Guests: Tom Daschle, Adam Green, Richard Viguerie, Judson Phillips, Michael Moore, Nicolle Wallace
RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC: Now, it‘s time for THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE
O‘DONNELL.
Good evening, Lawrence.
LAWRENCE O‘DONNELL, HOST: Rachel, you did a great job for someone who got no sleep last night.
MADDOW: Thank you. And you are about to, my friend.
O‘DONNELL: Yes, I‘m going to be faking it.
Thanks, Rachel.
MADDOW: Thanks.
O‘DONNELL: Demopocalypse, Republitastrophe, Demogeddon, Web sites are still busily making up funny names for the Republican takeover of the House as both parties are still trying to figure out why it happened.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(MUSIC)
ANNOUNCER: This is an NBC News special report.
BRIAN WILLIAMS, NBC NEWS ANCHOR: The president of the United States, Barack Obama, woke up to a new challenge.
O‘DONNELL (voice-over): After a wild campaign, Democrats wake up with an election hangover. They know the “what.”
KEITH OLBERMANN, “COUNTDOWN” HOST: The House of Representatives now in Republican control.
JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: Last night, two years of Obama liberalism tossup.
O‘DONNELL: And the “who.”
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And we‘re going to hear any minute now from the GOP leadership in Congress.
O‘DONNELL: But are struggling to answer the “why.”
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We were in such a hurry to get things done that we didn‘t change how things got done.
REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: It was not a process. The president compromised on things he should have fought on.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The White House fought for health care plan that was unpopular.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, the mandate that was clear in the 2008 election was for health care reform. What they didn‘t want was this health care reform.
O‘DONNELL: The president took responsibility for the losses.
OBAMA: I‘m doing a whole lot of reflecting, where we‘re going to have to do a better job.
O‘DONNELL: And the new Senate majority leader?
SEN. HARRY REID (D), NEVADA: We‘ve got to start working together.
We‘ve got to stop the name-calling.
O‘DONNELL: Republicans exalting in victory—
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), MINORITY LEADER: This is a happy day for the three of us.
O‘DONNELL: -- begin with a tone of cooperation—
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), MINORITY LEADER: Last night, the president was kind enough to call me. We discussed working together.
O‘DONNELL: -- which lasted almost a minute.
BOEHNER: The health care bill was enacted by the current Congress will kill jobs in America, and bankrupt our country. Repeal this bill and replace with common sense reform.
O‘DONNELL: Republicans new plan sounds like no plan at all.
MICHAEL STEELE, RNC CHAIRMAN: Do you really think they would come to the table in the heat of a celebratory moment and lay down the very heady policy details?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It‘s not what I expect because you got 14 million people out of work, you have a great number of people who are concerned about this country who say bring it.
STEELE: OK, OK. Calm down.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I will get—
STEELE: We just won the election last night.
O‘DONNELL: But at some point, Republicans will have to dance with the date who brought them, the Tea Party.
MARK MECKLER, TEA PARTY PATRIOTS: Leader Boehner who may or may not depending on what goes on becomes Speaker Boehner, we want him to remember, the American people have spoken loud and clear, and they‘re not in a flexible mood.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
O‘DONNELL: Good evening. From New York, I‘m Lawrence O‘Donnell.
Republicans picked up 60 seats in the House, and six in the Senate so far. We continue to await final results from Senate races in Washington and Alaska. All of which leaves factions inside the Democratic Party competing for control of the post-election conventional wisdom. Did the Democrats lose because they weren‘t liberal enough? Or did the Democrats lose because they were too liberal? Or did the election results have nothing to do with policy nuances and have everything to do with record high unemployment, near collapse of the banking cartel, and partisan gridlock?
The answers to those questions will set the guide posts for the Democratic Party going-forward.
Joining me now are: Former U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, and Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee.
Senator Daschle, it is an honor to have you at the table. We used to sit at tables in the Senate trying to figure out how to go forward. Wooden tables, not these high-tech plastic things.
How do the Democrats go forward from here? And is there a message in this result that says they were either too liberal or not liberal enough?
SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D), FORMER MAJORITY LEADER: Well, Lawrence, I think your characterization as the alternative of that question, which is the economy, the unemployment levels, the frustration people have towards Washington today had everything to do with the way the election turned out.
We were the majority party in both the House and Senate and the White House. They were looking at us to produce the kind of results they wanted. We haven‘t seen a lot of them yet, my view is: we‘ve done a lot more than we gave credit for. And I think over the next couple years, we‘re going to be able to demonstrate that what we did was very good for this country and it will continue to grow as a platform and an agenda for us, as we look forward.
But that‘s what it was. It wasn‘t the nuance question that you posed at the beginning.
O‘DONNELL: The economy more than anything else?
DASCHLE: Absolutely.
