayed with him, that 40% is his base, they are not leaving no matter what. anybody with the capacity for outrage is already outraged. that number is not going to go down below where it is now. the other 60% of the electorate are on the negative side or there are doubts about him getting higher and higher. all these things are kind of basic but not individual issues. think that will have the same impact down ballot? iowau think the farmers in who have been hurt might take it out on joni ernst even though they stick with donald trump because of that tribal identity? me, i thinke asking joni ernst is in deep trouble. i am not sure the farmers. to me it is independent. i refer to the holsters. we saw -- pollsters. we saw an enormous erosion among independents has the coronavirus started rising. town, rural folks like that, this is about identity. this is about he speaks for me. that, iut having said think they will have a horrible night in the senate. i think it will be more independents that are breaking overwhelmingly against not just the president but against republicans down ballot. his base will never leave him. small town rural whites are definitely, and white farmers, definitely are in that base. >> the other thing important here is fierce. when you -- fears. with the groups he has done well with in 2016, the numbers have fallen off since the start of covid are senior citizens. i have studied millennial politics for a decade now. i have been preaching to republicans for a decade they have to give the program or lose young voters. now those millennials are almost 40 years old and they still break for democrats by huge margins. if you look at many poles, senior citizens are voting like millennials. it is wild. it would be hard to suggest that isn't at least in some way do to covid-19, which is disproportionally having a massive negative health effect on senior citizens. comment on the whole china phenomenon. i think it is an identity issue, a foreign policy issue, an economic issue. the president is seen as much stronger and standing up to china. that has a lot of derivative positives for him. strength.draw that it emphasizes put america first. both candidates are talking about putting america first. joe biden has the buy american plan. in the united states so we don't have to rely on china for another crisis. did you see it playing out in local races. you see mick sally trying to -- onsallie attacking kelly china. whichk the china thread, is really a foreign policy issue, it is identity and economic strength. that fred is pulling strong. the other thread is russia where joe biden has the string. an organization launching an ad where they are hitting on where the russians put bounties on our troops. donald trump did nothing and made friends with putin. he saw susan rice making the same attack. there are interesting threads for individual countries are playing a role about whose side are you on and what is your tribe. >> if i can just jump in, what is interesting is china. we hear so much about it. it is not about what should our policy be towards china. what you have got his president trump and joe biden each using china as a cudgel to beat the hell out of the other so it is not a substantive issue. it is a tool. it is a weapon. what should our policy be towards china? biden has a lot of interesting things to say but no one is listening. he doesn't even bother. they are using it as a weapon and not a substantive issue. it is a legitimate issue but that is not what we are hearing. >> i suspect china will be a massive issue in the republican primary of 2024. there is a reason you see josh hawley, tom cotton, everyone and congress he may be even thinking they might possibly may read for to be at in 2024 wants part of the china task force. something your voter may think of on an issue like trade or in terms of covid-19. i do believe this is something the republican base will be a much more long-term animating issue. >> it is so interesting how things have slipped in some ways on china. for a long time democrats were tougher on china than republicans. it was about human rights and it was about trade at a time democrats are more protectionist and republicans were more for free trade. now you don't have anybody basically saying good things about china. it is pretty clear republicans have seized on the issue more and made it more of a force and factor for themselves. it's interesting, especially million people in concentration camps with one of the worst human rights abuses we have seen in decades that the republicans were able to bring a human rights hero from china it was able to escape and achieve asylum here. they are talking at the convention last night, trying to some ways neutralize the human although it is not clear have any votes go with that anyhow. mentionedn, you lawmakers who may run in 2024. i wouldn't ask you about congress generally. -- i wanted to ask about congress generally. without the backing of foreign policy initiatives and really the backing of congress, it can all be very fleeting. president trump basically undid everything president obama tried to do or did do in his second term. the iran deal, the paris climate accord, the tpp stalled, cuba reopening. dead ontisanship foreign policy? when you look at the congressional map, how consequential are some of the house and senate races