from their ballots under the 14th amendment, so he gets to stay on the ballot in colorado, where the primary is tomorrow, maine, and illinois can't kick him off either. this decision is significant because the supreme court has never had to rule before on whether or not states have the power to disqualify a candidate, even an insurrectionist. this outcome is not necessarily surprising. the moment most legal experts heard the oral arguments and, specifically the back and forth with the justices, most of them predicted the court wouldn't take the step of barring the republican front runner from the ballot, that they would find a way out, and they did. now, would a different outcome have sent a stronger message that you cannot foment an insurrection and be allowed to run for federal office? yes, it would have. would it be better for the prospects of president biden's reelection if donald trump got kicked off the ballot given the fact that he attempted to overturn the last election? yes, the answer there is obviously yes. the biden team was never banking on trump getting booted. i actually asked biden's deputy campaign manager quinton folks about the ruling earlier today. this is what he said. >> we don't really care. it has not been the way that we have been planning to beat donald trump. our focus since day one of launching this campaign has been to defeat donald trump at the ballot box. everything we have done since the president announced back in april that he was running for reelection is to build an infrastructure and apparatus to do so. >> this is what they, like many of us, expected because of watching those oral arguments and talking to smart legal experts. what was not expected today was that the majority of the court went further than simply settling whether a state lead colorado can take this action. they said power is reserved exclusively for congress. quote, the constitution makes congress rather than the states responsible for enforcing section three against federal officeholders and candidates. by saying congress is the sole authority here, yes, it means that red states will not be able to just kick democrats off the ballot willy-nilly and blue states won't be able to kick republicans off, you would think, but it also means that if we have one body of congress that is the same body as the candidate in question, like we do right now, it seems hard to imagine a scenario where they are going to be barred from the ballot even if they foment an insurrection. that's a lot of power for an already dysfunctional branch of government. at the end of the day, what was most interesting to me, and i will talk to a lot of legal experts on the show, is what the court did not do. donald trump seems to think this was a well crafted decision, his words, not mine. he gave them during a strange midday set of remarks where he bragged about the fact that he won the legal argument this time. here is the thing -- the court did not clear him of engaging in an insurrection. remember, both the colorado district court and colorado supreme court ruled trump did, in fact, engage in insurrection. the state court said his, quote, actions constituted overt, voluntary, and direct participation in the insurrection. a judge in illinois and the secretary of state in maine determined at the same thing. today, by declining to address that issue at all, the supreme court let that stand. they could have said otherwise, but they did not. it's not like trump didn't ask them to. remember, he argued at length that he did not engage in an insurrection, that it was not an insurrection at all, but the court said nothing about that. by saying nothing, i think they said a whole lot. yes, donald trump's name may be on the ballot in colorado and illinois and maine, but no, that name was not cleared of an insurrection today. it's important to remember that. i spent all day wondering what sharon ivel thinks about all of this. she never holds back. she has lots of brilliant thoughts. she's the former president of the naacp legal defense fund. she's now the vernon jordan distinguished professor and civil rights at howard law school. you have said, we've talked about this case before. you have said, quote, section three was enacted for such a time as this and for such a figure as president trump. you have reflected on history, which is so powerful. what was your reaction to the court decision today? >> well, i was not surprised, jim, at the outcome, at the judgment that we had talked about this before as you said at the top of the hour. the court would be looking for an off ramp. i was extremely disappointed in the oral argument, in part because many of the justices seemed unprepared. this was a case in which there were many, many amicus briefs that were filed. there were complicated arguments. this was a case in which we do not have a lot to go on in terms of president because, fortunately, until 2020, we have not experienced a federal insurrection. i expected that the court was going to seek an off ramp. i thought the off-ramp would be kind of what it was, which is that they weren't going to allow one state to remove trump from the ballot. i think what is disturbing is the overreach and i'm going to have to disagree with you a little bit. i hesitate to do so. we are in sync with the green. >> please! you are a legal expert. i will come your disagreement. please! >> i even disagree with other legal experts on this. i am not at all encouraged by the fact that the court didn't say something about whether or not trump engaged in insurrection. it was very clear from the argument that they had no intention of touching it. they had no intention of reviewing the factual premise of the colorado supreme court's decision and they seemed even disdainful of involving themselves in the stickiness of the actual factual question as to whether or not trump had actually participated in an insurrection, but what they do is that they overreached. even though this was a unanimous judgment, i think the takeaway from this opinion today is the brawl that is clearly happening on the supreme court. we have three justices, justice sotomayor, justice kagan, and justice jackson, who seemed to be