O‘DONNELL: The record high numbers—
DASCHLE: No question, unemployment as high as it is. The—
O‘DONNELL: Double what it was in ‘94, when you witnessed this same kind of collapse for the Democrats in the election.
DASCHLE: Exactly. What we don‘t get credit for is, as you‘ve so well articulated, is the fact that it could have been 20 percent. It could have been something much higher.
But a bridge that doesn‘t collapse doesn‘t make news. We saved the bridge from collapsing. We don‘t get credit for that.
But we‘ve got to continue to work, stick with our principles, and try to find common ground.
O‘DONNELL: Adam Green, you worked hard this year to try to push Democratic candidates in a more progressive direction, and try to support and actually support strongly Democratic candidates who went in a fully progressive direction.
Do you have any successes to point to last night?
ADAM GREEN, BOLDPROGRESSIVES.ORG: Well, we‘re very happy that someone like Raul Grijalva, the chairman of the Progressive Caucus, survived a close challenge and won.
But I just want to say something, you know, Senator Daschle is right, I think, that voters were looking to Democrats to lead. And they specifically were looking for them to pass, quote, “Change we can believe in.” But what the reason the Democrats lost was because Democrats did not fight hard enough for popular progressive change, change that would actually inspire former Obama voters to come back out to the polls.
And that‘s why we saw a dramatic decrease in the number of young people that voted yesterday. Obama voters weren‘t out there again.
And I think that, you know, the thing that‘s really important to realize is that on an issue like the public option, an issue that “The New York Times” said in June 2009 had the support of over 80 percent of Democrats, over 70 percent of independents and, at that point, 50 percent of Republican voters—when Democrats failed to really fight for that, well, that‘s the way you lose your base. That‘s the way you lose independents who voted for Obama. And I think we saw the result of that yesterday.
O‘DONNELL: Adam, so, you‘re saying that because the Democrats didn‘t get the public option, liberals and other voters who would vote for Democrats stayed home and decided they would be perfectly happy to see Republicans win an election because the Democrats didn‘t get the public option?
GREEN: I wouldn‘t put it like that. Look, it was one example that I used. The same goes with Wall Street reform. Nothing can be more popular than taking on the big banks, breaking up the big banks, frankly throwing Wall Street executives in jail after what they did. We polled on it, it‘s immensely popular across the political spectrum.
Democrats never fought for that. And I‘m not saying that people stayed home in some kind of protest, what I‘m saying is, as Senator Daschle said, people are in a tough economic time, people live busy lives, and some people just thought, you know what, this is not registering enough on my radar to be inspired to come out to vote. I‘m going to work my two jobs and make dinner for my kids, and they weren‘t feel the “change we can believe in” spirit that they had two years ago.
O‘DONNELL: OK.
GREEN: If Democrats have fought for bold change, things would have been different. And Democrats would have lost a lot less seats last night.
O‘DONNELL: OK. Senator Daschle, I want to look at one of our exit poll results, which says that 56 percent of voters who voted yesterday—
56 percent of them believe that government is doing too much—too much. So, when Adams says they should have done more in banking regulation, when Adam says they should have done more in health care -- 56 percent say government‘s doing too much, 38 percent say government should do more.
So, Adam, as far as I can tell, I‘m going to ask Senator Daschle about this—but as far as I can tell, interpreting this exit poll data, it seems to me, Senator, that the position Adam‘s advocating is supported by 38 percent of the electorate. And how do you win elections with that?
DASCHLE: Well, I think Adam is right in that we didn‘t have the energy level that we had two years ago, Lawrence, and I think that was a factor. We don‘t have the kind of energy level, and if we‘re going to win elections in the future, we‘re going to have to ignite and energize our base and those that we want to have working for us.
But I think—I think a big debate that continues to go on and play itself out, whether regards to health care or the economy, or any one of a number of issues, is: what is the rule of government today? And I think that‘s really what this is talking about. It‘s—we don‘t want as much government in part because they are not convinced that government can provide the solutions.
I think that‘s part of the message of the progressive movement and the Democratic Party. We‘ve got to demonstrate, just as we have over history, that government can play a very vital role, a very important role, a constructive role in solving some of the problems our country is facing today.
O‘DONNELL: Adam, I look at the electorate and the practical form of who actually does show up. So, I‘m not one who sits here and says, oh, here‘s who should have shown up or could have showed up.
The self-identification of the voters who showed up to vote, the ones who actually count, the ones who show up to vote yesterday are 41 percent self-identified as conservative, 39 percent self-identified as moderate, leaving 20 percent self-identifying as you do and as I do as liberals.
How can you win an election based on appealing to 20 percent of the electorate?
GREEN: All right. Well, Lawrence, as much as you know, I really respect you. I think right there, you peddled two false pieces of D.C. conventional wisdom, that just kind of honestly misinforms people who are watching.