in terms of shaping foreign policy the next four years? >> it comes down to where foreign policy gets made. the executive will always have the biggest role in that front. the house has a much smaller role than the senate but foreign policy is traditionally something the president drives. i believe there is a reasonable amount of bipartisanship on foreign policy. the area we see republicans the most apt to criticize president trump is on foreign policy issues. withdrawing troops from syria for instance. you had a number of folks that were big fans of president trump on most issues in congress nonetheless coming out to say why are we abandoning our kurdish allies? there are a handful of foreign policy issues where because donald trump so complete the obliterated the mccain-romney consensus, the president bush -mccain-romney consensus, those fractures exist and frankly give republicans more room to agree with democrats on some issues, creating the strange faultlines. the fact we are seeing big swings in foreign policy has everything to do with trump being an unconventional president rather than necessarily a particular write-down of bipartisanship around foreign policy. i would suggest there may be more bipartisanship there on some things that on a host of domestic issues. >> the other thing i would add is the public really wants bipartisanship. particularly senior voters. you are right on the importance of senior voters. we are doing better with senior voters and we have done before 2008. they really want the democrats -- republicans to work on people do not expect any kind if i partisanship from donald trump. even his best friends don't think that is possible. that is a very important point you rail raising -- you are raising. >> it is interesting to see the contrast. this is in some ways a populist takeover of the republican party. it is a reflection of the fact it is far more a trump party than anything else. the criticism has been not just of the obama foreign policy, and even more of the clinton foreign policy. it is of the reagan, first bush, second bush foreign policy. just as much ronald reagan wanted to promote america's influence around the world. he helped create the u.s. institute of peace, the national democratic institute and the national republican institute. a lot of other entities. all of that now is sort of put into a bucket of criticism by the administration. but we also have is most republicans in congress, even when they criticize some elements of the policies, they don't follow up on it in any way. it is not like the senate foreign relations committee held blistering hearings criticizing any of this. they have not held any oversight hearings on any elements of it. the interesting question will be when trump leaves. peoplely, i think, the who are fighting to be his heirs will be led by those who want to continue those policies. the tom cottons and the josh hawleys he will be out there in a very visible way. we will see others, including those who basically before trump went along with the conventional maybe steplicy up and be a little bit more supportive of the nato alliance, more critical of russia, and maybe move in a different direction. how much remains to be seen. right now what we have seen is a takeover of the party from unconventional sources. it did not start with trump. look at pat buchanan with his look at foreign policy which is kind of a populism as well. -- i agree that foreign policy issues is the one area republicans have been willing to substantively step out away from the president a little bit. i would argue that is the only one they do that because the trump base does not care much about foreign policy. that is the only area where they can get away with creating some distance from the president and showing they are not just with him 100%. they feel like that is -- they get a free pass as long as they do not get too critical of the president. what was that? foria -- sanctioning russia the interference in the election. 95-5 vote or 98-2 vote. the president had practically no support. they thought they could get away with it and they did. no harm, no foul. to talk specifically about one policy. there is foreign policy and there is deploying troops overseas. i think norman should afghanistan. president trump promised he would in this war. president obama promised to bring troops home. everyone has struggled with this. it has been going on for decades now. voterch -- where is the sentiment on this right now in terms of bringing home troops, ending the war in afghanistan, and have demographics changed? >> we don't have any recent data on that. i don't know if you do, norm or charlie. engagement.nded people are definitely anti-expanded engagement. i would think that would be even more so now where people think we are out of money. we are the ones hurting. we have to take care of ourselves. i had never even thought of the vaccine point. that is a brilliant point and that will be a tough sell with the public. we have not looked at that. i don't know if you have seen anything. we have not seen anything. >> one thing that comes to mind for me right afghanistan, was it worth it? how does it shape american views of military power abroad? the november election will be the first time that someone who was not alive when 9/11 happened will be able to vote. that is how long