concurring, but it was a pretty harsh concurrence. this is a case, they said, that cried out for judicial restraint. they used their concurrence to talk about the failure of this court to exercise restraint. jim, the court went beyond what they needed to do not only in terms of president trump, but remember that they also talked about the need for congress to pass legislation. they described precisely what the congressional action has to be. they described the legislation itself. it has to be tailored to section three. i think this really outraged the three justices who wrote that concurrence. this was not a question that had been factually developed or even illegally developed in this case. it wasn't that issue in this case. they reached out to do it. i think it's shocking and important for the three concurring justices to say that they did it in order to insulate, they said, this court and the petitioner, that is president trump, from future controversy. they also said, the three concurring justices, that the decision today insulates all alleged insurrectionists from future challenges to their holding federal office. that is important, jen, because you know there were two -- ten members of congress. one was a representative elect, marjorie taylor greene, who met with trump on december 10th. some of us have kept a running list of members of congress who were involved or believed to have been involved in the plans to overturn the election. trump is not the only fish in this ocean. the supreme court seemed to go further afield not only to protect trump into the future but also to protect others. of course, there is this concurrence from amy coney barrett, the other conservative on the court, who writes a kind of plaintiff very short concurring opinion which demonstrates what she clearly had hoped for was that this court would be unanimous, that the five members would restrain themselves from going further than the three concurring justices wanted to and that they could have spoken with one voice in a way that, as she would describe it, will bring the temperature down. it's clear to me that from her concurrence she was disappointed that the five, other five conservative justices, the five male conservative justices, were somehow unable to exercise the restraint that might have resulted in a true unanimous judgment and opinion in this case. i think this is very revealing to us about what is going on on that court. i think when the historical record is written, when seats are added to the supreme court as they invariably will be, this will be part of the record of what was happening and what even justices on the court were prepared to say is the overreach of the conservatives on this court. this is a decision that we expected as it relates to mr. trump. it is overreach is disturbing as it relates to other insurrectionists and as it relates to the court encroaching on what they believe congress must do, but it's also very revealing about what is going on on this supreme court. it's very contentious. >> when you look at how revealing this is, and please disagree with me anytime, i welcome your viewpoints and your brilliance. when you look at that, because we are all awaiting -- this immunity case, they are not going to start hearing arguments until april. how do you assess or read this ruling today in terms of how they might approach cases related to trump moving forward ? we >> i am actually -- this is why i'm spending so much time parsing the words of the concurring justices because i think they are speaking in moore's code to us. i think they are telling us something. they are telling us something that is very disturbing, which is that -- i, mean when they say it is an attempt to insulate all alleged insurrectionists, that's a pretty loaded thing for fellow justices to say on the court and that the court attempts to insulate itself and the petitioner from a further controversy. i think this idea of reading the tea leaves as though there is any chance that this court is going to rule in a way that does not allow mr. trump to go forward, even the immunity case, they obviously could have decided that that case on an expedited basis as they were asked to do by jack smith. they didn't do so. they could have left intact the court of appeals decision. they didn't do so. they have created a schedule that i think is going to make things very, very difficult. i think the idea that the supreme court is going to be some form of salvation here is not a sound one. we don't have any reason to believe that. i do think that we should be independently concerned as a matter of democracy about what is breaking down on the united states supreme court and that their actions would be cast into this way by their three colleagues who were united in that assessment of what is going on and joined not in how far that concurrence went, but joined in the disappointment and dissatisfaction by amy coney barrett, who also clearly would have preferred that the court not engage in this kind of overreach which would set off this kind of fracture. that means that she knows that there are legitimacy issues as well as americans view what the court is doing. for me, i think that's the biggest take away from this decision today and i think it's independently alarming and we should be paying attention to that as well. >> always read the dissent. that is my shorthand summary. always watch what the court is doing. >> it's a concurrence! it's a concurrence in this case, so you got to read it all. >> you gotta read it all. thank you, sherrilyn ifill. i always appreciate having you on a talking to and hearing your brilliance. thank you for joining me this evening. coming up, the supreme court shows they can move quickly like sherrilyn ifill was just referencing, when they want to. why are they dragging their feet? i'm going to ask conservative attorney george conway who actually says the delay of the d. c. trial could be bad news for donald trump. we're coming back in 60 seconds. ♪ ♪ ♪ it sure does seem like the supreme court can move very quickly when they want to help donald trump. it also seems like they can move very slowly when they want to help donald trump. consider this -- trump asked the supreme court to take up the colorado ballot case on january 3rd. today, just 61 days later, he got a ruling and it was the ruling he wanted. compare that with the court cace in deciding trump's claim of absolute immunity from criminal prosecution way back in mid december when we were just talking about this with sherrilyn ifill. special counsel jack smith asked the supreme court to weigh in on the immunity claim in head of appeals court ruling, -- they refused. the appeals court than ruled, unanimously rejecting trump's claim of immunity. last, week the supreme court said, you know what? we do want to weigh in after all. they scheduled a hearing for the week of april 22nd. that's seven weeks from now. that's four months after jack smith first asked them to take the case, four months to get a hearing on the immunity claim justice compared to over six days to get to today's ruling which keeps trump on the ballot. joining me now is conservative attorney george conway. he's a contributor to the atlantic and co-host of the podcast george conway explains it all. i want to dig into all of that. a lot of us can't figure that out, the timing of the supreme court. we were just talking about the ruling today. you tweeted today, it doesn't even profess to be interpreting the text. >> it doesn't! you know, professor eiffel said that there was a lot of overreach in the majority opinion. i think the problem here is that all nine justices under reached. they simply decided that they were not going to apply the constitution the way you normally apply it, which is you read the text and you try to figure out what it means in the context of history and you apply it. the plain text of the constitution from here says that donald trump is disqualified. so, you know, that was the real problem with today's decision. i don't think that -- i don't make much of the concurring opinions criticism of the majority for having gone too far. at the end of the day, i don't see, i can't see where in the majority opinion it does say that states can't enforce section three of the 14th amendment against federal office holders. the only difference i can see between that holding and what the four concurring justices, the four women, interestingly, said is that they probably would have restricted it to the president and just the president. again, there is just no basis, no textural basis, no historical basis. >> for them not to apply it? >> not to apply it! the only argument that is ever made in any of the opinions as to why you would restrict states from applying the 14th amendment, the plain text of the 14th amendment, the 14th amendment which gives also of other provisions that apply regardless of whether congress says -- whatever congress, including the protection clause which prohibits race discrimination, the fact of the matter is that there is no basis to single out section three as being different from these other provisions. they are just making it up. all the justices were making it up. >> why, though? why? you've studied this court for so long. >> because they were terrified. >> of, what trump, the reaction? >> the reaction! i think that is clear from justice barrett's incurring opinion. she says all of this stuff. she says the quiet part out loud. this is not the time to amplify disagreement with the stridency. the court has settled a politically-charged case in the volatile season of a presidential election, particularly in these circumstances. writing of the court should turn national temperature down, not up. she's terrified, and they all were terrified, including the liberal judges, okay? the only difference that i can see between what the liberal judges said and what the majority says was that they probably would have restricted into the president. if they do, that opinion would have been even worse because it would have looked like you just cherry-picked the president out of a pile to say that the presidency is somehow special. >> there were other insurrectionists. >> there were other insurrectionists. look, the bottom line is they were never, ever going to rule against trump here, and not because it was donald trump, but because of the fear that this court with only a limited amount of political capital these days, and we would disagree on the reasons for that, we agree or disagree. it's a similar. they don't have the political capital to all of a sudden and drop this ruling on the public and say that donald trump can't appear on the ballot. they were terrified. >> why should they have to worry about political capital? they are the highest court in the land. >> they are the highest court in the land, but they are worried about political capital! this is a court which basically, and you are going to disagree with some of what i'm about to say and agree with some of it, that has basically wasted its political capital on things it should have never been involved in. it should have never been involved in abortion, for example. you will disagree on that but i say that it was a mistake to get involved the way they did. even ruth bader ginsburg kind of agrees with me on that. it was a mistake to get out of it after 50 years, after telling hundreds of millions of women that they had this right. they have blown a lot of capital on things that they should not have been concerned with because it's not in the constitution. this provision, section 14, section three of the 14th amendment, actually is in the constitution. it's clear. they didn't have to make anything up to apply that. the only rationale they had for not applying it is to say, oh, well, you will get this patchwork. some states will rule this way. some states will rule that way. some states will use different records. some states will use different procedures. that shouldn't be the courts problem! that should be the insurrectionist problem. this guy, as you point out, the major takeaway from this case is that donald trump remains because there is nothing in any of these opinions that says otherwise. >> what they didn't say! >> adjudicated in insurrectionist, he still that, just as he is already an adjudicated rapist. >> george conway, i love your passion, i love your breakdown and your