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

Weekend of July 17-18, 2004

CHRIS MATTHEWS, host:

Look, the big question this week is whether these cultural issues are a plus

for the Republican Party or not.  The gay marriage issue, the stem cell issue,

the Hollywood connection.  Does this all add up to a plus for the Republicans

or should we just stick to the war and the economy?

Family values.  Ron Reagan fights the president on stem cells while Lynne

Cheney parts with Dick on gay marriage.  Wedge issues rile voters but also cut

to the guts.  Are the politicians exploiting deeply felt family matters?

Love letters in the sand?  Pat Boone blasts a raunchy Kerry fund-raiser.

Could Hollywood liberals be playing to the Republican game plan?

The millionaires next door.  The Kerrys and the Edwardses live a block apart

in Georgetown.  The Bushes and the Cheneys are all-state tycoons.  Can these

people even grasp what the average guy in the phone book knows about paying

the bills?

Plus the case against this election being close.  If the past is any guide,

expect a blowout.

All that and more with a wide-eyed round table on your weekly news show.

Announcer:  From Congress to the West Wing, he's been a Washington insider;

now he's one of the capital's top journalists:  Chris Matthews.

MATTHEWS:  Hi, I'm Chris Matthews.  Welcome to the show.  Let's go inside.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Interview: BBC correspondent Katty Kay, Black Press USA editor Ed

Gordon, NBC's Andrea Mitchell and "Crossfire" host Tucker Carlson

discuss top presidential election issues

CHRIS MATTHEWS, host:

Katty Kay covers Washington for the British Broadcasting Corporation; Ed

Gordon anchors the news for BET and is an editor of Black Press USA; Andrea

Mitchell has covered many presidential campaigns for NBC News; and Tucker

Carlson appears on CNN's "Crossfire" and hosts "Tucker Carlson:  Unfiltered"

on PBS.

First up, family values.  This week, President Bush and his party reminded the

country there is more at stake in this fight than Iraq and good-paying jobs.

Here's the president calling for a ban on gay marriage.

President GEORGE W. BUSH:  (From July 10 radio address) I urge members of the

House and Senate to pass and send to the state for ratification an amendment

that defines marriage in the United States as a union of a man and woman.

MATTHEWS:  Tucker, is this smart for the president to push this issue of

banning gay marriage?

Mr. TUCKER CARLSON (CNN; PBS):  I don't think it is.  I mean, I think in

general, you know, most of the public is against gay marriage.  John Kerry is

against gay marriage.  Most Democrats are against gay marriage.  But I think,

as usual, the Bush administration's problem is it hasn't explained itself.

Rather than explain what might be wrong with gay marriage, or better yet,

saying, `Let's slow down and do some studies on how this will affect

children,' for instance, make it a children's issue, it has instead come up

with this blanket amendment that I think a lot of people--incorrectly, but

still see as an attack on gays.

MATTHEWS:  Ed, why do you think they're doing it?

Mr. ED GORDON (Black Press USA):  I think they're doing it because...

MATTHEWS:  It forced a vote on the Senate this week on the whole question

whether to debate the issue.  Why?

Mr. GORDON:  I think your intro hit it.  You said that there's more than the

war and good-paying jobs, and I think that's a problem.  They can't talk about

those two things so they're stabbing in the dark to find something to latch on

to, and I think they hope this is the issue.

MATTHEWS:  Will it help in places like Ohio, conservative southern Ohio,

western Pennsylvania?

Mr. GORDON:  I think it will help in corners of those states, but in its

totality, to win the state, I don't think it will help.

MATTHEWS:  Andrea:

ANDREA MITCHELL reporting:

I think it's a way to energize the base.  It's a good wedge issue in the fall,

and it doesn't matter that they...

MATTHEWS:  OK, who's it tick off?  Who gets angry thinking about gays getting

married and that being an official public event in this country?