we have been in afghanistan. someone born after 9/11 is now an adult and can vote this november. these are conflicts that have been going on for some of these new voters their entire lives. deal ofgreat skepticism from young people that america's projection of power oversees the military force has any potential upside. that does not mean they don't want america to be able to defend itself, but the idea we can promote our values through strength abroad is viewed with a skeptical eye from younger voters. >> they have grown weary and frustrated about iraq and afghanistan. they have this attitude of, to hell with it. it will never fix itself. we have a son that served in combat in afghanistan. david was perfectly willing to go back and combat, just not in afghanistan. it just wasn't worth him losing his friends. it was not worth it. there was no solution. that is the weariness and the withdrawal from the world we are seeing out there. it is a reaction to those two things. if they ever do get in the rearview mirror whether things will be in a position to go back and play our traditional readership roles. they are sort of traumatized by these two places and just want to get the heck out at don't care much about how we get out. >> it is interesting to me when barack obama said he was going to set the deadline for withdrawal of troops, republicans went to devcon one. -- defcon 1. we sought it again at the republican convention. all this talk about how he pulled the troops out. they have not pulled the troops out. we don't know how many are there. there are just as many there now as there were in 2016. that is just a complete reversal of form. there is another place which will have no impact on voters but which is especially striking as well in terms of the party change. the pledge to withdraw troops from germany. great implications for europe and for our relations with russia. that has not penetrated in any way. i have not even seen it mentioned. it is one of the pivotal foreign-policy question but also get that the trump relationship with putin that is off the radar screen and reinforces the notion even when these things are extremely important it is hard to get it to penetrate public attention. >> traditionally one of the presidential debates is devoted more often -- mostly to foreign policy. important butso not really being talked about in a serious way. i think that would be a very feeling debate, i really do. i think we will learn a lot because we are not learning much on a day-to-day basis, that's for sure. >> we will move to some questions from our viewers if that is ok with you guys. interference and misinformation. is, are voters more aware and alert in 2020 do we run the risk of questioning the election outcome as a result? what do you guys make of the disinformation and how it is changing your ability to gauge public opinion? >> you lost me with the tail end of that. tell me if i'm not answering it right, the question you are asking. people are very worried about tampering in the election. they are also very worried and aware of misinformation and disinformation. they see it as both an international problem and a national problem. up -- this is interesting. this is an impact on state and local races. in the last election we actually monitored the bots. mainea, my home state and where charlie is where the top two states in terms of bots and involvement in the senate races. joked and often montana, there are whole villages involved w devoted to montana -- in moldovia devoted to montana. this is something people are quite aware of. they are not very good judges of it. right now they don't hold the platform as responsible as they should. there is a lot of effort from the democrats to get the platform -- for people that hold the platforms more accountable. the last thing i will say is there is nothing like a good politician to invoke misinformation campaigns. we see this is a very bipartisan phenomena. the way these women are treated is unimaginable. sexualized, misinformation, child predator thing which is a thread they are pulling for the republican convention. that is a huge concern for those of us who are really committed to women politicians. >> one thing happening -- i agree with her then she said. are sort ofts traumatized by the results of the 2016 election, but things are so edgy, so hyper partisan now. 2000. remember florida. half of the country was going to be feeling like the election was stolen. the only question was which half. we thought things were partisan then. heck, it's like a candy store now. i think they are pulling these things together and terrified if there is a close election -- i don't think it is close but anyway, if it does get to be close, if it is disputed or disputable, they have got visions of 2000 coming back. i think people -- they don't know what to think but it scarcely hell out of them. >> in 2000, it was one state where you had every election lawyer in america dissent to sift through every ballot in palm beach county. imagine that happening across a dozen states. think about have any states do up or are just spinining robust mailing programs. florida, those ballots get counted quickly. almost a washington, decade they have built up a robust way of doing this. there are other states that are kind of throwing this together ramshackle at the last minute. tonwill