Number one is the idea that we only should look at a poll of those who showed up yesterday. If you listen to the point, what I was saying was: progressives have been urging Democrats for the last two years to be bold, to fight the fight on economic populism issues where the public overwhelming agrees with you, like taking on the big banks, taking on the insurance companies.
And if you do, the young people who voted for President Obama will come back to the polls. The Obama voting independents, many of whom didn‘t show up yesterday, while the McCain voting independents did, will come back to the polls. So, it‘s extremely relevant who votes, and it‘s extremely relevant the progressives have been urging Democrats to make sure the people are really inspired to vote.
On the second point, we‘ve done polling on this and honestly, when you ask even the most liberal person, are you a liberal? Nobody says they‘re a liberal. The reason is that Republicans did a very good job of scarring the term “liberal” in the ‘80s and ‘90s.
Most people who support a public option—again, we did the polling -
most people who want real corporate accountability call themselves a moderate. It‘s cool to say you‘re a moderate.
Some people even say they‘re conservative, because they are fiscally responsible.
I think I‘m fiscally responsible. So, I will call myself fiscally conservative me. But those labels are false.
The question is: Where do they stand on the issues? And when Democrats derive an entire political strategy based on a weird label question in a poll—as opposed to looking at the question that poll that shows that over 80 percent of Democrats, over 70 percent of independents, and 50 percent of Republicans supported the public option in June of 200 -- well, that‘s the basis of some of their problems. And that‘s why progressives are urging Democrats: be bolder, fight stronger. That‘s the key to political success.
O‘DONNELL: Senator Daschle, neither party can win an election with members of—with just an electorate of their own party. Again to the exit polls, the voters yesterday identified themselves 38 percent as Democrats, 38 as Republicans. No winning numbers in those kinds of—in that group. Twenty-eight percent independents—the election was won with independents, with people who refused—consciously refused to call themselves Republicans or Democrats.
How do appeal—how do you get the independents in the next election to go for Democrats?
DASCHLE: Well, Lawrence, I think that‘s really the key question, because those independents swing back and forth. In 2008, we had over two-thirds of all the independents and they swung toward us, in part because we had a message, and in part because we have the messenger.
We need to demonstrate leadership. We need to be very clear about what our agenda is going to be. We need to connect once again with that constituency in a way that affects their lives, in a way that‘s relevant to them.
I think we‘ve lost some of that relevance. We‘ve got to get it back.
O‘DONNELL: Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, thanks you very much for joining us.
Adam Green, thank you very much for joining us. I know how hard you worked on some of these campaigns, Adam. I know how tough a night that was for you.
Thank you, both.
GREEN: Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: Coming up: Michael Moore joins me to tell us what he thinks the takeaway from the midterm elections. And Senator-elect Rand Paul is leading a Tea Party wave on Capitol Hill. How will the Tea Party and Republican Party actually get along when it comes to governing? That‘s next on THE LAST WORD.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: There is little time to celebrate for the Republicans because, according to conservative Richard Viguerie, today is day one in the battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. And how is the Tea Party involved in that battle—that‘s next.
And later, my exclusive interview with Michael Moore.
You‘re watching THE LAST WORD on MSNBC.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: One time Republican operative Richard Viguerie told “The New York Times” back in September, “We‘re all on the same page until the polls close November 2nd, then a massive, almost historic battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party begins.”
Well, that battle might as well begin right here, right now.
Joining me now the chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, Richard Viguerie, and returning to THE LAST WORD, Judson Phillips, the founder of Tea Party Nation.
So, Richard, where are the battle lines drawn and who is fighting this battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party?
RICHARD VIGUERIE, CHAIRMAN, CONSERVATIVEHQ.COM: Well, Lawrence, it‘s the—America is the grassroots America. America spoke loud and clear yesterday that they‘re angry. They‘re furious with politicians in Washington.
I think it‘s partly Republicans, but recently, mostly liberals, because of the out of control spending, the high taxes, the bailouts, the stimulus, the takeover of car companies, insurance companies, banks. The government is being run by a ruling class, and maybe it‘s 20 percent, 30 percent of the country, and the rest of the country figures that this ruling class is using and abusing their power to enrich themselves and their friends.
And the Tea Party movement is a result of that use and abuse of power by the ruling class. And it‘s far more, Lawrence, than just Republicans and Democrats, people in politics in Washington, it‘s the establishment in this country. Higher education, lower education, big business, Wall Street, Hollywood, the media, nonprofit community, legal community, all of these people are a raid—the leadership is a raid against the interest of the middle class of America. And we‘re seeing the beginning of a revolution that‘s going to go on for, I think, for decades.
O‘DONNELL: Judson Phillips, let‘s listen to Rand Paul had to say in his victory speech last night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SENATOR-ELECT RAND PAUL ®, KENTUCKY: I have a message. It‘s a message I will carry with me on day one. It‘s a message of fiscal sanity. It‘s a message of limited constitutional government, and balanced budgets.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
OLBERMANN: Judson Phillips, is Rand Paul now in effect the leader of the Tea Party in Congress?
