IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

'Up with Steve Kornacki' for Saturday, October 5th, 2013

Read the transcript to the Saturday show

October 5, 2013
Guest: Victoria Defrancesco Soto, Rep. Jerry Nadler, Jonathan Martin,
Jackie Kucinich, McKay Coppins, Drew Cline, David Dinkins

STEVE KORNACKI, MSNBC ANCHOR: Five days into the government shutdown, the
Republicans looking for a way out.



KORNACKI: At the start of this Saturday morning, we find ourselves on the
hunt for answers. It`s now officially day five of the federal government
shutdown. We`ll examine the forces that brought the House to a deadlock.
By the way, how are they going to get out of it?

Also, today, it wasn`t long ago that Cory Booker was looking like a sure
thing to be the next U.S. senator from New Jersey. That might not be the
case anymore. It`s a must-win race for Democrats. Can they still count on
winning it?

Speaking of Senate race, does Scott Brown plan on running for the Senate in
New Hampshire? Does he plan on telling us? A blistering editorial in New
Hampshire`s biggest paper this week told brown to put up or shut up. We`ll
talk with the man who wrote it.

There are also democrats who have bigger, much bigger dreams for the woman
who beat Scott Brown in Massachusetts last year. What does the future hold
for Senator Elizabeth Warren? More importantly, is a future she even

Plus, the first named storm of the 2013 hurricane season to hit the United
States is bearing down on the Gulf Coast. We actually want to begin with a
brief update on that from MSNBC meteorologist, Bill Karins. Good morning,

BILL KARINS, MSNBC METEOROLOGIST: Good morning to you, Steve. And you
know, the least thing we needed was a big storm coming on shore, that the
government would have to send FEMA and get everyone together during the
shutdown. It looks like we`ve avoided that. Karen is going to be a non-
event now. It looks like along the Gulf Coast. That`s great news. People
waken up there. You can go about your Saturday mornings and do what you
normally would.

The storm looks very pathetic right now, actually, and it considerably
weakened overnight. It wouldn`t surprise me at all if it gets downgraded
even further. So again, all good news with Karen. And the forecast is
going to bring it on shore tomorrow. Just some rain and wind. But we did
have some other really nasty and dangerous weather last night across the
country. A lot of heavy snow up in areas of Wyoming into Nebraska and even
South Dakota.

We had huge tornadoes last night. Sixteen injured there in portions of
Nebraska. And today, we do have more damaging winds and thunderstorm
threats, Chicago, St. Louis, Indianapolis. Again, that`s more typical
stuff. Not something that`s going to cause a lot of devastation. If we
get any really bad weather events today, my eyes are on Southern
California, Steve. That`s where we could see some dangerous Santa Ana

And if we get in those big fires that form, they`re going to spread
quickly. So, that`s really my only weather concern. I mean, we really,
during a government shutdown, didn`t need a big disaster, and we`ve avoided
one in the gulf.

KORNACKI: Some great news. Thanks for that report, Bill. It is easy to
forget, especially during weeks like this one that when John Boehner looks
like this, it`s usually because he`s happy. It is possible that on the day
this was taken, that was the day in January 2011, when he assumed the
speakership that he had some sort of insight into how agonizing the job
would end up being. I sort of doubt it.

He definitely understood how conservative the new members of his caucus
were, how suspicious many of them were of him. But on that day, nearly
three years ago, I think Boehner was mainly just feeling the joy of
realizing a lofty goal he pursued for decades. So, those were tears of
happiness in his eyes. He was genuinely pleased to be speaker of the House
of Representatives.

That moment of triumph for Boehner was built on an exceedingly shaky
foundation, because the votes that gave Republicans the House majority,
that votes that made John Boehner speaker three Januarys ago, they came
from the Tea Party. It was Tea Party inspired, Tea Party backed, Tea Party
aligned, Republicans who were key to the mammoth 63-seat gain that
Republicans posted in the 2010 midterms.

So, those Tea Pay Republicans were at the heart of everything John Bohner
and the House GOP have done since then. In their first year, Republican
freshmen, like Scott DesJarlais from Tennessee, Renee Ellmers from North
Carolina, Ben Quayle, Sean Duffy, 3:13 __, they had a huge impact in the
2011 debt ceiling negotiations.

Actually, they created the idea of debt ceiling negotiations, of
threatening to hold up the full faith and credit of the United States,
unless, the White House granted massive concessions. Before 2011, debt
ceiling votes were symbolic. No one ever dreamed of threatening an actual
default. No one ever dared to threaten an actual default.

But in 2011, the Tea Party decides to make this a bargaining chip. And if
we`re going to give the full version of what happened, Barack Obama let
them do it. They wanted to negotiate over the debt ceiling, and he
negotiates over the debt ceiling with them. Then, the negotiations blow
up. The default deadline draws perilously close, and an unprecedented
crisis is averted only with a last-second deal with deep spending cuts.

The president is relieved it`s all over. Those Tea Party Republicans look
at it differently. Remember, for the ones elected in 2010, this is the
first time they`ve ever confronted the debt ceiling. They just held the
president up over it and they got away with it. They figure this is what
they get to do every time the debt ceiling comes up. That`s the backdrop
for what`s happening right now.

This morning, we`re entering the fifth day the first government shutdown in
nearly 18 years. It happened because John Boehner`s House Republicans kept
taking, kept passing measures that would fund the government and attaching
to them provisions that would gut President Obama`s signature achievement,
it`s the health care law. And they wouldn`t stop doing this. Obama called
their bluff, and so, here we are.

There`s another deadline coming up. It`s coming up fast. That`s the debt
ceiling deadlines now less than two weeks away. This time, the president
is in no mood for negotiating. Do your job, open the government, raise the
debt ceiling, he`s telling Republicans, then we can talk about whatever you

But to Republicans in the House, especially the tea Party Republicans who
are so central to everything that`s happened these past years, they are
still acting like it is 2011, a shutdown of the government, a possible
debt ceiling default. These are things to negotiate over. These are
things to make demands over even if they don`t actually know what those
demands are.


Republican said, I`m quoting here, all right, because I want to make sure
people understand I didn`t make this up. One House Republican said, "We`re
not going to be disrespected. We have to get something out of this and I
don`t know what that even is."


OBAMA: That was a quote. "We`re not going to be disrespected. We got to
get something out of this and I don`t know what that even is." Think about
that. You have already gotten the opportunity to serve the American
people. There`s no higher honor than that. So, the American people aren`t
in the mood to give you a goody bag to go with it.


KORNACKI: The congressman responsible for that remark is Marlin Stutzman
of Indiana. He`d already tried to walk back that remark early Thursday
morning saying that he carelessly misrepresented the negotiating that was
being done by John Boehner, but it was already too late. Political reality
has changed since 2011. President Obama felt burned. He felt used. He
felt abused by the debt ceiling negotiating he did back then.

He fought back in the 2012 election. He won that election. And now, he`s
adamant that he won`t make the same mistake twice, with the constant threat
of a shutdown, of a constant threat of a default, that this is no way for
the country to be governed. He`s emboldened. He believes the public is
with him on this.

The polls have come out this week say he is right on that score, but if
political reality has changed, the Tea Party hasn`t noticed yet. So, the
government is still closed. The default clock is ticking. The million
question marks hanging in the air. If you`re the Republican speaker of the
House, it`s your next move.

Here to help answer that, I want to bring in former RNC chairman and MSNBC
political analyst, Michael Steele, "Washington Post" political report,
Jackie Kucinich, also host of Post TV`s "In Play," Buzz Feed political
editor, McKay Coppins, and political scientist, Victoria Defrancesco Soto.
She`s a fellow at the Center for Politics at the LBJ School of Public
Policy at the University of Texas.

So, I guess let`s pick up on that clip we played from Obama there. It was
the quote of the week. It may be the quote of the year from Marlin
Stutzman of Indiana basically saying, you know, we don`t want to be
disrespected. We`re not sure what we really want here. I guess, the House
is in session. Do we know right now, Michael? Do we know what Republicans
tangibly want out of this shutdown?


KORNACKI: What is it?

STEELE: They don`t know what they want.


STEELE: And that`s the reality. We know they don`t know. And I think
Stutsman`s comment reflected that. And, this is what happens when you go
on cruise control. This is what happens when you get into this psyche
where the vacuum is filled not by the leadership, with a plan and a
strategy to work with the administration and to maneuver the administration
to a particular point.

You don`t have that. It`s going to be filled by someone. And in this
case, it`s been filled by Ted Cruz. So, you have a lot of folks in the
House, particularly those moderates, whomever they happen to be in the
House who say, why are we doing this? This is not the way to do this. We
don`t need to link Obamacare with closing that closer -- with closing the
government. The debt ceiling is the play. That`s the argument.

That`s where we can talk about tax reform. We can talk about spending
cuts, etc. And so, now, they`re sitting here, and they have no place to go
with this. It`s a corner that they`re in because if they start to make the
move to give the president some ground on opening the government backup,
what do you say to your base, that you`ve now ginned up, jacked up, and
fired up to go out here and stand with you to fight Obamacare when you say,
wait, wait, Obamacare, we`re just going to let that slide.

And the base is like, no, you can`t let that slide. You told us this was
important. So, there`s a real problem here now.

KORNACKI: So, Jackie, what are -- realistically, we know what the sort of
the observe wish list -- the Republicans might put out there that they
can`t have, but realistically speaking, can you see what are some specific
things maybe that John Boehner, maybe that House Republican leaders could
put out there that would be acceptable to Democrats, it would be acceptable
to the president to reopen the government, and that wouldn`t get them
accused of treason by the base? It would politically safer (ph). Is there
anything you`re seeing as this that criteria?