legal mind. thank you so much for joining me this evening. i appreciate it. coming up, super tuesday, state of the union -- it's a huge week in the presidential race. i have a few thoughts about the freak out over polling at some of the things which deserve way more attention. later, congressman tom suozzi just won a big special election in new york and taught democrats some important lessons, some good takeaways. the congressman will join me for his first msnbc interview since he was sworn in. we are back after a quick break. so, i know we have said this before, but i promise you this week is shaping up to be the biggest one yet for the 2024 presidential race. here's why. tomorrow is super tuesday, when voters in 16 states will cast their ballots. while he won't secure the total number of delegates needed tomorrow, the night will likely end with donald trump taking an insurmountable lead in the nomination process. on thursday, president joe biden gives perhaps his biggest speech of the year in the state of the union, aside from maybe the convention speech. this really feels like that kick off of the general election when voters will begin to decide between joe biden and donald trump for president. at this moment, there are some warning signs for the biden reelection campaign. there have been recent national polls which have donald trump leading, four of them, a couple of numbers deeper down that are more problematic. that's all a challenge for the president and his team, no doubt about it, but let's remember polls are just a snapshot in time. they are about to the moment and a bet on what the electorate will look like. they are worthy of our attention in that respect, but not all of our attention. they solely -- by solely fretting over the polls, we can lose sight of the bigger picture, and that is what is at stake in november. the contrast between two candidates voters will have to choose between, that is what it is about. that contrast is stark. on one hand, voters think joe biden's old. no argument there. the man is 81. for those sweating biden's age and whether he is up to the job, you have a question. what do you think about all of this? >> did you just see maduro? it's unbelievable. oil exploration and production in the united states. the biden border will, you know this, right? we will expel at the warmongering. we are a nation that just recently heard that saudi arabia and russia will -- [inaudible] >> i don't even know what the last one said. you'd rather that guy have access to the nuclear codes? okay, maybe you are upset about what is happening at the southern border. absolutely fair, our country's immigration system is in desperate need of repair, many aspects of it. something needs to be done. something would have been done, by the way, had it not bad for donald trump. when joe biden tried to pass a border security package, negotiated, by the way, by one of the most conservative publicans in the senate, donald trump tanked it. he's not the solution, he's kind of the problem, and he killed that bill, not over policy differences, but so he could continue to campaign on an anti immigrant fear, promising sprawling detainment camps and echoing the language of adolf hitler. >> our country is being poisoned. we are really been poisoned. >> i will not let let him turn the usa into a crime filled, disease ridden, dumping ground. people with terrible, terrible herbal disease that is easily caught, i have to say they are pouring into our country. >> it's all racism and fearmongering, all of it! some money for ineffective law on the side as well. that's it, no real solutions. maybe you are upset about joe biden's handling of israel's war in gaza. i get it. there is no question that more needs to be done to put an end to the humanitarian crisis. it needs to end. would you prefer the guy who instituted a muslim ban? would you prefer the guy who basically gives netanyahu completely free reign and otherwise has said next to nothing about this crisis? seriously, this is about as much as he has said. >> so, you have a war that is going on and you are probably going to have to let this play out. you're probably going to have to let it play out because a lot of people are dying. it should have never started. >> is that the kind of strategic thinking you are looking for in the oval office, in the situation room? okay, maybe it's the economy you are most concerned about. on lots of people's minds, that's understandable. the economy currently has a 3. 7% unemployment rate, 3. 1% inflation with a stock market near record highs. i am asking this sincerely -- can you articulate one thing, just one, that donald trump has done or would do to make the economy better or your life better? okay, while i'm waiting, let's talk about concerns about corruption that you might be basing your choice on. we've heard a lot about corruption. despite relentless accusations from republicans and donald trump in congress, they've come up with nothing, zero, to pin on joe biden. it's a fever dream. it's meant to muddy the waters and distract from donald trump's four criminal indictments, the half a billion dollar ceos for business fraud and sexual assault, and the coup we all watched him attempt in realtime. is this batch of national polls good for joe biden? it is not, not at all, but at this point in the race, i'm not letting him take all of my attention and neither should democrats. joe biden and democrats shouldn't be on their heels right now. they can and should play offense on every single issue i just mentioned, not to mention other important issues like reproductive rights and climate change. the policy is on their side. the politics is on their side. the facts are on their side. congressman tom suozzi just raw won a crucial special election in newark by playing a whole lot of offense. you love to see it. he's the most recent success story for democrats. he joins me after a quick break. if you try vaping to quit smoking, it might feel like progress, but with 3x more nicotine than a pack of cigarettes - vapes increase cravings - trapping you in an endless craving loop. nicorette reduces cravings until they're gone for good. democratic congressman tom suozzi