JUDSON PHILLIPS, TEA PARTY NATION: I—well, he‘s not even there yet. He doesn‘t get sworn in until the first part of January.
I don‘t know that he‘s the leader there. He‘s going to be a leader of a new conservative wing that is coming into Congress. That is going to do a lot of the things that he said in his speech.
O‘DONNELL: Do you think Richard Viguerie is right that it is going to take a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party starting now to sort out where the Republican Party goes from here? I mean, for example, will you as Tea Party members be making specific demands on Rand Paul and other Tea Party candidates who have made it to the Congress now?
PHILLIPS: Well, there is no question. There is—as Richard put it, the battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. And I‘d even argue for the future of the Republican Party, because if they don‘t pay attention this time, the Republican Party may get cast into the ash heap of the history.
Now, are we going to be making demands on just Rand Paul or just Marco Rubio? No, we‘re going to be going to all the Republicans, the senators and the congressmen, and we‘re going to be saying, hey, y‘all ran on conservative principles this time, this time, y‘all going to have to live up to your conservative principles, you‘re going to have to get the out of control spending under control. You‘re going to have to reduce spending. You‘re going to have to do something to get this economy going, such as—perhaps a pretty tax cut.
O‘DONNELL: Now, Richard Viguerie, since the Republicans only control one body, do you think the Tea Party is going to be accepting the different kinds of strategic decisions that John Boehner may have to make given that he only controls one body and things he does will not necessarily even be considered by the Senate?
VIGUERIE: Lawrence, let me just add a little footnote to what Judson said there, and that is, that people like Rand Paul, Mike Pence, Jim DeMint, Tom Coburn, Michele Bachmann, these—Mike Lee from Utah, we‘re not concerned about these. These people are going to know the right thing to do.
What we‘re concerned about is these establishment Republicans, people say, well, Richard, how are you going to pressure them? How are you going to keep them true to their promises? And my response, to add on to what you were saying earlier about taking over the Republican Party, I think that‘s what the conservatives need to do, and the Tea Party people, is just replace these people.
We are not a wing of the party, we are the party. And we just need to send more Rand Pauls, Mike Lees up here and Marco Rubios, and we‘ll be fine.
O‘DONNELL: Judson Phillips, you heard Rand Paul last night say that we are enslaved by debts. One of the big votes that‘s going to be facing him in the United States Senate is a vote to increase the debt ceiling, which is now at $14.3 trillion. It is—basically, as you know, the credit card limit for the United States government. They can‘t go over that in debt unless the Congress authorizes the United States to raise it, which is traditionally done whenever we bump up against that debt ceiling as we will in 2011.
Do you want Republicans and Tea Party members to allow an increase in the debt ceiling, or is that something you would want Rand Paul to filibuster? Which he is—which he is empowered to do as one senator?
PHILLIPS: Well, you know, to quote Everett Dixon or to paraphrase him a little bit, a trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon you‘re talking real money. It‘s going to be phenomenally interesting poker game. Is Rand Paul going to do that or not? Should he do it or not?
You know, we keep hearing that if we don‘t increase the debt ceiling, the sky is going to fall. The sky is going to fall. Well, at some point, we keep increasing the debt ceiling, the sky‘s going to fall anyway.
So, is he going to do it? I don‘t know. What he should do is say, well, if I‘m going to vote for the debt ceiling, before I vote for it, we have a plan in place that is going to start reducing this absolutely unsustainable spending.
O‘DONNELL: Would you then go along with letting him do that kind of vote, if there‘s a—what you would consider a plan in place?
PHILLIPS: If there‘s a plan in place to reign in the insane spending, then, yes, that would be a necessity, I wouldn‘t be real happy about it. But, yes, I could live with it.
O‘DONNELL: And if there‘s no plan in place, would you say Rand Paul should filibuster the debt ceiling.
PHILLIPS: I‘ll tell you, it‘s something he should look long and hard at. I don‘t know if we‘re to the point of making a decision on that yet. But it‘s certainly an option that needs to be left on the table.
O‘DONNELL: All right. We‘re going to get you back when we start approaching the limits of the debt ceiling next year.
Richard Viguerie—
PHILLIPS: Please do.
O‘DONNELL: We will.
Richard Viguerie, chairman of the ConservativeHQ.com and Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation—thank you very much, both for joining us.
PHILLIPS: Thank you.
VIGUERIE: My pleasure.
O‘DONNELL: Sarah Palin endorsed dozens of Tea Party candidates in their midterm election fights. What was Palin‘s election night track record? We‘ll talk with Nicolle Wallace who helped run Palin‘s vice presidential campaign.