JACKIE KUCINICH, WASHINGTON POST: When it comes to the base, it`s going to
be very hard to do without Obamacare repeals. So, you really -- you kind
of have to accept that you wouldn`t be able to make them happy which is
going to be the biggest problem on John Boehner`s side of the coin here,
but you can have the medical device tax repealed. That`s one thing that
they`ve talked about attacking to a Senate Bill, but it`s popular with some

That could possibly happen. But, you`re still going to have the same
problems with that that you would have with anything that does not have an
Obamacare repeal, defund, delay, anything that`s still going to be because
that reality for whatever reason has not set in, that that`s what`s going
to happen.

Harry Reid can say it over and over and over again, but they think they`re
going to push him to some kind of capitulation there. And it just -- I
mean, even if he does, it`s going to get to the White House and it`s going
to be --

KORNACKI: It`s amazing. If the end game is like -- is the medical device
tax being repealed, the idea of like we had to shut down the federal
government and being flirt with the default to get rid of a medical device,
you know, extra tax. It seems absurd, but I guess that --

KUCINICH: In a lot of ways, they`ve already had a victory. They have
their funding levels attached to this bill, but that is -- and I was
talking to Republicans this week who are, they`re not exactly moderate, but
they`re institutionalists, so they`ve been there a while, and they`re
saying, you know, a couple years ago, this would have been huge.

KORNACKI: Well, the victory is there in that this whole sequester level
spending. The Democrats say, you know, a lot of republicans have sort of
embraced and learned to love. Is there an out there, McKay, for
Republicans to say, hey, you know what, wait a minute, we got sequester
level spending. That`s our victory. Does that exist?

MCKAY COPPINS, BUZZFEED.COM: I mean, that`s a tough sell. I`ve talked to
a lot of conservatives who say, yes sure, that`s a Democratic concession
from 2011, right, when we agreed on the sequester cuts in the first place.
It`s right --


KORNACKI: In 2011, they agreed to say that this is the wrong process.
This sequester was the punishment for that.

COPPINS: Right. But the punishment went into place, right, and they
haven`t been able to figure anything else out. And so, yes, I mean,
obviously, Democrats, that`s a Democratic you know argument that they`ve
been making for the past week. We`ve already made this concession. That`s
a really tough sell for conservatives.

And some Republicans are willing to go along with it mostly because they
want to get out of this whole thing, and they think that it`s a political

KORNACKI: That`s the question to Victoria. We always talk about, you
know, who`s winning, who`s losing, but it affects the incentives that the
elected officials have. If they feel they`re losing something, they`re not
going to be as hard in their demands, if they feel they`re winning, they`re
going to be a little more emboldened.

I certainly get the sense from the president the way he`s talked this week
and the way Democrats have talked that they feel very good about their
political positioning, they have the ability to sort of sit here and say,
you know, no, we are really not negotiating over any of this stuff. But I
wonder, is that sense also permeating the Republican world? What`s your
read on how Republicans have reacted to this week?

it`s trickling down. And i think it all comes to the electoral connection.
And the president talked about it this week in a speech. He said, well,
during a government shutdown, the Social Security checks still go out. But
during a debt ceiling, if we get to that point, they won`t go out. So, I
think that he knows, the president knows that the pressure is going to be
turning up for Republicans.

People, senior citizens are going to be calling in their representatives.
Offices are going to say, hey, I want my checks coming in. I don`t care if
you`re against this because your party is against it. You need to vote to
get this over with. So, I do think that in terms of the Democratic stance,
they do have that favorability with it because that you have connection

KORNACKI: Michael, what do you think, you know, hearing that, what do you
think like John Boehner is thinking? Where do you think he is right now?
Is he just looking for some way, anyway out --

STEELE: He was probably thinking, can I give the gavel back?


STEELE: Is that possible? No, I think -- i don`t underestimate John
Boehner. John Boehner has been in this bubble inside the House for a
while. I mean, this is no stranger. Yes, this is a new group of players
at the table that no one in the party has really had to deal with before
who quite frankly and rather honestly, since I helped get a lot of them
there in 2010, I understand where they`re coming from.

I mean, you`re looking at a group of individuals who, for the first time in
Congress, have not been co-opted into the system and just go along to get
along. They were sent to Washington to do a particular thing, which was
basically to control spending, to cut the size the role of government. And
so, they`ve held firm to that.

The problem for Boehner has been, how do I then work that into the typical
day-to-day operations of this place so that we can get things done? His
default doesn`t work here, which is, hey, can I give you a bridge? How
about if I help you get -- yes, the earmarks.

COPPINS: That`s one of the big problems, right?

STEELE: Can I give you a committee assignment? I don`t want a committee
assignment. What do you want? I don`t want anything.

KORNACKI: The whole idea with earmarks, too, the whole sort of spirit of
the Tea Party Republicanism is to get rid of government.

STEELE: Exactly.

KUCINICH: They have their -- a lot of these Tea Party conservatives, their
districts. Their people are saying good job. You`re sticking it to them.
They are being spurned on by the people who sent them there. So --

SOTO: It`s a connection.

KUCINICH: And so, you know, when they`re looking at their calls, they`re
not getting the same calls that maybe a senator is getting for the entire
state or, you know, their Democratic colleagues.

KORNACKI: We can forget that totally if you start looking at a strongly
Republican in Congressional district. All of these sort of national trends
just don`t apply there. It changes the incentives we`re talking about.

SOTO: The key then are those non-Tea Party Republicans. That`s where you
need --


KORNACKI: They`ve been very quiet. That`s the thing we hear like --


KUCINICH: They had a press conference last week talking about a different
kind of CR that does not have the defund attached to it. And these are the
people that will feel the pain in the next election. I mean, these guys
are looking at their jobs. They`re also getting the calls saying what the
heck are you guys doing up there?

But, if Boehner brings that bill to the floor and there`s Democrat to
support and there`s enough Republicans to push it across, he`s still going
to catch heap, because he allowed it to come to the floor.

KORNACKI: We have a Democratic member of Congress standing by. And we`re
going to talk to him about those Republicans who may be possibly could be
willing to cut some kind of a deal here. We`re going to see if he sees
anyway out of it with him is Congressman Jerry Nadler. He`s joining us
after this.


KORNACKI: So, I`m talking about the current shutdown. It might help to
have a member of Congress who`s around the last time there was a shutdown,
especially since that one and this one share more differences than they do
similarities. Well, I want to bring in Congressman Jerry Nadler. He`s a
democrat from New York. He joins us now from Washington.

And Congressman, I guess, I want to start by just -- by reading a quote
here. This was from a Republican House member, an unnamed Republican House
member (INAUDIBLE) in New York yesterday, who`s a conservative journalist.
This unnamed Republican house member said, "I think there`s a sense that
for us to do a clean CR now, then what the hell was this about? So, I
don`t think it`s going to end anytime soon."

We are talking about this a little bit in the last break. I guess, the two
things I ask you are one, do you have any optimism that this is going to
end soon? And, two, do have you any sense of any sort of bottom-line
demands here that Republicans could make that you could live with that
could end this thing?

REP. JERRY NADLER, (D) NEW YORK: No. This is fundamentally a budget
dispute. The Senate passed the bill for $1.058 trillion discretionary
spending. The House wanted 986. That`s a budget dispute. You normally
split the difference. The House Democrats and the president and the Senate
Democrats agreed to go with the Republican number.

That`s a total concession, at least, for the six week CR. We`ll fight that
again for the next CR that has to start on November 15th. But for now,
it`s a total capitulation. For the Republicans to add non-budget-related
items, defund Obamacare, repeal this tax, is a fundamental problem and we
cannot give an inch on that.

We can compromise on budgets, but you can`t allow the Republicans to use
either the threat of a default or the threat of closing government to get
unrelated concessions because that`s government by blackmail. And if you
have government by blackmail, then a minority in one House can dictate to
the majority. Like their demand to delay Obamacare or to defund it or to
change it is essentially saying, look, it was passed by the Senate, by the
House and by the president.

It took 60 years from the time that President Truman proposed national
health insurance until we finally got a very mild form of national health
insurance based on private insurance companies instead of Medicare, but OK,
we finally got it but by the president, the Senate, and the House all
passing it. The Supreme Court okayed it. And then, there was a
presidential election in which the Republicans said get rid of it.

The Democrats and Obama said, no, we got to implement it. The Democrats
won. The president was reelected on that platform. And now to come along
and saying, we will blackmail you. We will destroy the economy the
country, by defaulting on the debt or we will close down the government,
that`s the blackmail that says democratic government is over in this
country, that the majority can be frustrated by the minority and that can`t
be allowed to happen.

KORNACKI: OK. I take your point, congressman. But let`s look at this
practically where we`re talking about, you know, it`s October 5th right
now. We`re right now in the shutdown. We also have the debt ceiling
deadline coming up on October 17th with, you know, potentially catastrophic
consequences if there`s no resolution of the debt ceiling issue before

So, from what I`m hearing you say, I mean, is your strategy here, is your
strategy as Democrats to basically keep this posture. We are not
negotiating on this at all and you believe that the political pressure will
rise to a certain point that Republicans will have to --


NADLER: That is the only strategy. Now, the end, there is a majority as
you said before, there`s a majority in the House that would vote to end
this right now. You have 20 or 25 Republicans, which is more than enough
who said publicly that they would vote to pass the continuing resolution to
fund the government for six weeks at the number which is their number, not
the Democratic number, which is a terrible number, by the way, one we can`t
live with, but temporarily OK that they would do this.

There are two ways that they can effectuate that. Number one, they can
vote for -- they can vote for a Democratic motion -- or against the motion
on the previous question. If that fails, then the Democrats can put a
clean CR on the House floor and they can vote for it or they can simply
assign the motion, the petition to discharge, which we`re going to be
filing in the next coming days.

If it gets 218 signatures, it will put a clean continuing resolution on the
floor and they`ll vote for it. They say they`ll vote for it.


KORNACKI: Michael Steele wants to get in here, congressman.