just won a very important special election for george santos, yes, that guy, his seat in new york. in his first speech back in the house floor, he delivered a blunt message about what voters told him during the campaign. >> mister speaker, on the night of my election victory, i promised the people of long island and queens i would deliver a simple message to this chamber. wake up! the people are sick and tired of the finger-pointing and the petty partisan bickering. they want us to work together. enough with the theater and the drama! enough with the hyperbole and histrionics! enough with the shutdowns and put downs! the people are not paying us to make things worse. the people pay us to be in the solutions business. >> joining me now is democratic congressman tom suozzi of new york. congressman, i've been looking forward to talking to you about politics. you are raised in new york. we're going to dig into all of that. i want to start today on the news of the day because the supreme court ruled this morning that only congress, you and your colleagues, can enforce the 14th amendment, barring anyone who engaged in insurrection from holding federal office. your colleague amy raskin, who i know you spent some time with on january 6th, said today he's already working on a bill that could do adjust that. if a bill barring trump from holding office for participating in an insurrection did come up to the floor, would you vote for it? >> well, let me say i love jamie raskin. i respect and admire jamie raskin. anything he crafts, i have to look at it and consider very seriously. the main thing we need to do is win the election. that's what my big focus will be. >> let me just put in another way. i promise we're going to move on to politics. it's so important for people to understand this. you were there on january 6th. people forget this. do you think trump engaged in an insurrection? >> well, i was one of the last people in the chamber that day, and this was not the tourists looking at the capitol. i was there when people -- you know the door the president walks through and they say, ladies and gentlemen, the president of united states of america, for the sake of the union? people were breaking that glass using some carbon fired pistons, pop, pop, pop! we thought those were gunshots. it was terrifying. we didn't know which way to leave the chamber. we were stuck, about 20 of us stuck up in the gallery for an extra 15 minutes while people were outside banging on the doors. i went back to the capital of that night and saw the broken glass, the broken furniture, the canisters of the liquid on the floor for the smoke. it was terrifying. it definitely was an insurrection. it was definitely a riot. whether the president instigated it or not as a legal matter, i'm not going to try to pile on that, i just know the president said a lot of things that made a lot of people angry and got a lot of them excited. >> i want to ask you -- there are so many things i want to ask you about politics. there are so many lessons from your race that i think democrats can apply. instead of running away from the immigration issue, you directly ran into, it literally showing up at your opponents event. it remains front and center as we look ahead to november, as you well know. what should democrats be doing to go on offense on this issue that they are behind nationally and in a lot of states and districts on? >> well, the first thing we need to do is listen to the voters. i mean, the voters are very concerned about the chaos at the border. we cannot ignore -- we are supposed to be representatives. we have to represent the people, which means you have to listen to what the people are saying. people are very upset about the chaos at the border. i'm very progressive when it comes to immigration. my father was an immigrant. he came from italy as a young boy. when i was the mayor, my hometown of glen cove, i started the first day worker shapeup center. anywhere on the east coast of the united states of america back in 1994, it was the federal government. back then, they had failed to address the immigration crisis. it has just gotten worse year after year after year. democrats have to be willing to talk about what the people care about. what we need to lean into is that there is a comprehensive, bipartisan compromise that was initiated in the senate that solves this problem. if we go along with it and the president goes along with it and the republicans and the senate go along with it, who's not going along with it and why? the wall street journal says this is a good compromise. the u.s. chamber of commerce says this is a good compromise. when the border patrol union president, who is a big trumper, said this is a good idea, why are we not even putting it on the floor for a vote? donald trump said, i don't want to give a victory to joe biden. i want to run on of the chaos. that is completely irresponsible and cynical and the worst part of politics. we need to lean into this issue. >> go ahead. >> we need to lean into this issue. we need to lean into this issue and talk about the bipartisan compromise that exists already. we need to take this issue and make it our own, proposed this moderate bipartisan solution. if the republicans finally go along, great, we will move the country forward. if we don't go along, me and the president and everyone else can say, are you just playing politics? are you just trying to weaponize this issue for political purposes? the american people will see right through that. >> in 2022, as you are very familiar, the new york house races swung control of congress, and not in a good way. democratic candidates, i spent some time up there with some candidates, were absolute pummeled, as you know, on immigration, but also on crime. you ran directly into that issue. talk to me about crime and how democrats should be talking about that issue, specifically in new york where there are a lot of competitive races coming up this fall. >> i think whether it's immigration or crime or the cost of living or other issues that are out there related to national security, israel, gaza, ukraine, whatever the issues are that people are talking about, reproductive