And President Obama called last night‘s Democratic losses a shellacking.
Michael Moore is here on THE LAST WORD to deliver advice to the Democrats on where to go from here.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Ahead on THE LAST WORD: President Obama says last night‘s election results left him feeling bad.
Up next: an exclusive interview with Michael Moore on what the president and the Democrats need to do to turn things around in 2012.
And the most bizarre campaign season we‘ve ever seen ends with the most bizarre concession speeches we‘ve ever heard—which gives us tonight‘s “Rewrite.”
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: In the spotlight tonight, Democrats faced a harsh reality this morning. Now only in control of the Senate, after losing 60 House seats in the biggest shift in power since 1948. President Obama called it “a shellacking” in his press conference today. And once again, he reached out to Republican leaders.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What yesterday also told us is that no one party will be able to dictate where we go from here, that we must find common ground in order to set—in order to make progress on some uncommonly difficult challenges.
I told John Boehner and Mitch McConnell last night I am very eager to sit down with members of both parties and figure out how we can move forward together.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Wow! He really gets it. He finally understands what voters want him to do, right?
MICHAEL MOORE, DOCUMENTARY FILM MAKER: No.
O‘DONNELL: Work together, go forward together. Come on.
MOORE: Yeah, that sounds good. That‘s why we all like Obama as a human being. He‘s really a good guy.
O‘DONNELL: Good guy.
MOORE: Really good guy.
O‘DONNELL: He‘s very well meaning.
MOORE: He‘s very well meaning.
O‘DONNELL: Generous of spirit. Gentle.
(CROSS TALK)
MOORE: Gentle with his enemies.
O‘DONNELL: He sort of thought they were enemies, but he realizes they‘re really just opponents.
MOORE: Yes, here‘s what he doesn‘t get: when your opponent states clearly that our number one job in the next two years is to make sure you don‘t have a second term—our number one job is to defeat you and to embarrass you, you don‘t respond with kumbaya, let‘s hold hands. What part of what they‘re saying to him doesn‘t he get?
O‘DONNELL: You know what your opponent sounds like when he says that?
An enemy. Doesn‘t he?
MOORE: Yeah, exactly. And what he sounds like today is that he‘s soft, he‘s weak, he doesn‘t have the courage of his convictions. You know, Americans are not ideologues. They don‘t see themselves—they don‘t wake up in the morning and say, I‘m a Democrat, I‘m a Republican, I‘m a liberal, I‘m a conservative. They‘re not wired that way.
They really—what they like is they like somebody who‘s strong and tough and smart and is going to get the job done. That‘s what they like. So that‘s why they‘ll switch from election to election, from—because they like that—Reagan just seemed to have some purpose do him.
O‘DONNELL: Remember what he said—he sounded kind of tough after his election, when he said to Republicans at a certain point, hey, elections matter, I won.
MOORE: Yeah.
O‘DONNELL: What is this—if elections mean something, what does this election mean? We‘ve ended up with a Republican House. We still have our Democratic president. And we have a Democratic Senate. How do you—what does this one mean?
MOORE: It really doesn‘t mean a whole lot of anything, because, as I heard E.J. Dionne from “Washington Post” said on one of the earlier shows tonight, this is a whole different election crowd. First of all, he lost young people. He completely—he built up this whole movement of young people; 23 million young people voted for him; 53 percent of the eligible youth vote voted for him in ‘08. That was a record for young people, 23 million.
Yesterday, nine million—nine million. That 14 million was pretty much the difference. If Democrats had had that yesterday—but a lot of young people stayed home. That‘s because he dismantled the entire organization, a mailing list of nearly 14 million people, texting them, that whole organization. What if he had spent all this time forming high school Democratic clubs or college groups during the two years? What if they had just appointed somebody to get down there in the grassroots level, to keep young people motivated, excited and involved, and give them something to be excited about?
And he didn‘t do that, and so they stayed home. He doesn‘t under—
the thing he doesn‘t understand is that they are going to go after him
relentlessly. And they‘re going to call him a socialist or a Kenyan or a
tribesman. And if he responds weakly, like a weakling, you know, he‘s not
they won‘t be calling him Mr. President any more. He‘s going to be unemployed in 2012.
I got to say, I think honestly, you know, if you want to just look into the crystal ball for a second about 2012, if the Republicans—you can see what‘s going on. They‘re going to have their own civil war.
O‘DONNELL: Tried to start it right here.
MOORE: Exactly right, right. I think you have someone coming on shortly here. But they—if they nominate one of their old traditional, you know, stuffy, Mitt Romney types as their candidate, the Tea Party‘s not going to settle for that. And they‘re going to—you‘re going to have a third party candidate in a Sarah Palin or Rand Paul or whoever else it could be.
O‘DONNELL: Or a bored billionaire like we saw in California.