STEELE: Congressman, it`s good to see you this morning. It`s Michael

NADLER: Good to see you.

STEELE: I want to pick up on the point that you were making about the
process. Do you see a way for House Speaker Boehner to just say, look,
Nancy, help me get the numbers and work outside of the 63 or so members on
the Republican side who are really a part of the Tea Party caucus who are
not looking to move forward on this, cut the deal with Nancy, and just kind
of put it in the hands of the Democrats to get this thing out of the House
and back to the Senate at this point?

NADLER: Well, the Democrats who will vote for any -- the Democrats who`ve
already said we will vote en masse for the Republican`s budget number.
That`s what should be debated here. I don`t think any of us will vote for
anything else nor should we, because that`s giving up Democratic government
in this country. That`s saying a minority in the House or in the Senate
for that matter, but right now in the House, can blackmail the majority and
get its way and that you can`t do.

I mean, imagine if the Senate Democrats suddenly said, we will not raise
the debt ceiling. We`ll destroy the economy of the country. We won`t
reopen the government, unless you agree to a strong gun control bill,
unless you agree to a liberal immigration bill, unless you agree to union
recognition, the bill changes. The Republicans would be rightly outraged
because you don`t govern by blackmail.

KORNACKI: All right. Congressman Jerry Nadler of New York, thanks for
taking a few minutes from D.C. this morning. We appreciate it.

And coming up next, why it is usually best to be considered the underdog in
American politics?


KORNACKI: With all the attention on Washington these days, it`s easy to
forget there is a race going on right now to send someone to Washington, a
one that will held in just over a week and one where the outcomes seem like
a very sure thing until this week. Meet Cory Booker. In fact, if you use
social media, chances are you already have. He`s the Democratic mayor of
Newark, but more than that, he is a national political celebrity.

He`s a friend of Oprah, he`s a friend of Oprah`s best friend, and he`s the
odds on favorite to replace Frank Lautenberg in the U.S. Senate. Chris
Christie is scared enough of how well Cory Booker will do on Election Day
that he actually scheduled a special election for October 16th just so he
wouldn`t have to run on the same ballot with him.

Booker easily won the Democratic primary in August. He took nearly 60
percent of the vote in a four-way race. He now faces Republican Steve
Lonegan and we`re just ten days away from the election. Lonegan is a
hardline conservative in a blue state. It`s a state that hasn`t elected a
Republican to the Senate in 41 years. Last month`s poll put Booker ahead
with Lonegan by as many as 35 points.

But this week, one new poll out put the gap at just 13 points and another
pegged it at 12. That`s a significant drop. It injects a sudden dose of
uncertainty into this race. It means something else is happening, too, the
sunny optimism and positivity that Booker has defined himself with are
being replaced with this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He privatized Social Security, shut down government,
band all abortion. Steve Lonegan, too extreme for New Jersey.


KORNACKI: That`s not the only thing that`s turned negative. One of the
polls this week asked, do you think Cory Booker wants to become a U.S.
senator more to be on the national stage or more to serve New Jersey?
Forty-five percent said the national stage and only 35 percent said to
serve New Jersey. Media outlets are now starting to cover Cory Booker`s
celebrity factor as a negative.

He`s also had to cut all ties to an internet startup that he had founded.
The story headlined Booker`s lackluster campaign. "Politico" wrote
yesterday that, quote, "Booker has painted a portrait of a celebrity who
prefers to boost himself on the national stage than to be around the voters
of New Jersey," and the attacks have worked.

Well, joining us now to discuss all of this is "New York Times" reporter,
Kate Zernike who is covering New Jersey, knows the Booker story really
well, knows what`s going on out there really well. And Kate, I guess, I`ll
just start with the basic question, the fear for every Democrat, whenever
there`s a Senate race, a special Senate race in a blue state like New
Jersey is Martha Coakley and Scott Brown, right?

When Ted Kennedy passed away, everybody said, well, the Democratic primary
is the only ball game. Martha Coakley won that. She`s going to be the
senator. And about three weeks before that election, Brown started to
creep up in the polls, and then, he suddenly he wins that race.

I guess, the basic question is when you look at New Jersey, you look at
Booker, and you look at these polls this week, is there any chance that
this race has that kind of trajectory that Lonegan could actually win this

KATE ZERNIKE, NEW YORK TIMES REPORT: Well, we struck by thing that the
huge wild card and that the election is being held on a Wednesday in
October. So, a lot of people aren`t going to know -- know even that they
should be voting or that they can vote. So, turnout is going to be
everything. And I think Steve Lonegan has really appealed to his base. I
mean, we were talking about the Tea Party earlier.

Steve Lonegan has done and he is a Tea Partier and he`s done what the Tea
Party did so effectively which was campaign, campaign, campaign, get out
there, sell your message. Cory Booker has spent a lot of time during the
campaign fundraising, I think because he feels he`s going to win this race
and then need to run again in 2014. So, he needs to raise a lot of money,
but he`s done a lot of time out of the state.

I talked to someone the other day, a supporter of Booker who said, you
know, I said to him, Cory, you just got to get back here. You got to get
back to New Jersey. Steve Lonegan has had press conferences. He invites
reporters to his house to talk to -- I mean, he`s really sort of saying
like here I am, I`m accessible.

Cory Booker is doing a red carpet event in Hollywood -- the red carpet of
normal Newark citizens in Newark. So, you know, he`s really done an
aggressive job of saying, I`m here for New Jersey. And as you saw in the
poll, people aren`t sure Cory Booker is.

KORNACKI: And Lonegan actually part of that out which was he did this
show. We invited him on this show. We`ve invited Cory Booker. We`ll
still put the invitation out there. Please come on Cory Booker before
election. We still got another weekend.

COPPINS: You got a lot of New Jersey voters as viewing --


KORNACKI: Yes. Help our PR campaign, McKay. We need that.


KORNACKI: But talk to about -- you started to get there. It sounds like
Cory Booker has maybe taken this for granted a little bit?

ZERNIKE: I think so. I mean, look, you know, you just said the polls were
showing him 28 points ahead, that we`ve had the history of Democratic
polls. Everyone thought Cory Booker will be a shoe-in. New Jersey has
700,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans.

So, I think in the end, look, a lot of politicians would not be very
thrilled to be 12 points behind in the polls before Election Day. I think
we`re talking about this, because we didn`t think it would be this close,
but that still 12 points to overcome.

SOTO: Thirteen point. I feel safe. I feel good about it. And the other
thing is, he has a ton of money and he can use that for the mobilization
game. Yes, the Tea Partiers are fired up. The numbers of Democrats
registered in New Jersey blow away Republicans. And Cory Booker, now that
the election has his attention, he can turn to it, throw money into getting
folks to the poll on the Wednesday of the election.

COPPINS: The interesting dynamic, I think, in this race is that, you know,
both of them are mayors in New Jersey, right? But for some reason, Cory
Booker, I mean, he`s on "Morning Joe" all the time. He`s a political
celebrity. You know, he feels like a part of the Washington establishment
already which has enabled Steve Lonegan to run as the typical tea party
Washington outsider against this guy who just wants to, you know, have
cocktail parties and be like by the political --


SOTO: -- but you can (ph) in New Jersey.

KORNACKI: And I`m with you, Victoria. And I`ve seen a number of, this has
happened a number of times in New Jersey where the Republican Senate
candidate will get, you know, within striking distance. It stirs up some
chatter, and then it always end up being sort of a 10-point race. But the
promise of Cory Booker I think in this campaign and to Democrats nationally
is, you know, for ten years, he`s built up an enormous national profile.

I think the expectation was you put him in this race especially against a
candidate as far to the right as Lonegan, and he`s going to win, you know,
30, 40 points, something like that. And this is just the first step on the
way to sort of national stardom. I wonder if the criticism he`s taking and
sort of the critique you offered (ph) sort of how he`s campaigned this race
has sort of the media -- the media has sort of enabled, has sort of built
Cory Booker, I think, the last 10 years.

Has the media started to look at him differently in this campaign? Because
that could have long-term implications for him.

ZERNIKE: Oh, absolutely. I mean, you know, the thing is the media started
to look at him more critically. And I think, you know, he doesn`t have
(ph) the thickest of skin to say the least. And he`s sort of -- he fights
back against that, and I think people -- you know, some people start to see
that maybe he`s not so, you know, doesn`t have such --

COOPINS: What do we call a certain Kate Zernike story?

ZERNIKE: I don`t remember that.


STEELE: I think to the point that you just made about the voters, yes, it
takes place on a Wednesday and getting the vote out, it`s going to be
critical. But I don`t assume that those Democrat votes just because there
are more of them than there are Republicans that just going to buy into,
you know, to this whole thing. There`s a reason why there is a 20-point
erosion for him.

There is a reason for that, and I think that the Booker campaign and the
Lonegan campaign are trying to get to the nub of that, to figure out how
does that affect turnout, what aspects of turnout does it allow us an
opportunity to play with or do we have to avoid. So, I think there`s more
of a dynamic here.

And a lot of it is due to what you and others are reporting about the race,
particularly, if you`re coming at it clean. If you`re just saying, this is
the guy, and everyone is going, really? That`s not the guy that we thought
it was. I mean, I think all of these things begin to nibble at the bottom

KORNACKI: And Kate, there were two debates in this race. The first one
was yesterday, it was like a Friday afternoon, taping it, so they didn`t
really put much video out. They`re going to air it Sunday morning. I
think there`s another one next Friday, but tell us how these two interacted
in this debate yesterday and what we can maybe look forward to debate next
week when Lonegan and Booker share the stage.

ZERNIKE: Well, I mean, this is really a debate -- a campaign and a debate
of opposites. So, you have Steve Lonegan -- Cory Booker is saying Steve
Lonegan is a Tea Party extremist and you have Steve Lonegan saying, well,
Cory Booker is a liberal extremist. And you know, he had a great line
about, you know, we need a leader, not a tweeter.