freedom, whatever the issue people are talking about, we need to talk to the people about what our proposals are. we cannot ignore the issues that people are talking about. as i said earlier, we are supposed to be representatives. we need to represent the people. i forget which president it was years ago that said the best politician is the one that says what the people are already thinking. people are fed up with the finger-pointing and partisan bickering! they want us to work together. we don't need to just pander to our base. we don't need to be bullied by our base. i said it in my swearing in speech. we need to look at the problems, listen to the people, and propose reasonable solutions. >> congressman tom suozzi, that sounds very reasonable. thank you very much for joining me this evening. it was a perfect tee up. coming up next, we have a big exclusive announcement about the nation's largest organization dedicated to electing democratic pro-choice women. we're going to unveil the new president of emily's list live right here when we come back. ele e the four signs of early gum disease. a new toothpaste from parodontax, the gum experts. whoa, how did you defeat them? with a little kung fu strength and by connecting my devices to the most powerful force of all. skadoosh. hah, huh? cool right? amazing. harness the power of xfinity internet and stay connected to the things you love. ah, they'll be like this for hours. hello dad, hello dad, hello da. uh-oh. good bunnies. ahh! if there's one thing i've learned throughout my career, it's that political campaigns are all about very simple, very clear messages. so, here's one for you. donald trump killed roe v. wade and he brags about it. that opened the door to what we saw recently in alabama when a ruling by the state supreme court forced hospitals to pause ivf treatment. if you think this is going to stop there, you are wrong. republicans might be shouting support through for ivf from the rooftops, but the majority of the republican caucus is signed on to a bill which would nationalize the alabama ruling. 145 republicans in congress last week filed an amicus brief asking the supreme court to restrict access to the abortion drug mifepristone. in just a few weeks, the supreme court is going to hear a case on whether that drug should be banned nationwide. they are telling us exactly what they intend to do. in this election, perhaps more than ever before, it will be important for candidates to make that message as clear as they possibly can. that is the goal of organizations like emily's list which is working tirelessly to help elect democratic, pro- choice women to office up and down the ballot. that is important. in 2020, they helped elect nearly 500 candidates to local, state gubernatorial, and federal offices. the stakes have never been higher than they are this year. joining me now is jessica mcclure. she's been the interim president of emily's list since the former president laphonso butler was appointed to the u.s. senate. she has spent her career working to elect democrats for years, one of the smartest and i know. i know a lot of them, and a true political force. we have some very exciting news to announce right now. we can say for the first time that jessica mcclure is the new official president of emily's list. jessica, thank you for joining us tonight. congratulations! how do you feel? >> it's amazing! i am so honored to have been chosen by this board to be its fourth president. it's honestly a real a full circle moment for me because i started my career at emily's list. i was an intern and later a staffer and i got to travel all over the country working for candidates, candidates like congresswoman gwen morris who spent all the time on the ground in milwaukee. it grounded me all this time that i understood the barriers women face when they run for office, what it takes,, especially women of color, what they face when they run for office, and what it takes, what an organization like emily's list can do to get over those barriers and overcome them. it was not just the mission but the ethos of emily's list. it's this idea that we can stand in the gap, take on these really tough fights. i've carried that with me. i've never shied away from a tough fight. that is because of emily's list but also because we get to see the difference that these women make. what does it actually mean when we elect these women to office? so, women like me and many watching would love to see more women in office. what is your goal? what are you trying to achieve this november? >> absolutely. we say every year this is the most important election of our lives. i don't think it takes much convincing for people to believe that this is actually the most important election of our lives we have. so much at stake -- democracy, abortion rights. for us, that is electing, building on the success of emily's list, electing democratic pro-choice women up and down the ticket. that is reelecting kamala harris and the biden harris ticket. that is holding the united states senate, so many emily's list women on the ballot in the senate. is flipping the united states house, securing state legislative majorities, and all of that is important because we know that republicans are going to have this fight at all levels in trying to strip us of our rights. we are going to be doing that. when i zoom out and i think about, okay, that's what's on the ballot this year, and i think about the future of emily's list, what i really love about it is that it has always been about collective power. it's been about how everyone can come together in this community and do what we can and we can really change the dynamics for these women candidates. that's what i'm really excited about. >> that's a huge thing. you have walked me off of the ledge. you know so much about research, politics, polling on this. you're going to help walk our viewers off the ledge. >> i'm here for you. >> there been a lot of polls lately on abortion rights which are surprising, i think, to a lot of people, including me. in a recent cbs poll, only -- nearly half of voters polled say they neither give him credit nor blame him for overturning roe. that is such