see -- i worry a of folks looking if signatures match on this absentee ballot it feeding into a pre-existing idea that the elections are somehow invalid either from the left because of forward interference and voter suppression or from the right because of voter fraud. that makes me greatly concerned for what november 4 looks like. >> we know that donald trump has said multiple times the chinese will send in millions of bogus ballots which has no basis in reality. bringing that issue in a different way, it's a distraction from russia which our intelligence community has said under donald trump is actively trying to interfere in this election. i would add, especially relevant to what might panelists have said, that when the interfere in 2016, it was not just to elect donald trump. it was to ferment divisions that have long been there in american society. they will do that again as well. i am on a couple of taskforces and working hard on many of these issues. the good news is we have had conversations with the top people at almost every social media platforms. that includes facebook. they are very much aware of what the foreign hackers, especially the rockets but not as closely the russians, although some of their allies are helping in this area, arguing. they will do their best but said, thewhat kristin super majority of republicans say they will vote in-person. a super majority of democrats say they will vote by mail. the results will not match the final result. some of the states not is used dealing with mail and some even like new york that are, but new mosthaving one of the incompetent election and ministry since we have ever seen will take many weeks. we know from 70's result they can change -- some of these results they can change dramaticly from election eve to the conclusion. california, it took more than a month the subtle house races. there will be much misinformation about which votes to count. we may well have the president or some of his allies on election eve declaring victory but maybe a third of the ballots have been counted. if we are not prepared to deal with the disinformation coming from abroad, as well as what we will have internally, we will have a mess that will make florida look like a picnic. >> the ironic thing is the president is in a deep hole. right now he is not competitive. president disciplined could climb out of the hole. but not this one. he says and does things that are self-defeating. for example, by trashing vote by becoming more reliant on in-person voting. the thing about that is because of the coronavirus, because of the inability to attract election workers, they will be a lot fewer in-person polling places. byis hurting himself trashing -- discounting the validity and the mind of republicans of that whole process. he really is hurting himself. you noticed last week at the democratic convention where they were saying vote in-person if at all possible. so you arein-person not relying on the postal service. only if you can't do that, then vote by mail so it has lots of time to come in. >> and voting in person, we do not know what it will look like on november 3. we have a question that i am hoping you will be able to weigh in on in terms of what happens in october. things look different in a number of ways, but there is the october surprise that we are all aware of. the question is whether you may not believe foreign policy may be -- it is possible in this volatile world, how could some --oreseen event move forward foreign policy to the forefront? >> it better be a september surprise because the first of october -- you will have a lot of people who have already voted. who cares? i am being facetious. but seriously, it would be interesting. where would be the midpoint on the calendar where half of the votes that ultimately coming will ultimately have been cast? my guess is a big chunk will be done -- the first ballot, north carolina mailed out there alex on september 4 -- their ballots on september 4. there will be a lot of people who will vote as fast as they can because they feel so intensely about this election. >> we know what democrats fear is the so called durham report. attorneyeen a u.s. --he has hadbarr johnple interviews with brennan, all geared toward showing the obama-biden administration manipulated the election to kill trump's chances with the phony russia investigation. they fear that. a more traditional october surprise would either be a treaty, or something that the subject changes for the election. it is entirely possible. we have to keep in mind that up yahu would likeenh to see a surprise. we could have a confrontation with iran. oncould see india, pakistan, the verge of something. we could see something happen with china. there are a lot of things that could happen that could provide a distraction. keep an eye on the southern border, which is another place where i could very easily expect something to happen. it has been a distraction used by donald trump multiple times when he did not like the way things were going. i think we might see -- you made your point. democrats are trying to push for everyone to vote early. vote as soon as you get that ballot. be one of the first to vote against donald trump, which is very motivating to democrats. i think the other surprise is the vaccine and whether it is real or not. thatis the other thing could