That was a take away. But I think, you know, they`re both saying -- I
mean, you really do have -- you have Lonegan who is in the Ted Cruz mold
who says that`s his model. He wants to go, you know, dismantle Obamacare.
And you have Cory Booker saying, look, this is crazy. This is what`s
happening in Washington. If you send Steve Lonegan to Washington, we will
see more of what we have now with government shutdowns and government
entrenches in the Republicans.

KORNACKI: And that sounds like the ultimately the message I would guess
that would win in New Jersey, but again, the question is, you know, the
longer-term gain here for Booker has this change the way people look at --
that will this change the way people look at him a little bit?

Anyway, thank you to Kate Zernike of the "New York Times."

Joining us today, get ready to put your current even knowledge to the test
when we play our very our own quiz show, "Up Against the Clock" next.


KORNACKI: Obamacare officially launched this week with the opening of
enrollment for the state health insurance exchanges. A challenge now for
the White House and for anyone who wants this law to work is to get as many
eligible people as possible to sign up. And you know, I think I have a
secret weapon they can use. A game show. Let me explain.

A few years ago, the Social Security Administration was startled to learn
how many Americans didn`t know the basics of how that program worked, even
though it had been around since the 1930s. So, they commissioned award-
winning producer, Charles Roggero (ph). And many of you may remember him
from such government-produced classics as direct deposit to explain Social
Security in game show form.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What will the Social Security statement tell you about
your retirement?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I remember getting my Social Security statement in
the mail and I know it`s B.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, you`re right. Congratulations.


KORNACKI: Informing the public. That`s our mission on "Up Against the
Clock," our weekly current events game show. We`ve got three contestants
just off camera warming up and psyching each other out. They will play for
keeps right after this.


ANNOUNCER: Live from studio 3-A in Rockefeller Center, U.S.A., it`s time
for "Up Against the Clock!"


ANNOUNCER: Today`s contestants, originally from Columbus, Ohio, home of
the Ohio State University, it`s Jackie Kucinich.


ANNOUNCER: From Sierra Vista, Arizona, it`s Victoria Defrancesco Soto.


ANNOUNCER: And our returning champion from Washington, D.C. and vicinity,
whose one-day winnings total $7 in cash, prizes, IOUs and final deposit,
say hello to Michael Steele.


ANNOUNCER: And now, the host of "Up Against the Clock" is Steve Kornacki.


KORNACKI: Thank you for that, Bill. As always, thank you at home for
tuning in to "up Against the Clock." We had two new contestants who are
joining us today. We say welcome to you ,Victoria and Jackie. They will
be challenging our returning champion who will be going for his second
consecutive victory. You know him. You love him. You play at home
against him, Michael Steele. Welcome back to "Up Against the Clock."

Now, I doubt anyone needs it. Let`s give you a quick refresher on how this
show works. This is a rapid fire quiz about the week that was in politics.
There are going to be three rounds in regulation play. Each will be 100
seconds long. In the first round, questions will be worth 100 points. In
the second, they`ll be worth 200. That means they`re a little harder. And
in the third round, we call this the Ph.D. round. They`re worth 300

We`ll move fast and we`ll get through as many questions as we can. And
don`t forget, there are also a few instant bonuses scattered throughout.
These are follow-up questions and no risk chance for you to double your
winnings on one question. Contestants, remember, you will be penalized for
incorrect answers in an important experimental rule change to tell you

Today, we are eliminating the requirement that you wait until I`ve
completed the entire question to ring in. This was very unpopular with our
audience at home.


KORNACKI: They buzz in at any point now. But be careful, you never know
if there`s a twist at the end of the question. And I will also remind as
always our live audience here in the studio, please no, outbursts. Our
contestants deserve and demand absolute concentration when they`re "Up
Against the Clock." And with that, I will ask you, contestants, are you

STEELE: They`re ready.

KORNACKI: Hands on buzzers, please. We will put 100 seconds or one minute
and 40 seconds on the clock. I`ll give you the update on the score at the
end of the round. And here we go, for 100 points, which conservative news
outlets stirred mockery this week by pointedly referring to the government
shutdown as a, quote, government slim down?


KORNACKI: Michael.

STEELE: The "Daily Caller."

KORNACKI: Incorrect.


KORNACKI: Victoria.

SOTO: Fox News.

KORNACKI: Fox News is correct.


KORNACKI: President Obama on Wednesday met with the loaders of several
major banks, including Lloyd Blankfein who is the CEO of what investment



KUCINICH: Oh, gosh, I don`t know. Bank of America, it`s not right.

KORNACKI: Incorrect.



KORNACKI: Lloyd Blankfein, the CEO of which investment house? 3, 2, 1,
time. The correct answer is Goldman Sachs.

KUCINICH: Oh, gosh.

KORNACKI: Back with this, a well-known internal House Republican rule that
bears his name --


KORNACKI: Victoria.

SOTO: Hastert rule.

KORNACKI: Hastert is correct.


KORNACKI: Go to buzz in first.

At a vice presidential debate held 2005 years ago today, which candidate
uttered the famous putdown, "senator, you`re no Jack Kennedy?"


KORNACKI: Michael.

STEELE: Lloyd Benson.

KORNACKI: Lloyd Benson is correct. And this is an instant bonus question.
No risk here, Michael, for 100 extra points. Which journalist asked the
question that triggered that outburst from Lloyd Benson?




KORNACKI: It`s Judy Woodruff.

STEELE: Judy, Judy.

KORNACKI: For 100 points, we have 23 seconds left in the round. The
treasury department issued a warning to Congress on Thursday that
potentially catastrophic damage could be caused by what?


KORNACKI: Victoria.

SOTO: By the government shutdown.

KORNACKI: Incorrect.



KUCINICH: Default.

KORNACKI: Default is correct. 100 points. On Wednesday, Sarah Palin
attacked which U.S. Senate candidate for quote "constant tweeting" and
trips to --


KUCINICH: Cory Booker.

KORNACKI: Cory Booker is correct at the wire. At the end of the round,
that brings us to the end of the 100-point round. The score, our returning
champion, Michael Steele, zero, Victoria 200, and Jackie, zero. Still,
anybody`s game especially now that we move to the 200-point round. These
questions are worth 200 points. A little harder. We`ll put the time on
the clock, and we will go with this.

The American people want this, said one of the lead sponsors of legislation
introduced by Democrats in the House on Wednesday, dealing with what
contentious non-shutdown related topic?


KORNACKI: Michael.

STEELE: Obamacare.

KORNACKI: Incorrect.



KUCINICH: The continuing resolution?

KORNACKI: Incorrect. Victoria, you want to take a chance?

SOTO: I`m going to get penalized if it`s the wrong one.

KORNACKI: You really get penalized if it`s the wrong one.

SOTO: I`m riskoverse (ph).

KORNACKI: She says no. The correct answer is immigration.

SOTO: That was the one I was saying.

KORNACKI: For 200 points, the government shutdown puts the United States
at risk for a terrorist attack was a suggestion made this week by which
Republican senator?

Time. Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz made that suggestion at a hearing this week.
For 200 points, this coming Monday marks the 10th anniversary of the
election in California that made Arnold Schwarzenegger governor when voters
recalled whom?


KUCINICH: Gray Davis.

KORNACKI: Gray Davis is correct for 200 points. Another 200-point
question, who said in a "Today" show interview that aired Thursday that she
has regretted, quote, "pretty much every day since," referring to Hillary
Clinton as a monster during the 2008 presidential campaign?

SOTO: Oh, I know this. One name.

KORNACKI: Two, one, time. The correct answer is Samantha Powers.


KORNACKI: For 200 points, 26, 24, or 21, tell me, what is the number of
states that have refused to take part in the Medicaid expansion provisions
of Obamacare?



STEELE: Twenty-six.

KORNACKI: Michael says 26. The answer is 26. 200 points for the


KORNACKI: 200-point question, we`ll get the last one. In veterans
assembling at Washington, D.C.`s World War II memorial Tuesday, in protest
of the government shutdown were being egged on by which Iowa Republican



KUCINICH: Steve King.

KORNACKI: Steve King is correct. It brings us to the end of the 200-point
round. The score, Jackie 200, Victoria 200, our returning champion, zero.
This is a close game as we head to the Ph.D. round. Michael, you can make
it all up with one question in our 300-point Ph.D. round.

The game will be decided here. Ladies and gentlemen, we go with this
question. This republican governor of a mid-Atlantic state stirred
criticism when in a television interview yesterday he compared gay marriage


KORNACKI: Victoria.

SOTO: The Pennsylvania Governor Corbett.

KORNACKI: Corbett is correct. For 300 points, Tom Clancy, the celebrated
"Thriller" author who died at age 66 this week, burst onto the national
scene in 1984 when Ronald Reagan publicly praised his debut novel which was
title titled?


KORNACKI: Michael.

STEELE: The Hunt for Red October."

KORNACKI: The Hunt for Red October" is correct. Instant bonus question,
Michael, to double your winnings, the film version of "The Hunt For Red
October" was the 6th highest grossing film of known 1990 made any of the
movies that made more money that year.

STEELE: 1990?

KORNACKI: 1990. We need an answer. Time. I`ll give you the list later.
"Home Alone" was one of them.

For 300 points, Iowa Republican State senator, Ted Sorensen, abruptly
resigned this week when a state investigator charged he accepted a $25,000
cash payment after switching his support to which --


KORNACKI: Victoria.

SOTO: Michelle Bachmann.

KORNACKI: Incorrect.




KORNACKI: Ron Paul is correct. Instant bonus, Jackie, which candidate was
Sorensen backing before?

KUCINICH: Bachmann.

KORNACKI: Bachmann is correct. Another 300 for Jackie. 300-point
question, writing that, quote, "tension is at an all-time high here on the
capitol, this Republican senator and potential presidential candidate sent
an invitation to colleagues from both parties this --



KUCINICH: Rand Paul.