MITCHELL:  Some of the people in those areas of Ohio, the panhandle of

Florida, Michigan, certainly the entire South.  So it's a good issue to

energize the people who they need to get out, and they can use it in the fall

to campaign against Kerry and Edwards.

Ms. KATTY KAY (Washington Correspondent, BBC):  Yeah, partly, perhaps also,

there are conservatives in those very groups who have had enough of the big

budget deficit, of the big government, who need an issue, a wedge conservative

issue, that they can build on.  But, actually, what's interesting about the

overall numbers is that since people have seen gays getting married in places

like San Francisco and places like Massachusetts, there had been a fear

amongst the gay community that that could produce a backlash.  Actually, the

opinion polls have shown that more people now feel that actually gay marriage

is not such a bad idea.  The majority is still opposed, but the amount opposed

is smaller than it was last December.

MATTHEWS:  You mean, your worst nightmare isn't as scary as you thought it

was.

Ms. KAY:  Actually, exactly, because you see that they're people, and they're

couples like everybody else.

MATTHEWS:  Well, let me talk politics here for a second.  Tucker, you know

this business.  The Republican Bush family learned the hard way that when you

lose the right, as they did in '92 because of the tax increase and the "Read

my lips" betrayal, and other issues that maybe George Bush Sr.  was too

mainstream in his religion--he wasn't evangelical enough; he wasn't connected

with the South.  Has the son learned those lessons and says, `Damn it, I am

not going to lose the right this time on cultural issues'?

Mr. CARLSON:  Well, they've been worried about it since day one, absolutely.

They have alienated a lot of people on the right because of spending and also

because of the war in Iraq.  There are still a lot of nationalist

conservatives.  Not isolationists, necessarily, but people who are distrustful

of any sort of international...

MATTHEWS:  Entanglement.

Mr. CARLSON:  That's exactly right.  I do think, though--this is Katty's

point--this is one of the very few issues left that even works as a wedge,

because if you're angry at Kerry for being a big spender, well, Bush is sort

of a big spender, too.  If you're angry at Kerry on Iraq because he wants to

stay the course, well, so does Bush.  This is the one place they really do

disagree.

Ms. KAY:  But I think they do have to be careful about it.  I think Bush has

to be very careful not to be seen as gay-bashing, but as opposed to gay

marriage as a legal issue.

MATTHEWS:  Well, it looks like he's willing to take that risk, Katty.

Ms. KAY:  He's been carefully using that language, legal language.

MATTHEWS:  Let's take a look at why he might be willing to take the risk,

which he is taking, looking, perhaps, like a gay-basher.  Let's check in with

THE MATTHEWS METER this week.  We asked 12 of our regulars whether the gay

marriage issue helps or hurts the president.  Nine of our panel, three

fourths, say it helps him.  Three say it hurts him.  And the polling would

suggest the same exact results.

                                    TEXT:

Favor Or Oppose

   Gay Marriage Ban?

             Favor  Oppose

Republicans   78%    20%

Democrats     57%    39%

Independents  47%    49%

CBS News Poll May 23 3%

MATTHEWS:  Seventy-eight percent of Republican voters favor an outright ban on

gay marriage, but the Independent voters are evenly split.  About 47 favor a

ban there against gay marriage, but 49 percent, pretty much the same, are not

against the ban.  So if you're Bush and you're Karl Rove in the White House,

you're thinking to yourself, `I can keep the base happy with this thing and

not offend Independents.' Andrea:

MITCHELL:  The swing voters are not going to change their mind on this.  They

are evenly split already.

MATTHEWS:  So no cost to going on the right on this.

MITCHELL:  Exactly.  So go to the right...

MATTHEWS:  Is that what everybody thinks here?

Ms. KAY:  Well, no, but...

Mr. GORDON:  You know where it's problematic?  It's problematic in--as we see

the Cheneys' home, because, even though this is very much still in the closet

for many people, you don't like to talk about it outright when it hits your

home.  We see what Mrs.  Cheney did.