lend unpredictability to election.ion -- this >> that is a good point. we have seen some of the concerns being raised in politics on that process. we have a question about -- independent voters. thequestion is, we talk all time about independent voters and staunch supporters of a party, what do independent voters care about and what would tilt them one way or another? >> if i could jump in. the trump lovers, you have the trump low there is, and then the in between there's that you could call independent -- the in-betweeners that you could call independents. they do not care anything about politics and most of them will end up not voting. the sliver of people right in the middle -- you are talking about a small group of people, and a lot of that group on the one hand love where the economy was and gave president trump full credit. at the same time, many had reservations, doubts, concerns about his character as a person and as a leader. you take away the strong economy from theseoubts people who tend to be cynical anyway, i think where the president has severely compromised his ability to be trusted by those people above anybody else. i think this is really uphill. that group of independents, they leaned one way or the other -- lean one way or the other. what are the pure independents? 5%, 6%? is an interesting study where they have a panel where they ask the same group of people about their political views repeatedly. askedember of 2018, they who are republicans -- they say that they are independent, but they leaned republican. in september of 2018 and july of this year, 9% of those folks said they would switch to democrats, and 3% said they no longer had a lien. 9% of democrats said that they were now republicans or leaned republican, and another 3% now said they had no lean. why -- that is part of the party conventions we have seen over the last two weeks, i am actually skeptical of how much they are going to swing those independent voters because independent voters are probably upon hour.g hour you may not love the way donald trump tweets, you may not love the way he handles himself, the way he handled covid, but don't you remember why you are republican in the first place? here is mike pence, i think that is where you are seeing parties begin to focus. to make sure people in the margins do not go wobbly in the selection -- in this election. divide --s a growing let's just look at white voters. although hispanic voters are an interesting subcategory that have not gone in the same direction, in the same magnitude as african-americans or asian americans. among white americans, have a huge divide between college-educated whites and noncollege educated whites. lot of those college educated white voters in suburbs voted for him in 2016. and then voted for democrats. a lot of the struggle now is over those voters. i expect in a few numbers, whole lot of those who were republicans who switched or moved into a different category were from that suburban base. and that is why trump is going whichsuburban housewives, isn't quite the right category he should in four. new york times has an obsession and has done a million stories -- all of the suburban voters who do not really like trump. they rebel against his coarseness, and yet, on the other hand, we see them thinking about going back to their original spot and how you can motivate them. many may decide they will not you motivate them or move them back to their original orientation is going to be an interesting phenomenon. , it ispart of biden going to be part of the scranton toking-class roots to get 70/30, 60/40. if hillary clinton had done that, we would have had a different result. minute before we are out of time. >> when we look at suburban voters, look at where they are and where they came from, and the ones that migrated out of the city -- they are very democratic. the ones who used to live in rural areas moved into the suburbs, they are still bringing that small town, rural point of view and they tend to be much more republican. it is an interesting way to look at suburban voters. >> a great point. you have all made many great points. thank you so much. that is unfortunately all the time that we have, thank you. we really appreciate your time. a fascinating discussion, and i am s >> monday morning, a conversation about the 2020 election and the candidate foreign policy agenda, at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, c-span.org or the free c-span radio app. tuesday, treasury secretary steven mnuchin testifies before the house oversight and reform committee on the need for coronavirus relief for children, theers and families, and implementation of stimulus programs from earlier in the year. coverage begins at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span.org, or listen on the c-span radio app. host: joining us is rendon why shirt -- brandon weichert. thank you for being with us on c-span. guest: thank you for having me.

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Australia , Montana , Afghanistan , Paris , France General , France , Iran , Washington , China , Florida , California , Togo , Russia , Pakistan , Germany , Maine , Iraq , India , Israel , Americans , America , Russians , American , Joni Ernst , Joe Biden , Ronald Reagan , Charlie Cook , Brandon Weichert , Mick Sally , Pat Buchanan , Hillary Clinton ,