KORNACKI: Rand Paul is correct. For 300 points, this Republican member of
Congress took heat for sending a tweet on Thursday less than 10 minutes
after the Capitol Hill shooting that read, quote, --




KORNACKI: Incorrect.

That read -- this Republican congressman sent a tweet that said, quote,
"Stop the violent rhetoric, President Obama, Chuck Schumner, Nancy Pelosi,
# disgusting." This is potentially for the game. Three, two, one, time.
And that brings us to the end of round three. Jackie Kucinich with 800
points that won "Up Against the Clock" defeating Victoria with 200, and our
returning has been dethroned, Michael Steele with 300.

Jackie Kucinich, congratulations to you. A dramatic victory. A powerhouse
performance in the 3rd round. And as our champion, you will get a -- you
will get the official "Up Against the Clock" prize package. Bill Wolf
(ph), tell her what she`s won.

ANNOUNCER: As our champion, you have your name printed in exquisite
sharpee on the coveted "Up Against the Clock" gold cup. And you`ll get to
take the trophy home with you and show it off to friends, family, and local
school children for exactly one week. You`ll also receive an appearance
this coming week on MSNBC`s "The Cycle" every weekdays, 3:00 to 4:00 p.m.
eastern time.

And you`ll get to play in our jackpot bonus round for today`s grand prize
of $50 gift certificate to Little Poland., the most authentic Eastern
European (ph) eating and drinking experience in New York City`s historic
east village. And while you`re there, get a tattoo or a piercing. Back to
you, Steve.


KORNACKI: Well, thank you for that. Congratulations, Jackie, and here is
your mug.

KUCINICH: Thank you so much.

KORNACKI: But we he some business to conduct for that $50 gift certificate
to Little Poland. You will get one question in our bonus round. Are you
ready for it?

KUCINICH: I`m ready.

KORNACKI: You question, Jackie, Indiana Republican congressman, Marlin
Stutzman made news this week by saying he doesn`t know what his party even
wants in the shutdown. Finish behind what current U.S. senator in a 2010
Republican primary for the Senate?

KUCINICH: Oh, gosh. I should know this.

KORNACKI: You have five seconds.

KUCINICH: I know. I know. It`s not -- Donnelly. Oh, gosh, no, Mark

KORNACKI: We`re going to need -- Mark Kirk is incorrect. I`m so sorry.
The correct answer is Dan Coax (ph), Mark Kirk for nearby Illinois. The
$50 gift certificate is safe for another week, but soon, Little Poland, I
promise you, we will be sending you some customers. Jackie,
congratulations. You are a new champion. Victoria, Michael, you will not
go home empty-handed. We have the home edition for both of you. Fun for
the family, fun for kids of all ages, except those under 12 because there
are small pieces of this game, so be careful with it.

And thank you at home for playing along. We`ll be right back here next for
another battle for the ages on "Up Against the Clock."

And now for the real show tease, don`t go away. How do you convince
someone to do something when they really sort of seem to be happy right
where they are? I know it`s a lot harder when you want them to run for
president. The full details, that`s next on the real show.


KORNACKI: We have just enough time toward the end of the hour for Jackie
Kucinich to bask in the glow of game show victory. She signs the coveted
gold cup in sharpee. We also need to say goodbye to Michael Steele,
returning champion, and Victoria Defrancesco Soto and thank them both.
Another hour of UP (ph) still ahead.


KORNACKI: We all know that it`s very early in the 2016 presidential cycle.
And if we go back to this exact same very early point in the 2008, I think
they called it back again, presidential race, we`ll see the setup on the
Democratic side is basically the same as it is now. Everyone expected
Hillary Clinton was going to run and everyone called her the overwhelming
Democratic favorite.

But there were some in the party searching for someone else. The first big
name who was touted as the one who could beat Hillary was Mark Warner. He
was the centrist governor of Virginia back then, he was really going to
give Hillary a run. That`s what people were saying back in 2005.

And attention shifted to John Edwards. Remember him? After running with
John Kerry in 2004, he turned decisively against the war in Iraq him and he
positioned himself as a populist, he was aiming to rile up the left against
Hillary. And he started getting really early traction in Iowa.

I definitely fell for it. Back then, I wrote for "The New York Observer"
that Hillary Clinton`s, quote, "Iowa predicament could be summarized if two
words, John Edwards." It didn`t quite work out that way. But you can add
that to the list of things Google won`t let me forget.

There were also loud calls for Al Gore to get into the race back then. And
for a while, there was some suspense there, but he never really budged.
And then in August of 2006, it all finally came into focus.


women who we have sent to Iraq, we owe them -- we owe them the best that we
can do to get them back home. We owe them.


We have a solemn obligation to make sure that we are getting them home as
soon as possible. They have a mission to finish. But we`ve got to give
them a sense of that mission.


KORNACKI: And so, here we are again. Almost everyone thinks Hillary is
running in 2016. She is again the overwhelming favorite. And now this
week, rumblings of discontentment on the left, and a name to go with those
rumblings -- a name of another freshman senator with a passionate
grassroots following, Elizabeth Warren.

Jonathan Martin wrote about it in "The New York Times" this week. He said,
this disappointment in the promise of the Obama presidency, an unease under
a possible restoration of the Clintons had been Warren, who was sworn in
just 10 months ago the abject of huge interest in the avatar of a newly
assertive, fervently populist left.

Warren says she doesn`t want to run for president but her speech to the
AFL-CIO convention last month rallied the crowd to its feet in a way that a
first term Democratic senator and former law professor hasn`t done since
Barack Obama addressed the Democratic Convention in 2004.


SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D), MASSACHUSETTS: If we don`t fight, we can`t win.
But if we fight, we will win! The budget, immigration, minimum wage,
uphill battles, you bet. But however tough the challenge, however steep
our climb, I am proud to stand with you, to march with you, to fight side-
by-side with you. Our agenda is America`s agenda.

Let me hear it! Our agenda is America`s agenda. And if we fight for it,
we win!


KORNACKI: And joining us now to discuss his reporting on Elizabeth Warren
is "New York Times" political reporter Jonathan Martin back at the table
with us. We have reigning game show champion Jackie Kucinich of "The
Washington Post". And McKay Coppins of "BuzzFeed" is back with us, too.

So, Jonathan, let`s start with you.

It seems like Elizabeth Warren is sort of having a moment. She had a
Senate floor speech this week on the eve of the shutdown, kind of getting a
lot of viral attention. We have your piece.

Sort of -- tell us, try to put us in some context right now. Do you think
this is the start of something or do you think this is just a moment she is
going through here?

JONATHAN MARTIN, THE NEW YORK TIMES: I think it has the potential to be
the start of something. I think the start of it began long before this,
though. I mean, I think my reporting on this story, some folks never told
me that she was getting a run for president, even during a course of her
Senate campaign last year that when she was running in Massachusetts, folks
would approach her then and tell her to run for president.

So, it`s not necessarily new. What is different, I think, is the sense of
disappointment, not always expressed publicly, certainly there, Steve, on
the left with President Obama. As I put it in the piece, this notion that
the Clintons coming back is a move to go back to a DLC-style Democratic
Party, the Bob Rubin/Larry Summers Democratic Party that frankly in this
year a lot of Democrats, younger Democrats, especially think of as
yesterday`s news in a lot of ways. And not fitting for this moment that
we`re in, a moment where in her to eyes the central issue based in the
country is economic inequality.

KORNACKI: Right. So, the sort of the ties to Wall Street, the Democratic
Party forged under Bill Clinton are something locked at differently by the
base. I guess what I`m trying to figure out. This is from Gallup, they do
the weekly poll on Obama, on the president, approval rating among
Democrats. It`s still at 81 percent.

I guess what I`m trying to figure out is how much of an opening there is
now sort of on the left relative to what there was. You know, in the run
to `08, there was Iraq vote over everything, do we want the Clinton

Is the opening you think as big now or is, you know?

MARTIN: I think it is bigger now, certainly, in part because of the rise
of a younger generation of liberal activists.

The challenge that Senator Warren would have, Steve, if she does run in
2016 is that you well know there has been a Ron Brown terms the beer track,
wine track no the Democratic primary. And until President Obama got the
nomination in `08, the beer track always won.

Mondale beat Hart in `84, Gore beats Bradley in 2000.

KORNACKI: Pete Tsongas, right?

MARTIN: Of course, Clinton boat Tsongas in 1992. The list goes on and on.

President Obama broke that streak if part because he had a different
coalition. He had the upscale, NPR, latte-sipping, Prius-driving
coalition, but he also had African-Americans. And so, the combination of
the wine track plus African-Americans was just enough to beat Hillary
Clinton in `08.

Could Senator Warren put together any similar kind of a coalition or would
she be more hemmed in with the traditional college town left as we know it?
That to me is the big question. Besides the fact that, does she want to do
it? I mean that and the course of talking to people and the story is, a
lot of folks say, look, it was hard enough to get her to run for the Senate
in 2012 and this is going to be a pretty tough, tough job.

KORNACKI: Right, challenging Hillary Clinton.

MARTIN: As we know in American politics, how many examples do we have of
candidates who didn`t want to run, they wound up running?

KORNACKI: Barack Obama comes to mind.


KORNACKI: Supposedly, the fact that he didn`t want to run.

MARTIN: Eisenhower certainly comes to run.

KORNACKI: What do we make of Hillary Clinton? Do you see any signs,
anybody here see any signs that the mood Jonathan is talking about, the
Democratic Party, which really has been highlighted recently. A lot of
attention here in New York, like Bill de Blasio, winning this, the
Bloomberg fatigue, the Wall Street. Is there any sign --


MARTIN: He torpedoed. Yes.