MATTHEWS:  Let's listen to her right now.  Even though 78 percent of

Republicans support a ban on gay marriage, the other 18 percent can be very

vocal.  Here's Lynne Cheney, you're talking about, this week breaking from her

husband and the president.

Ms. LYNNE CHENEY:  (From CNN) First of all, to be clear, that people should

be free to enter into the relationships that they choose.  And, secondly, to

recognize what's historically been a situation that when it comes to

conferring legal status on relationships, that is a matter left to the states.

MATTHEWS:  What do you think?

Mr. GORDON:  I venture to say, if their daughter weren't as up-front as she

is...

MATTHEWS:  Publicly a lesbian.

Mr. GORDON:  ...you would not see this going on, the division and her coming

out and really playing to what Democrats are hoping for, and that is that

split.

MATTHEWS:  Can I talk hard politics here?

Mr. CARLSON:  Yeah.

MATTHEWS:  It's not just a zero-sum game here.  There are people that don't

vote because they don't have an interest in voting.  Now, if you made the gun

issue a big issue in the campaign, the owners would get out and the

anti-gun--or the pro-gun control.  But in this case, there are apparently four

million Christian conservatives who've been identified out there, who didn't

vote in the last election but who apparently seem to care a lot about this

issue.  Is this an attempt like an outreach program to bring in the right,

Andrea?

MITCHELL:  Sure, he needs those people.  He's got to have them, and they're

not that enthusiastic about George W. Bush because of some of the things that

Tucker has described.

MATTHEWS:  Let's talk about...

MITCHELL:  The base needs to be revitalized.

Ms. KAY:  But now you have nine states which have anti-gay marriage

initiatives on their ballots for November.

MATTHEWS:  Right.

Ms. KAY:  That's, again, the kind of thing--this outreach program, where you

try and get people into the ballot that are...

Mr. GORDON:  It can backfire.

Ms. KAY:  ...precisely those `For me.'

Mr. GORDON:  It can backfire if you see...

MATTHEWS:  How does it backfire if only conservatives care about it?

Ms. KAY:  It can backfire, as it did in '92.

Mr. GORDON:  Exactly.  If you see it as gay-bashing and then the mobilization

from the gay side will certainly bring votes.

Ms. KAY:  And what's...

MATTHEWS:  But don't the gay people and people who care about their cause of

liberation, I should say--tolerance, at least--don't they already know who

sides on what?  They know that Kerry's more for gay unions; he's more

sympathetic to the cause.

MITCHELL:  And they're going to be active already.

MATTHEWS:  Haven't the gays already marked their ballots `Democrat'?

MITCHELL:  You bet.

Mr. GORDON:  Oh, absolutely.  Absolutely.

Ms. KAY:  And you know what?  I think they will be active as well.

MATTHEWS:  So how do you lose?

Mr. CARLSON:  No, but it's not about the gays.  The gay vote is a tiny vote.

MITCHELL:  Oh, I don't think it's a tiny vote.

Mr. CARLSON:  The way to win on gay marriage is not to make it about gays,

it's to make it about marriage, because people like gays.  People...

Ms. KAY:  Which is why Bush has been framing it in the context `I was...'

MATTHEWS:  OK.

Ms. KAY:  `...pushed into this by...'

Mr. CARLSON:  No, but this is outright.

MATTHEWS:  That's a very positive statement yet to be tested.

Mr. CARLSON:  No, but it's true.  People do like gays.

MATTHEWS:  But you're right.  How many are there?  Five to 10 percent or less.

MITCHELL:  I don't think the gay vote is a tiny vote.

MATTHEWS:  Or less than 10 percent, clearly.

Let's go to this.  It wasn't just Lynne Cheney this week.  It was also the

Reagan family.  Here's Ron Reagan telling me why the son of the most revered

conservative Republican in history is speaking this year to the Democratic

Convention.