MOORE: Or that, right. And that‘s probably Obama‘s best chance of getting a second term, because they‘re going to split the vote. But—and this is the message that Obama and the Democrats need to hear. If they don‘t get some gumption in them, if they don‘t start having the courage of their convictions, if they don‘t end this war, if they don‘t put the clamp down on Wall Street, if we have another crash in these next two years because they didn‘t do the job to stop these criminals on Wall Street, if they actually expand the war, if they do anything like that, I can guarantee you—I‘m not saying that I‘m part of this, but I can guarantee you there will be a Nader-esque challenge from the left. I don‘t mean in the primaries.
(CROSS TALK)
O‘DONNELL: -- came from the sense that there wasn‘t an important enough distinction between Democrats and Republicans as we ended the ‘90s.
MOORE: Right. So trust me that there‘s enough upset, out of work, working class people out there who are just going to say, to hell with both of them. Yet, they have liberal, working class principles, so they‘re not going to vote for the Republican. There‘s going to be a challenge on the left.
So we have a potential for one of the few times in our history of having four candidates on the ballot next time. And if that—if that happens, that could split any which way. Someone—a liberal candidate running against Obama could actually become president with 30 percent of the vote, and that‘s how—
O‘DONNELL: Bill Clinton—
MOORE: That‘s how Lincoln got elected, with 39 percent of the vote, because there were four candidates on the ballot. Harry Truman.
O‘DONNELL: Bill Clinton, 43 percent of the vote in a three-way race. By the way, Christine O‘Donnell 40 percent of the vote in Delaware. Bill Clinton, 43 percent in the United States. What‘s going on in Delaware? That‘s 40 percent strange—
MOORE: Well, I think what‘s going on—first of all, last night,
what‘s going on is that I don‘t think she‘s a very good witch because she -
or Coons is a really great warlock. Like one of those two.
O‘DONNELL: Back to turnout. And there‘s a Hollywood component here.
MOORE: Yeah.
O‘DONNELL: My feeling about this turnout thing—we heard Adam Green talking about they didn‘t show up for these midterms because the youth vote was disappointed. I think this is movie star stuff. I think what you get in presidential election is a bigger turnout all the time, because you get to tell people, go out and vote for your movie star, your Republican movie very star, your Democratic movie star.
Obama was the great movie star of all recent campaigns. And so what you see on midterms is, we‘re trying to open a movie without a movie star, which you‘ve done. So Michael Moore, I‘m looking at you to tell us, how do you open a movie without a movie star. How do you get them to the polls when it‘s not—when there‘s no movie star in the midterms, and they have to vote for a House member some of them have never heard of?
MOORE: I think it‘s actually quite easy. I think you go out there like Jimmy Stewart in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” You go out there as a real person and you fight. You have some leadership. See, Obama was that way when he ran. Then he became president and he stopped being a leader and he became an insider. He tried to work it all out and compromise and see what we can do and never went to the base.
I don‘t know about you, but I was on that list. I was getting texts every other day, right. I got no texts during these—until just recently to please go out and vote. Where have you been? Why haven‘t you done that? He‘s got to come out of the gate now.
I‘ll tell you one way he can do this, actually. Right now, I think there‘s something like 420 bills that the House has passed during the session, that the Senate has refused to take up, 420 bills just sitting there for the Senate to take up. There‘s a lame duck session. They should just start passing some of these House bills right now that are already passed in the House, send them to the Senate, and have the Senate pass them.
If the Republicans threaten to filibuster, let them filibuster, because here‘s what some of those bills are, the Elder Abuse Victims Act, to help violence against old people, the Child Nutrition Act.
O‘DONNELL: I‘m in favor of that. I want children to have nutrition.
What‘s wrong with me?
MOORE: And if the Republicans in December want to filibuster that, that they‘re against child nutrition or abuse—stopping abuse against the elderly, let them filibuster. Start right now. Is Obama watching this? Really. I mean, start right now. Fire that first shot across the bow. Show the American people that you stand for something. That‘s why they didn‘t go for the Democrats this time.
O‘DONNELL: Talk to Obama. He‘s out there.
MOORE: We know for sure? President Obama, you‘re such a good guy.
We all were behind you. But you gotta get it—you gotta get it in you. I‘m trying not to swear, actually. I just—I want to say what a lot people in Michigan and the Midwest and the people who are—they‘re in fear of losing their homes right now. They‘ve lost their jobs. I bet you if we just polled the people here on this floor, how many of you think you‘re going to be working—would you be absolutely sure you‘ll be working a year from now.
O‘DONNELL: Well, actually, these ratings are very good. I think they‘re OK.
MOORE: I‘m sorry. I was referring to “THE CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOW” people. Seriously, this is—people have this incredible anxiety right now, the average American.
O‘DONNELL: Three in ten, in the exit polls, say someone in their household lost their job?