KORNACKI: Is there any sign of Hillary Clinton giving out any, you know,
that she`s going to modulate a little bit, she`s going to adjust and she`s
going to move away a little bit from what Clintons kind of represent?

MCKAY COPPINS, BUZZFEED: I think we`ve already seen. She had the
challenge of spending four years as secretary of state where she engaged
very little in domestic politics, where she saw at the same time in that
same period, the Democratic Party move to the left on a lot of issues. And
so, she was chained for four years to the issues that she ran on in 2008.

I think we`re going to see her move back to the left. Although, she`s been
fairly quiet for the last, you know, several months, right? I think we
hear a lot from Clinton world whispers, saying she doesn`t want to get out
front and be the presumptive nominee the way she was in 2008 because it
didn`t work out so well for her.

But at some point, she is going to have to come out and modulate, like you

KORNACKI: Well, you know, stories like this and rumbles like you`re
picking up on it, the sort of thing that could force her out I think and
could make her move up her timetable, if she feels like, wow, there really
is sort of movement building left. There are questions I sort of have to
answer, positions I have to take, that could change her timetable, a little
bit, I would think.

KUCINICH: Well, absolutely, and I think she said in an interview this week
that she`s going to decide next year, she`s going to think about it next
84, which is hard to believe she`s not thinking about it right now. But,
you know, these are options --

COPPINS: She`s just hanging out.

KUCINICH: Hanging out. Yes.

It could, but she doesn`t have, Warren will have an issue with raising
money that Clinton wouldn`t have. She has this infrastructure already set
up. She can take as much time as she wants, she has that. People already
know her name. She has name ID with some of these lesser-known candidates
as we all know, you need to get out there sooner and faster.

KORNACKI: Although the interesting thing, if I was Warren, I want to play
this, this was -- this to me was -- I know she was on the national stage.

This to me was the launch, August, 2011, and she had film at a fundraiser
in Massachusetts. This video went viral. Let`s play a clip of that for a


WARREN: There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own, nobody.
You built a factory out there, good for you. But I want to be clear -- you
moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired
workers, the rest of us paid to educate. You built a factory and it turned
in something terrific or a great idea, God bless, keep a big hunk of it.

But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and
pay forward for the next kid who comes along.


KORNACKI: And, Jonathan, she tapped INTO something with that that no other
national Democrat really has been tapping into. I mean, she raised a huge
amount of money in smaller dollar negotiations for her Senate campaign.
She became a lot of ways, I said at that time, I think the Democratic Chris
Christie, a viral video that made her a national star.

MARTIN: She raised $42 million second only to who? Somebody named
Clinton. Hillary Clinton raced more than that in `06 when she was running
for re-election in New York. As we know, a lot of that money was given to
her for other purposes besides being reelected in the Empire State.

Besides $42 million, she built this army of grassroots supporters up. You
know, hundreds of thousands of small dollar donors that she has. Her list
is probably second in Democratic politics only to Hillary Clinton herself
in terms of active politicians.

That video was so important that a fellow named Obama actually --

COPPINS: I was going to bring this up.

MARTIN: -- picked up on her rhetoric and got in trouble for it.


MARTIN: You didn`t build that, right?

KUCINICH: I was like we built this.

COPPINS: It became the Republican national convention`s rallying cry.
They had huge signs that said, we built this.

KORNACKI: Although I guess the Obama people were laying this elaborate
trap, because the Republican botched their convention. But, yes, he did
not deliver the line the way she did. She did give it the thematic
backdrop --

COPPINS: But isn`t that Elizabeth Warren`s strength is she can articulate
these liberal ideals in a way that really no one else can, demonstrated,
including Hillary Clinton.

KORNACKI: Which is why I say Democrat Chris Christie, because that`s what
Chris Christie does in the Republican side.

We got to cut this off. We got to segue to something that`s very Elizabeth
Warren-related. It has to do with the man she beat last year in this
position. It is not every "Cosmo" centerfold, he goes on to become a U.S.
senator, now he is being accused of flirting with voters in other states,
and the feeling might not be mutual.

We will play the wingman. I`m out of metaphors, or at least we will pull
the bar stole. That`s next.


KORNACKI: Let`s go back to last November when Scott Brown lost his re-
election race to Elizabeth Warren.


SCOTT BROWN (R), FORMER U.S. SENATOR: There are no obstacles you can`t
overcome and defeat is only temporary. Listen --



KORNACKI: Honestly, at the time it felt like losing that election was only
going to be a speed bump for Scott Brown. His political future actually
seemed bright and obvious.

The Massachusetts governor`s office would be wide opened in 2014. Even
though voters rejected him for the Senate, they still liked Brown
personally, they liked him a lot. Polls show he was still after losing to
Elizabeth Warren the most popular senator in Massachusetts.

This state is definitely a blue state. Four of the five most recent
governors were Republicans, voting for the person, and not the party is not
an empty expression when it comes to Massachusetts governor`s races.

So, it looked like Brown would just turn around, run for governor and be
right back in the game. So, that everyone figured he`d do. But what he
has actually done since then is left everyone. That includes his old
allies in Massachusetts and everywhere else, scratching her to heads about
what it is he wants to do, what he`s trying to do, if he even knows what he
is trying to do.

When he sent out this indecipherable tweet in January, well, that didn`t
help out either. Any excuse to get that.

In last nine months, Brown has flirted with running in the special election
for John Kerry`s U.S. Senate seat. And back out of that, he visited Iowa
twice. He`s toyed with the idea of running for president. And now, he is
appearing regularly in New Hampshire, where Democrat Jeanne Shaheen would
be running for reelection to the Senate next year. And now, Brown has put
his Massachusetts home on the market, which would leave him with just one
house in New Hampshire.

Well, polling shows he`d be at least competitive in a race against Shaheen.
Brown has been coy in what he is up to. It all got to be too much for the
powerful conservative voice in New Hampshire. The feared editorial page of
the "Union Leader", which excoriated Brown for his Granite state
flirtations. Brown, quote, "makes Jeanne Shaheen stronger and the state
Republican Party relatively weaker, as long he`s just entertaining a run,"
they wrote.

And they issued an ultimatum, Brown needs to move here and state a run or
state definitively that he will not be a candidate.

Here to talk with us about what Scott Brown is doing is the author of that
editorial, "New Hampshire Union Leader" editorial page editor, Drew Cline.

Drew, thanks for joining us.


KORNACKI: So, first of all, any tip (ph) from Scott Brown people after you
wrote this?

CLINE: No. We didn`t get it any feedback. Our political reporter called
him and talked to him about it. He didn`t reach out to us, which is
interesting because it falls into the consistent pattern of him not
reaching out to any top folks in New Hampshire.

So, you know, let`s go back. I think to help you understand New
Hampshire`s perspective on this. Go back to the race with Martha Coakley
and 2010, January -- so before that, he`s way up in the polls, right? He
becomes, before he becomes a national Republican hero, he is a New
Hampshire Republican hero because New Hampshire in every election even
municipal elections gets Democrats from Massachusetts flooding over the
border to make phone calls to come door-to-door, and Republicans in New
Hampshire resent that a lot.

This was the first time Republicans in New Hampshire ever got the
opportunity to give them back. Go down to Massachusetts and it was huge,
Republicans flooded. Now you go to call centers, Brown campaign set up
call centers near the border so that New Hampshire Republicans can go down
and make phone calls for him and they were full.

So, he was this great hero in New Hampshire to Republicans.

KORNACKI: So there would be potentially an opening for him, to avoid the
carpet backer charge. There is a groundswell sort of goodwill for Scott

CLINE: Well, New Hampshire is a state with more than half residents are
from out of state. So he could conceivably come in.

Now, we go to the last six months or. In April, he`s at an event for
Martin Luther King, Jr., a sort of memorial event. He talks a lot about
himself. And someone asks him about running in New Hampshire.

He talks incessantly about how he`s basically grew up in New Hampshire. A
lot of family ties here, and I`m going to rule out running for Senate. All
of a sudden, Joan Shaheen, click, starts raising money.

So, he comes a lot more times to New Hampshire. He`s been here seven or
eight times and every trip now that Shaheen campaign gets in overdrive and
raises tons of money. He has not made any steps to actually set up a
campaign. He`s not called any of the top Republicans in the state, he`s
not gotten any operation on the ground, but he won`t rule it out.

KORNACKI: So, he has no real relationship with the Republican Party
establishment. So locking at this race if 2014, you know, New Hampshire is
a state that used to be a Republican state long ago, now it is a swing

Jeanne Shaheen, I`d say, is a marginal favorite, certainly it could be a
competitive race. Are there other Republicans who are being crowded out
because of the attention Scott Brown is taking up?

CLINE: That`s unclear right. There are some -- probably not at this
point. It`s no so much a crowd out as it is he`s crowding a fund raising
for anybody.

So, when he comes -- since he`s opened the door, Shaheen can tap into
networks. I mean, we were talking how vast Elizabeth Warren`s fundraising
network is. It`s huge.

She has now helping Shaheen raise money through her network because of
Scott Brown. Without that connection, Shaheen would not be able to tap
into that fund raising network. So, it`s a huge advantage. He either
doesn`t realize it. And we hope the editorial will help him realize it or
doesn`t care.

So, that`s a concern I think to a lot of Republicans in New Hampshire. So
he`s gone from this hero, everybody thought he helped us get being those
Massachusetts liberals to what is he doing? He is hurting us.

KORNACKI: So, what does this look like nationally? I mean, the Scott
Brown of 2010 was this -- became Massachusetts a national Republican hero,
his sort of behavior since the election in 2010, how have Republicans
nationally, how have the national press been looking at Scott Brown?

MARTIN: They look smaller, no question about it. When you go from this
sort of conquering hero he was in 2010 to, OK, he had a tough reelect in a
top state in a presidential year, he loses, we all get that. But he ran a
pretty strong campaign, raised a lot of money.