Mr. RON REAGAN:  (From MSNBC's "Hardball" Monday) I'm not going to the

convention to make a political speech.  I'm going there to talk about

embryonic stem cell research, which is of critical importance to this country

and the world.  And the Democrats support it, and the Bush administration

doesn't.

MATTHEWS:  Well, there's a lot of numbers behind this in terms of how the

public reacts to this.  Not just a moral issue to a lot of people.  Eighteen

million Americans have diabetes right now, and a lot of us are thinking we

might be getting it, by the way.  Another four million have Alzheimer's and

they have caregivers involved.  Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries.

Altogether, 25 million, plus the multiple factor of their families involved,

are interested in stem cell research.  It doesn't have to do with sex; it

doesn't have to do with the usual trappings of a discussion over life issues

or abortion rights issues.  Is stem cell an issue that the Democrats win on?

Ms. KAY:  I think this is much harder for President Bush.  And you've had

three dozen Republican congressman, 48 Nobel laureates in science coming out

and saying that the ban on stem cell research has to be overturned as well.

Ron Reagan is not by himself.  There's a broad body...

MATTHEWS:  He's got Nancy behind him, too.

Ms. KAY:  He's got Nancy behind him as well.  And I think he has public

support...

MATTHEWS:  Orrin Hatch.

MITCHELL:  Orrin Hatch.

Ms. KAY:  ...and public sympathy behind him as well, and that's more

important.

MITCHELL:  You know, this goes so far beyond...

MATTHEWS:  You're laughing.  I'm sorry.

Mr. CARLSON:  Well, I'm just laughing at Ron Reagan's line that, `I'm not

giving a political speech at the Democratic Convention.' I mean, that's

ludicrous.

MITCHELL:  Hey!

Mr. CARLSON:  I will say that the problem with this issue is the White House

hasn't explained why it might be wrong.  I mean, first of all, there's no

guarantee that stem cell research will cure anything at all.  But I must say,

they haven't explained what the core issue is, and that is you shouldn't

create life to destroy it.  Without saying that out loud, people get confused.

MITCHELL:  But that's...

Ms. KAY:  But they put the cap on the expanding of the scientific experiment.

They said there were going to be 80 lines of embryos out there to research...

Mr. CARLSON:  That's right.

MITCHELL:  And there aren't.

Ms. KAY:  ...and there are not.

Mr. CARLSON:  That's right.

Ms. KAY:  There aren't that many.  And yet, here you have the scientists

saying, `But we could have access to some 400 that are already there.'

MATTHEWS:  OK, Andrea, we've got to give--basically talking about...

MITCHELL:  She's talking about the multiplier effect.

MATTHEWS:  ...fertilizing an egg in a petri dish.  That's what we're talking

about.

MITCHELL:  And, just the fact is that you have so much people, as Chris'

numbers show, with Alzheimer's who have relatives, spinal cord injuries.  It

probably is not, ironically, going to be helpful on Alzheimer's, of all the

diseases.  But there are so many people, it crosses party lines; this goes

beyond anything that has to do with morality.

Mr. GORDON:  And, obviously, as America...

Ms. KAY:  And America is now squarely behind other countries in the research

on this.

Mr. GORDON:  Exactly.

Ms. KAY:  In Europe, you're already starting to see...

Mr. GORDON:  And as America gets older, the demand is going to grow.

MATTHEWS:  Right.  OK, but there's--you've got some good points.  We're going

to talk about it in future weeks.  This is a moral issue, as well as a science

issue.

On another front in the culture war this week, clean-cut Pat Boone, the white

bucks guy, visited the capital and blasted last week's celebrity fund-raiser

for John Kerry, which had some raunchy material.

Mr. PAT BOONE:  (From Tuesday) These entertainers were not speaking about

traditional values or from the heartland of America.  It sounds like they were

speaking from the crotch of Hollywood.