MOORE: That‘s right. That‘s who voted. And still, when asked in terms of who did not—not the 38 percent of what you identify with, but who do you think can get the job done better, the Democrats still yesterday in the exit polls came out a little bit ahead of the Republicans. So there‘s not a huge visceral hatred of Democrats here. It‘s just that the so-called leadership, all those Blue Dog Democrats -- 47 percent of the Blue Dog, conservative Democrats lost yesterday.
You know how many of the progressive caucus—of the progressive
congressmen lost yesterday in the election? One percent; 99 percent got
re-elected of progressives. It‘s very similar what happened with Gingrich
when he took over in ‘94. These two professors from Manchester College in Indiana did this study.
O‘DONNELL: The control room is now panicked. You‘re going to a study. We have seconds left.
MOORE: I‘ll do this in seven seconds soundbytes.
O‘DONNELL: OK.
MOORE: They found out that those Democrats that stay true to their position, stay true to their liberal position, were the ones who got re-elected in ‘94. The ones who got bounced were the ones who tried to go to the right. If you try to go to the right or the center, President Obama or members of Congress, you will lose. Because in the next election, when people—if they want a conservative, who are they going to vote for? Are they going to vote for the real deal, the Republican, or are they going to vote for the fake Corinthian leather?
O‘DONNELL: Or the fake conservative Mitt Romney.
MOORE: State your position; 99 percent of the progressives were re-elected yesterday.
MOORE: -- a series regular her on THE LAST WORD, the man who needs no introduction and doesn‘t get one. MichaelMoore.com. Thank you very much for joining us tonight, Michael.
Sarah Palin wasn‘t on the ballot last night, but she endorsed dozen of candidates across the country. We‘ll get the Palin 2010 scorecard. And Christine O‘Donnell lost last night, but you might not have been able to tell by her concession speech. The former witchcraft dabbler makes tonight‘s Rewrite.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Time for tonight‘s Rewrite. Last night, we learned that several Tea Party candidates seemed to have no idea what the word concession actually means, as in concession speech. It‘s a fairly straightforward ritual; thank your supporters, don‘t mention the big money supporters by name; don‘t forget to thank the staff by name, if you can remember any of their names; hug the spouse and kids, if you have a spouse and/or kids.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LINDA MCMAHON, DEFEATED CANDIDATE FOR SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT: This
is our fabulous team back here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: OK. Inviting the family on stage is not mandatory, especially if half of them are steroid crazed members of World Wrestling Entertainment, one of whom has been depicted on TV forcing a woman to bark on all fours like a dog. Now, tell everyone we fought the good fight. Let‘s see how Christine O‘Donnell did.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRISTINE O‘DONNELL, DEFEATED CANDIDATE FOR SENATE IN DELAWARE: I
cannot thank you enough.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: So far so good.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
C. O‘DONNELL: We worked hard. We had an incredible victory. Be encouraged. We have won.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: OK, no. You have to actually win to say we have won. Now, mention that you just got off the phone with your opponent and you had a good conversation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
C. O‘DONNELL: And I asked him if he would talk to you, and if he would take up my promise to, in this lame duck session, fight to stop the death tax from being reinstated this January 1st.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: OK, when you lose, you lose. And it‘s not just you who loses, your ideas lose too. Your opponent, now known as the winner, will take office and push his ideas. That‘s what he promised the voters. You can‘t ask him to violate the promise he made to the voters during the campaign and go do the things that you, the loser, would do if you had been elected. Let‘s see how they do this in the wild west?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHARRON ANGLE, DEFEATED CANDIDATE FOR SENATE IN NEVADA: I want to tell you something else that was incredible about this race. And that is that we were able to inspire not only Nevadans, but a country. Think this: in the last quarter, we raised 14.3 million dollars; 80 percent of that came from out of our state. That means that America was wanting—was desperate, was anxious to help us, to help us here in Nevada.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: OK. Bragging about massive amounts of cash coming into the campaign from outside the state is just not done. It‘s usually denied even when it‘s true. The conventional wisdom, for what it‘s worth, says that outside money makes people inside the state uncomfortable. So uncomfortable they might actually vote against you, which is actually why Sharron Angle found herself discussing the outside money in a concession speech.
Now, what‘s the worst possible thing you could do in a concession speech? A, use an orange baseball bat as a prop. B, threaten your opponent with bodily harm. C, all of the above.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CARL PALADINO, DEFEATED CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK: I have a message for Andrew Cuomo, the next governor of New York. I‘ve always said my baseball bat is a metaphor for the people who want to take their government back. As our next governor, you can grab this handle and bring the people with you to Albany. Or you can leave it untouched and run the risk of having it wielded against you. Because make no mistake, you have not heard the last of Carl Paladino.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: When you‘re caught on camera during a campaign doing this
--
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PALADINO: You‘re his stalking horse right there. You‘re his stalking horse. You‘re his bird dog. You send another goon to my daughter‘s house and I‘ll take you out, buddy.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You‘re going to take me out? How are you going to do that?