So, what`s next? Well, he`s going to run for governor of Massachusetts.
Well, I`m not going to do that.

OK, maybe Senate New Hampshire. Long, deep ties there? We`ll see.

KUCINICH: He talked about the president at one point.


COPPINS: There`s also the Senate seat was vacated --

MARTIN: Te then goes to Iowa, to the state fair, but in a way where it`s
almost like he`s reading the state`s direction, like I`m here in Iowa at
the state fair. You know what that means.


BROWN: This is a guy addicted to the attention he got for a few years, he
is looking for anyway to sort of gin up? I mean --

KUCINICH: Certainly. I mean, you have to have some kind of focus, pick a
body. Pick a seat. It seems like he doesn`t know what he wants to do.
So, he is keeping his options opened. I can do this, this, or this.

COPPINS: It also helps to maintain the attention that got him his
contributor job at FOX News, for example, right? He wants to be a part of
the political mindset. I`m from New England.

I know like Drew does that New Hampshire has a very distinct political
culture. Republicans may like him there. They also hate when they`re
treated like an overflow from Massachusetts, right?

So, there is this kind of sense he would have to battle, well, I couldn`t
win in Massachusetts, so I guess I`ll try that state up north, right?

KORNACKI: Yes. No, that`s the thing that I kind of wonder about. I grew
up in New England. I`m one of those Massachusetts people that would go to
Nashua, New Hampshire, because they have no sales in their shopping mall
tax. That`s one thing.

I wonder, Drew, though, do you want him to run? Because you would like to
have Jeanne Shaheen to lose next year, do you want Scott Brown to run? Do
you think he would be the best Republican option for Republican --

CLINE: I don`t think it`s a matter of do we want him, you know, to come or
not. It`s not a matter of inviting Scott Brown. He`s got to make up his
own mind on what he wants to do. The Republicans in New Hampshire will,
you know, there will be candidates to choose from.

So it`s not really from the leader perspective, it`s not our job to sort of
weigh in on that and say, hey, let`s recruit a candidate for Republicans.
We don`t really do that.

But the point with Brown is, he`s got to stop treating New Hampshire, if he
wants to have -- even if he doesn`t want to run here, which all the signs
point to him not wanting to run here. He should have the courtesy to keep
a good relationship with New Hampshire Republicans and to be respectful of
their needs and he doesn`t seem to be doing that right at the moment.

At least, maybe he`s not intentionally being disrespectful, but it`s coming
across that way. And he`s got a lot of Republican activists in the state
really upset with him right now.

KORNACKI: I think maybe, "The Union Leader, my favorite about it, you guys
aren`t afraid to run the front page editorials. Maybe you need to do one
of those to get his attention next time. We`ll keep an eye on what

Anyway, thanks to Drew Cline of "The New Hampshire Union Leader" for
joining us. Three things I love still ahead. Politics, more politics, New
York City and football.

It`s a good day. We`ll go get to it, ahead.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, that`s a little hard. Here we go.

give it a shot? Go low.




KORNACKI: That`s Chris Christie needing only one throw to beat President
Obama at an arcade game called Touchdown Fever in the Jersey Shore this
spring. He gave the president a bear he won.

I`m a football fan. I`m a politics fan. And today, there is another way,
another story in which they are linked in a very profound and I think
important way. It`s a beautiful day to watch football, folks.

Stay with us.


KORNACKI: In a month, America`s biggest city, New York, will elect a new
mayor. And we have new clue about who it might be.

A poll this week put Bill de Blasio ahead 49 points. The idea of de Blasio
winning probably doesn`t seem that historic. A white guy with an Italian
name as the mayor, seen that before. The 6-foot-5 de Blasio wouldn`t be
the tall mayor. John Lindsay was 6-foot-4.

You know what, if de Blasio wins it will be the first time 24 years that
New York, that deep, deep, blue New York, where Obama won 82 percent of the
vote last year, it will be the first time in 24 years that New York has
elected a Democrat as its leader. The first Democratic mayor since David
Dinkins who made history in 1989 when he became the city`s first black


DAVID DINKINS (D), THEN-NYC MAYORAL CANDIDATE: In a tough time you gave me
your trust. And you gave our city something special, you voted your hopes
and not your fears.


KORNACKI: But Dinkins took over at a tough time. It was the early `90s
recession that hit the Northeast particularly hard. It drained revenue the
city couldn`t afford to lose. The New York of that era was ravaged by the
violent crime, crack epidemic and AIDS crisis and mounting racial tensions.

There was progress in the Dinkins years. By the end, crime was falling.
It`s kept falling to the two decades since then. There was a reduction in
homelessness. There was new economic investment.

But the deep racial and ethnic and cultural divisions that defined his city
back then made his path to re-election treacherous. Dinkins lost a close
1993 rematch against Rudy Giuliani. And that started the long, improbable
streak of non-Democratic mayors in New York that is about to end.

Mayor Dinkins is now ready to say things about his days at mayor and 1993
campaign he hasn`t said before. He does it in his new book. It`s called
"A Mayor`s Life: Governing New York`s Gorgeous Mosaic."

And Mayor Dinkins joins us now on the set.

Your Honor, thank you for joining us.

DINKINS: Thank you.

KORNACKI: So, I guess I`m just curious. You are the last time when you
were elected in 1989, it`s amazing how much the world has changed. There`s
still Soviet Union in 1989. Larry Bird was still playing for the Celtics.

That was the last time this city, this overwhelming Democratic city elected
a Democratic mayor. It is going to happen, it looks like, unless these
polls are way off. It`s going to happen again next month.

But when you lock at that 24 hour-year gap in New York. What do you think
that is all about?

DINKINS: Well, I look at the fact that Mark Green I think would have won
had he not agreed to let Rudy stay in office for 90 days following 2011.

KORNACKI: This was in 2001, he was running.

DINKINS: Terrible, terrible mistake because the electorates are going to
say, well, gee, if you can`t handle things, why should we vote for you?
So, I think that made the difference.

He was -- I was supporter of his. He had been a commissioner of mine. He
asked me about a lot of advice. He never asked me about. That had he, I
would have said, hell no.

KORNACKI: But you were mayor at and we get to sort of the end there for
you in 1993 when you lost that really close race to Rudy Giuliani, you were
mayor at a difficult time in New York City. We talk about the Crown
Heights riots, one of the famous examples of the era. But you were mayor
at a time when there was a lot happening in New York. There were a lot of
divisions that didn`t have anything to do with you. It`s just the way the
city was back then.

I wonder if you could take us back to what it was like trying to govern a
city with all of that going on around you. What was it like back then?

DINKINS: Well, our city is a gorgeous mosaic. I went to school in Harlem
part of the time. We were told New York City is a melting pot. I don`t
agree. I think it is a gorgeous mosaic.

We have as many separate ethnic identities in New York, almost as many as
the United Nations has member nations. It`s a great city. It`s a
wonderful city to govern if you like public service and you like people.
It`s the best job I ever had, that`s for sure.

KORNACKI: Well, you write in your new book, this got a little press
attention when asked about it. You wrote in your book, "Looking back in
the 1993 company against Giuliani, when ask why I lost? I used to say,
`Why do you think?` I did not want to say it out loud, but it`s time.
Now, I say, racism, plain and simple."

DINKINS: I might have more artfully phrased that. If one considers the
contest of `89, I had three opponents. Ed Koch incumbent, Dick Ravitch, a
very bright guy, who did a great job with the MTA and Jay Golden, who I say
is the most articulate, knowledgeable person I`ve ever encountered about
municipal government.

And the conventional wisdom was we wouldn`t win, because even if I finished
first, I wouldn`t get 40 percent and each of the other three being Jewish,
their supporters would gang up against me, I`d lose. We got 51 percent.

Yet in the general election against Rudy, 1989, he is not yet America`s
mayor, 9/11 has not occurred. She a prosecutor to be sure, nothing extra
special and 1.9 million votes cast, we had a margin of about 50,000. Then,
in `93, I say had not there been or maybe I should have made it more clear,
had there not been a Girgenti report that Governor Cuomo ordered about
Crown Heights and the fact that they put the succession.

KORNACKI: This is Staten Island voters, the succession referendum.

DINKINS: The Governor Mario Cuomo, that is, is a legal scholar. No way in
hell can you take a portion of the city and excise it from the balance with
the whole city being responsible for the city`s debt. So, I`ve always
maintained that was unconstitutional in the first place.

But to my great surprise, Mel Miller, the speaker of the assembly, let it
pass and I said, sorry the governor never signed it. But he did. I think
those things perhaps more than anything else contributed to our loss. But
I can`t say just racism alone because I never would have been elected in
`89 had not a lot of white folks voted for me.

KORNACKI: What do you make quickly, we have the polls here, Bill de Blasio
ahead by 50 percent, will be the first Democratic mayor, so much of the
success of Rudy Giuliani, politically, and even a little bit Bloomberg,
politically, is sort of defining themselves and what they represent against
the caricature of you and the era that you represent. Sort of scaring
voters in the city that if you elect a Democrat, you`re going to get all of
these problems in the late 1980s the fact that city is in a place to elect
a Democrat probably by an overwhelming margin, do you think that indicates
New York has sort of moved on from the Giuliani and Bloomberg eras?

DINKINS: Well, I think it shows a lot positive about Bill de Blasio. We
have to give him credit. By way of full disclosure, I supported Bill

But de Blasio I like. He and his wife both worked in our administration.
And I think a lot of him and I think that to add with his son Dante and the
big after fro, it`s the best I have seen ever.

KORNACKI: In this end, we should say, too, there was video that got
attention this week, where you were giving a toast at Bill de Blasio`s
wedding back in 1984, see if you have ties to him as well. Probably the
next mayor of New York City.

Anyway, our thanks, to former Mayor David Dinkins of New York.

We`ll be right back after this.