MATTHEWS:  Well, there's a guy that reached kind of low to make his point.

Andrea, this is a problem.  We had the elite Republicans, wealthy--and wealthy

Democrats, too.  Then we have the elite left, coast and New York liberals.  Is

this smart for the Hollywood entertainers to use this kind of language when

they're pushing their candidate, Kerry?

MITCHELL:  You know, it was a Hollywood moment in the worst possible time and

place with all of the exposure at that event, and it was the last thing that

the Kerry-Edwards folks needed in their rollout week.  It was just bad

politics.  And let's see whether or not they can ever roll the videotape.

Mr. GORDON:  But the argument continues to be the height of hypocrisy when we

talk about values and we talk about the Hollywood values.  And this town can

be as raunchy as any, and we all know that.  So we know that this is just

pandering to the voter.

Mr. CARLSON:  Really?  I haven't noticed that at all.  I was in LA last week;

it seemed a lot raunchier than here.

Mr. GORDON:  OK.

Mr. CARLSON:  That's not a criticism.

Mr. GORDON:  OK.

Mr. CARLSON:  Washington, not so raunchy in my experience.

MATTHEWS:  My advice to Hollywood people:  Act as if your parents are in the

room.  Talk good.  It's always better to help the candidate, if that's your

motive.

Before we go to break, I guess even the most politically savvy of us gets

duped sometimes.  Here's HBO's fake journalist Ali G tricking Patrick Buchanan

in what Pat thinks is a real interview.

(Beginning of clip from "The Ali G Show")

ALI G:  Does you think that Saddam ever was able to make these weapons of mass

destruction or whatever, or as they is called, BLTs?

Mr. PATRICK BUCHANAN:  The--was Saddam able to make them?

ALI G:  Could he make BLTs?

Mr. BUCHANAN:  Yes.  At one time, he was using BLTs on the Kurds in the

north.  If he had anthrax, if he had mustard gas...

ALI G:  Whatever he put in them.

Mr. BUCHANAN:  No.  No, no.  If he had mustard gas, no.

ALI G:  Let's say he didn't have mustard and the BLTs just was plain.  Would

you have been able to go in there then?

Mr. BUCHANAN:  No.

(End of clip)

MATTHEWS:  Anybody would have been trapped by that.  But I'll tell you what,

I'll be right back with that uniquely American scramble, four

multimillionaires who want to be just like you.

Plus think it's going to be a close election?  Don't bet on it.  I've got

something to show you.  Stick around.

Announcer:  Today's show is brought to you by...

(Announcements)

MATTHEWS:  Halliburton and Heinz want to win the regular folks.

Plus my thoughts on nail-biters and blowouts.  Stick with us.

(Announcements)

Senator JOHN KERRY:  What we need is a president who understands that there

aren't people who are powerful and special interests that you take care of in

this country.  We're all in the same boat.

MATTHEWS:  Welcome back.  That was John Kerry, who married into a billion

ketchup dollars, reaching out to regular, middle-class voters.  But look at

the real estate involved here:  In addition to homes in Georgetown and

Nantucket, Kerry has a home in Boston's Beacon Hill.  There's also one in the

Pittsburgh countryside, as you see, and even a ski home out in the Idaho

mountains.  But John Kerry's not the only comfortable pol' in this election.

Take a look at these net worths.  Thanks to the Heinz fortune, the Kerry

family has upwards of a billion dollars.  Halliburton treated Dick Cheney

well; estimates put his wealth as high as $86 million.  John Edwards sits

happy with an estimated $70 million, and estimates about President Bush's

wealth run as high as $22 million.

I guess the question here, Katty is, do people who are regular people--and the

average income in this country for a family is about 30,000 a year--do they

think that any of these people get it, how they live?

Ms. KAY:  Well, it seems to be amazing that Americans are as unresentful of

their politicians with huge amounts of wealth as they are.  We've always often

talked about how Americans would like to have a monarchy.