a key issue. what do you do about that? do you believe those numbers? what do you do about that? >> you said this earlier. these polls are a snapshot in time. it's early for those of us who live and breathe this every day. you know, it's hard to remember. voters are just keying into this. they're not really going to keep an until much later, so that's one thing, but i think the most important thing is that we have to put this in front of voters. donald trump has said on camera that he has taken responsibility for overturning roe v. wade. he has said that he will adopt a national abortion ban. it's on emily's list to make sure that we are taking care of voters every single day between now and election day, showing them the tape, making sure that we are consistently delivering this message. what we have seen over the past few years is that it really works when we do that. >> show them the tape. that's good. we need t-shirts. let me ask you the other piece that i get asked a lot about, and i'm sure you do, is young voters, voters who may not be thrilled at this moment about the top of the ticket. they may be excited about abortion. we've seen that in special elections, surge voters, i know you call them. how many of them are there? can we rely on them for this election? >> well, i will tell you young voters, young women in particular have an opportunity to be a huge difference maker in this election. we saw this in the last election cycle. abortion was on the ballot. young voters turned out more than double digits over the national average of their turnout. we have seen that happen. i would say this works when we do the work. we really have to consistently show voters, young voters in particular, what is at stake in this election cycle. we see that this continues to be a driver. we've seen that in virginia and in ohio. we have really seen it consistently. when we are telling people what is at stake, when we are talking about the fact that republicans are not going to stop at roe v. wade, that they are going to continue to work and take away our freedoms, that they are going to continue to control and decide who gets to make these choices, democrats are going to stand up for restoring our rights and protecting these freedoms. they. >>. cote a. -- you for walking me and others off the ledge. you have a lot on your shoulders. thank you for taking this on. the congratulations on your new role. coming up, a sneak preview of my conversation with my old boss john kerry as he plans to depart the biden administration later this week. he had a lot to say and he did not hold back. we will be right back. . . this week, my old boss john kerry is stepping down from his latest public service role as a special presidential envoy for climate. i sat down with him today for his exit interview. during a conversation, we talked about the importance of fighting back against disinformation, whether in the fight against climate change or in our domestic politics. i want to play part of what he said. it has really stuck with me all day. >> if you lose the truth, as senator he said, you have lost democracy. you have to have truth. we don't have the same arbiters, the same referees that we used to have in our political structure. first of all, politicians are not the best validators anymore in our country. >> because of a distrust? >> because of distrust, because it all seems to sound the same, because people don't seem to see enough progress in different areas they would like to see progress, because there is gridlock after gridlock, budget after budget. people are looking at that and saying it's not working very well. mind you, and i think you know this, in other countries, particularly countries which are not that friendly, this is being exploited. >> some serious food for thought there from someone who ran for president and has seen firsthand the impact of disinformation in authoritarian countries. we're going to air the full exit interview this sunday at 12 eastern. this does it for me tonight. there's a very busy week ahead. be sure to turn in tomorrow night for a big night of super tuesday coverage. rachel maddow, of course, will lead our coverage with steve karnak a breaking down the results at the big board and special coverage begins tomorrow at six pm eastern here on msnbc. speaking of rachel maddow, the rachel maddow show starts right now. >>,. >>,. .

Related Keywords

Wall , Message , Values , Donald Trump , Issue , Justices , Decision , Supreme Court , Washington D C , One , Ballot , 14th Amendment , Ballots , Colorado , Primary , Maine , Illinois , 14 , Experts , Outcome , Power , Candidate , Blue States , Most , Insurrectionist , Oral Arguments , Court Wouldn T , Joe Biden , Insurrection , Reelection , Office , Runner , Step , Prospects , Yes , Republican , Election , Fact , Answer , Deputy Campaign Manager , Biden Team , Way , Planning , Folks , Quinton , Many , Us , Arguments , Campaign , Day One , Infrastructure , Everything , Focus , Ballot Box , Apparatus , District Court , Majority , Action , State Lead , Congress , Section , Constitution , Candidates , Authority , Democrats , Quote , Office Holders , Red States , Willy Nilly , Three , Lot , Question , Body , Won T , Scenario , Government , Show , Branch , Thing , Argument , Words , Midday Set , Remarks , Trump , Actions , State Court , Colorado Supreme Court , Participation , Judge , Secretary Of State , It , Zero , Stand , Length , Trump Didn T Ask Them To , Name , President , Sharon Ivel , Thoughts , Lots , Vernon Jordan Distinguished Professor , Naacp Legal Defense Fund , Case , History , Rights , Court Decision , Reaction , Figure , Howard Law School , Part , Judgment , Ramp , Oral Argument , Top , Jim , Terms , Briefs , 2020 , Overreach , Kind , Off Ramp , Estate , Disagreement , Expert , Green , Bit , Sync , Something , Whether , Didn T , Intention , Premise , Opinion , Brawl , Takeaway , Stickiness , Justice Sotomayor , Concurrence , Concurring , Failure , Justice Jackson , Judicial Restraint , Justice Kagan , Court , Need , Legislation , Restraint , It Wasn T , Order , Insurrectionists , Future Controversy , Petitioner , Holding Federal Office , Members , Marjorie Taylor Greene , Some , Running List , Challenges , Have , Jen , Members Of Congress , Trump On December 10th , Who , Two , Ten , December 10th , 10 , Fish , Plans , Ocean , Amy Coney Barrett , Course , Conservative , Plaintiff , Others , Five , Temperature , Voice , Record , Written , Seats , Mr , Conservatives , Brilliance , Viewpoints , Ruling , Immunity Case , Cases , Hearing Arguments , Attempt , Code , Moore , Idea , Controversy , Chance , Tea Leaves , Things , Basis , Court Of Appeals Decision , Jack Smith , Schedule , Salvation , Form , Democracy , Matter , Sound One , Reason , Colleagues , Cast , Assessment , Issues , Disappointment , Legitimacy , Dissatisfaction , Fracture , Attention , Americans , Dissent , Shorthand Summary , Sherrilyn Ifill , Thank You , Coming Up , Talking , George Conway , Trial , Feet , Delay , Bad News , 60 , Ballot Case , January 3rd , 3 , Claim , Immunity , Prosecution , Cace , 61 , Immunity Claim , Week The Supreme Court , Last , Head , Appeals Court Ruling , Justice , Hearing , First , 22 , Six , April 22nd , Seven , Four , It Doesn T , Contributor , Podcast , Co Host , Timing , Atlantic , Problem , Text , Majority Opinion , Professor , Eiffel , Nine , Context , Opinions , States , Don T See , Criticism , Women , Difference , Holding , Any , Provisions , Clause , Race Discrimination , Protection , Stuff , Writing , Circumstances , Season , Stridency , Judges , Presidency , Pile , Capital , The State Supreme Court , Fear , Bottom Line , Amount , Reasons , Similar , Public , Land , Abortion , Mistake , Example , Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Hundreds , Right , Millions , 50 , Anything , Provision , Rationale , Guy , Shouldn T , Insurrectionist Problem , Records , Patchwork , Procedures , Nothing , Adjudicated , Adjudicated Rapist , Polling , Race , State Of The Union , Breakdown , Mind , Super Tuesday , Passion , Freak , Special Election , Tom Suozzi , New York , Break , Lessons , Msnbc , Interview , Takeaways , Before , Voters , Lead , Number , Delegates , 16 , 2024 , On Thursday , Speech , Convention Speech , Nomination Process , Kick Off , Polls , Leading , Couple , Warning Signs , Biden Reelection Campaign , Numbers , Snapshot , Electorate , Team , Challenge , Respect , Bet , No Doubt , Sight , Fretting , Picture , Contrast , Stake , Oman , Hand , Job , Maduro , 81 , Nation , Production , Warmongering , Oil Exploration , Russia , Saudi Arabia , Biden Border Will , Country , Border , Codes , Inaudible , Border Security Package , Immigration System , Repair , Aspects , Bill , U S Senate , Immigrant , Solution , Policy Differences , Publicans , Crime , Camps , Ground , Language , Promising Sprawling Detainment , Adolf Hitler , Disease Ridden , People , Solutions , Side , Terrible Herbal Disease , Fearmongering , Law , Racism , Money , Terrible , War , Crisis , End , Needs , Handling , Gaza , Israel , Ban , Muslim , Netanyahu , Reign , Economy , Oval Office , Play , Situation Room , Minds , Unemployment Rate , Record Highs , Inflation , Stock Market , 7 , 1 , Corruption , Concerns , Talk , Choice , Life , Accusations , Fever Dream , Waters , Point , Batch , Coup , Democrats Shouldn T , Sexual Assault , Indictments , Dollar Ceos , Business Fraud , Realtime , Heels , A Billion Dollar , A Billion , Politics , Facts , Climate Change , Policy , Offense , Success Story , Progress , Vaping , Smoking , Pack , Nicotine , Cigarettes , Nicorette , Increase Cravings , Cravings , You , Good , Craving Loop , Victory , Floor , House , Seat , George Santos , Mister Speaker , Chamber , Finger , Queens , Long Island , Histrionics , Downs , Theater , Drama , Hyperbole , Shutdowns , Partisan Bickering , Solutions Business , News , Anyone , Amy Raskin , Bill Barring , January 6th , 6 , Jamie Raskin , Tourists , Door , Pop , Glass , Union , Pistons , Sake , Gunshots , Capitol , Ladies And Gentlemen , 20 , Doors , Smoke , Gallery , Liquid , Furniture , Canisters , Riot , 15 , Immigration Issue , Event , Opponents , Center , Chaos , Districts , Immigration , Representatives , Father , Italy , Hometown , Immigration Crisis , Worker , Boy , Mayor , Anywhere , Glen Cove , Shapeup Center , East Coast , 1994 , Compromise , Comprehensive , Go , U S Chamber Of Commerce , Wall Street Journal , Vote , Big Trumper , Border Patrol Union , Everyone , Forward , Purposes , New York House , 2022 , Races , Control , The Cost Of Living , Reproductive Freedom , Ukraine , Proposals , Politician , Bickering , Organization , Base , Problems , Tee Up , Swearing , Exclusive Announcement , Emily S List , Gum Experts , Gum Disease , Signs , Toothpaste , Ele E , Parodontax , Strength , Kung Fu , Force , Internet , Devices , Amazing , Skadoosh , Huh , Hah , Xfinity , Bunnies , Ahh , Hello Dad , Hello Da , Uh Oh , Career , Roe V Wade , Campaigns , Messages , Hospitals , Ivf Treatment , Alabama , Brief , Ivf , Shouting Support , Caucus , Rooftops , Alabama Ruling , 145 , Goal , Drug , Abortion Drug Mifepristone , Access , Organizations , 500 , Jessica Mcclure , Laphonso Butler , Stakes , Offices , State Gubernatorial , Time , Smartest , Congratulations , Board , Circle , Barriers , Staffer , Milwaukee , Congresswoman Gwen Morris , Color , Ethos , Mission , Gap , Fight , Fights , Lives , Watching , Ticket , Abortion Rights , Success , Majorities , Reelecting , Kamala Harris , United States House , Levels , Ledge , Women Candidates , Community , Dynamics , Poll , Viewers , Research , Cbs , Overturning Roe , Camera , Responsibility , Abortion Ban , Front , Piece , Election Day , Care , Tape , T Shirts , Elections , Surge Voters , Particular , Cycle , Opportunity , Maker , Digits , Average , Work , Turnout , Election Cycle , Driver , Virginia , Ohio , Freedoms , Choices , Cote A , John Kerry , Conversation , Role , Shoulders , Administration , Public Service , Exit Interview , Disinformation , Fighting , Climate , Envoy , Him , Importance , Truth , Senator , Referees , Arbiters , Politicians , Validators , Structure , Distrust , Gridlock , Same , Areas , Budget After , Countries , Someone , Food , Thought , Impact , Big Board And Special Coverage , Results , Rachel Maddow , Big Night Of Super Tuesday , Steve Karnak , 12 , Rachel Maddow Show ,