DINKINS: Thank you, buddy.


KORNACKI: So we have been teasing this a little bit. But any time we get
politics and football at once, I call that a good day. Chances are, if I
hadn`t gotten the gig hosting this show, I would be spending my Saturday
mornings in October watching ESPN`s college game day and waiting prediction
on who`s going to win the big game that day, which he does by putting on a
gigantic oversized head gear of the team`s mascot. I think that`s Nebraska
there with the corn. I`m not sure.

There`s a big game today. The Air Force Falcons, they`re playing the Navy
Midshipmen. This is a part of the annual battle for what is called the
commander-in-chief trophy, a triangular three-way series between the three
service academies, Army is the other one.

But, today`s game almost didn`t happen because of the federal government
shutdown. On Tuesday, the Defense Department said it was suspended
intercollegiate games at the academies. After a strong public outcry,
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ended up saying the game could be played
after all save when private donors agreed to step in and foot the bill.

So, this is an example to how easy it is to turn something affected by the
government shutdown back on when there is broad public support for it.
Even people who don`t like government in theory, find their outrage at some
of the specific things that had been close down. And House Republicans are
hoping to capitalize on outrage by trying to pass bills to fund only those
parts of the government that they like, that are very popular.

The other stuff they don`t like, that can stay closed.


REP. ERIC CANTOR (R-VA), MAJORITY LEADER: While we work out our
differences here in Washington, children should not be denied the
treatment. I believe that Senator Reid must take up this legislation today
for the sake of those children and their health.


KORNACKI: That was Eric Cantor making the case for NIH funding earlier
this week. Since then, Republicans have offered up more bills to open very
specific parts of the government later in the week, at least one of those
bills is going to be voted on later today.

But Senate Democrats and the president are not going to have any of it they
say. You cannot pick or choose. Either the government is opened or it`s

Let`s talk about this piecemeal strategy Republicans are pursuing. Is it
gaining any traction with the public? Is it buying them any time? Or are
people seeing right through it?

I guess the best way to set this up, is "The Hill" newspaper, Jackie used
to work for "The Hill", I know. I used to work for the rival "Roll Call".
But "The Hill" had a story last night that basically said Republicans have
finally found their message for the shutdown. And the message is they say
they want to call the Democrats the party of no, based on the Democrats
voting no on funding bills like NIH, any of these individual piecemeal
funding bills. Again the House is going to be in session, you know, today,
taking up at one of these, is there any sense this is gaining any traction?

Republicans think they have a message, or is this a message gaining any
traction with the public?

KUCINICH: Good luck. I don`t know.

There are so many federal workers who do -- who can`t go to work right now.
Opening a national park isn`t going to solve that.

So, I don`t think so. I think this strategy can only go so far, especially
when you lock at something like NIH. This is an organization that
Republicans have cut money from over the last couple years, now they`re
saying, you should open it up, we need these services.

So, there is a little disconnect there. I don`t see it going very far.
It`s not because Harry Reid is not going to do it. That`s reality.

COPPINS: I will say that it`s true that the federal workers, you know,
they don`t care whether the national park or national memorial is opened or

But there are a lot of Americans out there who so far haven`t felt the
effects of the shutdown. Yesterday I was at a barber shop in Brooklyn. I
asked them for the Kornacki. They didn`t quite get it right.

KORNACKI: That means they don`t cut your hair right.

COPPINS: I was talking to them. They said I think the Republican message
that, you know, Democrats, we heard Rand Paul on that hot mic moment say,
you know, Democrats I don`t think they poll tested this, we won`t negotiate
strategy. We`re going to eventually win.

I don`t think it`s gotten through. But I don`t think also that most
Americans are broadly blaming one party or the other.

You know, the polls have showed that Republicans are getting more blame.
But in general, I think people who aren`t paying close attention think that
both parties just need to figure it out, right? So, that -- I think the
Republicans are hoping that by saying, well, we want to fund cancer
patients, we want to fund the war memorials. We want to fund the things
that -- as soon as they pop up in the press that that will eventually steer
the narrative their way.

KUCINICH: Then have you like mortgages that are being denied. You have
all these other things, what about that? What about that?

KORNACKI: And I feel like -- that was the story of the last shutdown, too,
it was sort of the ripple effect of the shutdown.

COPPINS: It takes a little while.

KORNACKI: It starts to affect the broader economy, and then people start
to maybe feel a more direct way to beat people who aren`t government

KUCINICH: That`s what I`m saying that I think that strategy has a very
limited --

KORNACKI: Jonathan, we were talking at the top of the show, you in the
course of your reporting, you are pretty well-connected to the Republican
world. What -- what are you hearing about the Republicans you talk about
in how they are reacting to the shutdown, itself. This idea of do they
think they`re winning, is that what you are hearing?

MARTIN: I had a story yesterday in the "Times" about a lot of the sort of
elder statesmen of the party, or at least the sort of veterans around for
quite a few campaigns who are increasingly angry because -- to borrow the
Bob Corker phrase -- they were led to this box canyon and the fact is
defunding Obamacare was never going to happen for the obvious reasons we
know about -- Harry Reid and Barack Obama.

So, instead of attention being focused this week on the rollout, at times
rocky rollout of the health care law, everything is focused entirely on the
shutdown. And so, this is frustrating for Republicans who see President
Obama`s numbers at a two-year low in our poll, why are we giving him the
life line right now? So, I think that is a source of deep frustration.

It also is a part of a larger lament, larger complaint I find also, that a
year after the presidential election, their second consecutive loss, they
are locked in this interminable bull back and forth with President Obama
over spending issues in Washington and that the reform of the party is
being obscured -- well, delayed because they can never get out of these
intractable problems with President Obama.

And the people who believe that the governors in the party or the salvation
are really angry because the face of the party is, if not Ted Cruz, it`s
John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. They want the face of the party to be
Chris Christie, Scott Walker, Brian Sandoval, Bobby Jindal.

So I think you feel a lot of Republicans who are angry about the shutdown
but who are really angry about the state of affairs one year after the
presidential election because to become a national party again -- a reform
agenda is necessary and they can`t get any traction for that as long as
we`re in this endless series of fighting.

KORNACKI: It seems like the Republican Party has a choice and had one
after the 2012 election where they saw if you`re sort of very ultra-
responsive to the Tea Party movement and your base, you`re not going to win
nothing. You can win right now the way the population is distributed and
the line the way the lines are drawn. You can win the House, you can be
the House party. You can have a chance.

MARTIN: Congressional party versus national party.

KORNACKI: Right, but to win a presidential election, you can`t on this

COPPINS: Well, remember when President Obama predicted if he won re-
election the fever would break? I think a lot of people thought that was
going to happen in Washington, and we saw glimmers of that with immigration
reform coming up. You know, you saw Republicans come to the table. That
ended up going nowhere after it got to the House.

Now, we`re at this moment where the government is shut down and we`re
seeing the Republicans basically refuse to budge.

KORNACKI: It goes back to the House.

KUCINICH: We were talking about this story on the break. The Virginia
governor`s race could be affected by this shutdown. Cuccinelli down in the
polls and this is not helping.

KORNACKI: All the government workers in northern Virginia. It`s the
Republican Party that`s blamed then it`s the Republican candidate for
governor of Virginia.

What should we know for today? Our answers from the panel, that`s coming
up right after this.


KORNACKI: All right. We`re near the end of the show. Time to find out
what our guests think we should know for today.

Let`s start with you, Jonathan.

MARTIN: Well, because it`s the weekend, I`m going to talk about books. I
have a colleague Peter Baker at "The Times" who has a book coming out later
this month on the Bush and Cheney years. It`s really the first full-scale
look at those eight years that we`ve seen in book form.

As you guys know, Peter Baker covered the White House going back to
Clinton, first for "The Washington Post," now for "The New York Times."
It`s a really, really fascinating book, and I think we have lots of those

KORNACKI: All right. And, Jackie?

KUCINICH: You know, I was going to talk about the shutdown, but you say it
is the weekend. I`m going to talk about the Ohio State Buckeyes.

MARTIN: There you go. Big game in Evanston.

KUCINICH: It is, but we`re going to remain undefeated and it`s going to be
a great year.

KORNACKI: The Buckeyes over the Wildcats.

KUCINICH: I am, every day.

MARTIN: There was a tweet yesterday that the grass on the field is like a
foot high, by the way, to slow down the buckeyes.

KORNACKI: Those wily northwestern ground keepers.

And, McKay?

COPPINS: Moving to religion briefly, Pope Francis has been giving a series
of interviews in the last couple weeks where he said the church has de-
emphasized its stances on abortion and same-sex marriage, and it`s gotten a
lot on the religious right pretty upset. We saw a key official in the
Southern Baptist Convention actually come out and say that the pope was
guilty of severing God`s love from his holiness, which is saying the church
needs to move back to conservative issues. That will be an important thing

KORNACKI: Yes, watching this pope has been interesting.

My college football pick of the day, for what it`s worth, I know you`re all
anxious, Kansas State Wildcats going to get back on track and beat the
Oklahoma State Sooners. I mean the Cowboys. Wow, I`m going to get in
trouble with that.

I want to thank Jonathan Martin, "The Washington Post" -- that was
embarrassing -- "The Washington Post`s" Jackie Kucinich, and "BuzzFeed`s"
McKay Coppins -- I`m glad I get to stop talking now. Thanks for getting

Thank you for joining us. Stay tuned. We`ll be back tomorrow at 8:00 a.m.
Eastern Time.

Stick around. "MELISSA HARRIS-PERRY" is up next. And, you know, who else
-- Congress. It`s the House of Representatives. They are about to gavel
in for yet another special Saturday session. As they do that, Melissa will
try to make sense of the shutdown is really about.

So, don`t go anywhere because Nerdland is next. Have a great day. We`ll
see you tomorrow morning.



Copyright 2013 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 Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>