PALADINO: Watch.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: So, as I was saying, when you get caught on camera doing that during a campaign, the only campaign promises people are going to believe are your violent ones.
We saw the model for how to do this last night in Wisconsin. The perfect concession speech always makes you wish the loser had won. This one was perfect.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D), WISCONSIN: My friends, the people of Wisconsin have spoken, and I respect their decision. I‘ve called Ron Johnson and congratulated him and wished him well as our senator. And I also offered my help and the help of my staff in any transition.
I‘ve enjoyed working with you, and feel that we did many good things together. And I thank Wisconsin for this great privilege.
So it‘s on to the next fight. It‘s on to the next battle. It‘s on to 2012.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Her name comes at the end of this list: Henry Cabot Lodge, William Miller, Edmund Muskie, Sargent Shriver, Bob Dole, Walter Mondale, Geraldine Ferraro, Lloyd Benson, Dan Quayle, Jack Kemp, Joe Lieberman and John Edwards. The most recent vice presidential candidate to lose, then never become president of the United States, is, of course, Sarah Palin. She endorsed 59 candidates this year. In the Senate, six of her 11 endorsements won. The one undecided is Alaska, where Joe Miller will probably lose to Senator Murkowski.
In the House, she endorsed 40 candidates. About half will win. Palin might go eight for eight with her governor picks, but Tom Emmer would have to win in Minnesota. He trails by just under 9,000 votes.
To become president, Sarah Palin would have to overcome the responsibility of losing the Senate for Republicans by endorsing Christine O‘Donnell in the primary, thereby guaranteeing the Democrats would hold the Delaware Senate seat.
Joining me now, someone who‘s worked closely with Sarah Palin, senior adviser to the 2008 McCain/Palin campaign, Nicolle Wallace. Also, the author of “New York Times” current bestseller, “18 Acres” a novel set in the White House, which I would be reading now if you weren‘t sitting right beside me.
Nicolle, let‘s get right to it. I don‘t think Palin‘s running. I think she‘s doing the Colin Powell thing, which is tease on the book tour world, where Colin Powell drew out that tease of running as long as he possibly could. The second she says she‘s not running, all the interest turns away. Can she live? Can she breathe when we turn the cameras away from her?
NICOLLE WALLACE, AUTHOR, “EIGHTEEN ACRES”: I don‘t know. And, you know, having been in the room for her political birth really, I guess, you know, and her entry on to the national political stage, it was traumatic for everyone involved, including her. So I‘m not sure that she would willingly subject herself to real scrutiny again.
And I think—but every time we count her out, she exceeds expectations and the dead fish flopping on the street.
O‘DONNELL: She has never exceeded my expectations. OK.
WALLACE: For participation and, you know, activity.
O‘DONNELL: Attention getting capacity.
WALLACE: Yes.
O‘DONNELL: Nothing like it.
WALLACE: She has three things that money can‘t buy. And I think that probably drives Mitt Romney wild. She‘s riveting. Let‘s face it, whether you love her or hate her, it‘s really hard to switch before she opens her mouth. You kind of want to hear what she is going to say.
She demands more media attention than anyone, I think, including Barack Obama. And she has this ability to create—she‘s in the business of crisis creation. Everywhere she goes, there‘s a melodrama.
O‘DONNELL: Can she go into Iowa and win? Can she go into any of those states and win in a real fought primary?
WALLACE: I think anything is possible with her. I think there are these political laws and these norms, and they all seem to fall down when she gets on the picture.
O‘DONNELL: Your novel is about a woman president.
WALLACE: Yes.
O‘DONNELL: And you drew inspiration from the governor of Alaska?
WALLACE: There were things about some of the indignities that I thought she and Hillary Clinton both suffered in 2008, this kind of double standard that they had to be smart and soft, yet tough. These are analyses that we never make about men. We saw it in this cycle. We saw three of the big power women on the Republican side go down, Carly Fiorina, Meg Whitman, and Linda McMahon. Linda McMahon was, by the way, my favorite of all three of them.
O‘DONNELL: Spent more per vote than anybody.
WALLACE: Spent more per vote. They ran in really tough states. So let‘s give them credit for running in really tough states for Republicans. We still don‘t process women candidates the same way we process male candidates.
O‘DONNELL: But you treat them fairly in “18 Acres.”
WALLACE: I try.
O‘DONNELL: Nicolle Wallace, her recent book is “18 Acres.” Thanks for your time tonight, Nicolle. You can have THE LAST WORD online at our blog, TheLastWord.MSNBC.com. And You can follow my Tweets @Lawrence. That‘s tonight‘s LAST WORD. “COUNTDOWN” is up next.
END
Copyright 2010 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>