MATTHEWS:  Is that because of the American dream?  We all want to make it, so

we're rooting for them?

Ms. KAY:  I think what they want--they don't want to bash the wealthy, but

they do want to think that the playing field is level.  They want to think

that they can get there, too.  And the compelling thing about John Edwards' is

it's not that he's going after the super-rich.  `He's saying the playing field

should be accessible to everybody.  Everybody should be able to make it up in

the way that I have done,' and Americans seem to be embracing that story.

MATTHEWS:  He's the first self-made guy to be running for president or vice

president in as long as I can remember.  Made a lot of money before he ran for

office.  Does that set him up as a guy that is more identified with regular

people?

MITCHELL:  Well, Dick Cheney actually came from a very working-class

background...

MATTHEWS:  Did he?

MITCHELL:  ...and is self-made, if you will.  I mean, he's wealthy...

MATTHEWS:  That's right.

MITCHELL:  ...because of Halliburton, but he was a member of Congress.  That

was his only wealth until he went into Halliburton.

MATTHEWS:  He's a longtime politician.  Do you think anybody thinks that the

guys on the top get it, how they live?

Mr. GORDON:  I think some people believe that.

MATTHEWS:  The Roosevelts were immensely popular with poor people.

Mr. GORDON:  But I think, more than anything, they want to believe that.

MATTHEWS:  Right.

Mr. GORDON:  And I think that that's where that pandering comes in.  You have

to keep feeding that, because the minute you stop and they get the money you

get, and they get that they don't have the same problems, then you forget

about them.

Mr. CARLSON:  There's a weird dynamic, though, because there's a long

tradition of working-class voters supporting people who are not only rich but

came through their money by inheritance:  John Lindsay, the Kennedys, JJ

Rockefeller.

MATTHEWS:  Stevenson.

Mr. CARLSON:  That's exactly right.  I mean, the Roosevelts.

MATTHEWS:  The Harrimans.

Mr. CARLSON:  Exactly right.  And I do think there is this kind of weird

dynamic where poor people prefer an aristocratic leader.

Mr. GORDON:  Right.

Mr. CARLSON:  It's almost creepy, actually.

MATTHEWS:  But that goes back to the days of Caesar, where the poor people in

the streets looked up to the guy at the top.

Mr. CARLSON:  Well, that's exactly right.  That's exactly right.  Well, it's

part of human nature.  It's instinctive.

MATTHEWS:  But let's take a look at the numbers.

MITCHELL:  And all these Rockefellers who've been able to go to Arkansas and

become governor.  You know, Winthrop Rockefeller and...

MATTHEWS:  For a term.

MITCHELL:  ...Jay Rockefeller in West Virginia.

Mr. CARLSON:  One term.

MITCHELL:  Yeah, but he represented poor people.

MATTHEWS:  OK, let's take a look at John Kerry.  This is a great one.  Even

though John Kerry has more wealth than the president's family does, 55 percent

of voters think he understands the problems of people like them.

                                    TEXT:

Understands Problems

Of People Like You

(Photo) John Kerry 55%

(Photo) George Bush 42%

Washington Post Poll July 11

MATTHEWS:  Forty-two percent think the president understands.  Tucker, that's

a great question.  Like we always ask, `Right direction, wrong direction?'

Mr. CARLSON:  Yeah.

MATTHEWS:  My other favorite political question is, `Does this person care

about people like you?'

Mr. CARLSON:  See, I find it totally uncompelling.  I could care less whether

a president cares about me or understands me or knows my name.

MATTHEWS:  You do?

Mr. CARLSON:  I could absolutely care less.

MATTHEWS:  Suppose you don't have health insurance and you're looking for

somebody who's going to get it for you.

Mr. GORDON:  Yeah, but here it is.

Mr. CARLSON:  The only--hold on.  The only question is, is he doing the right

thing?

MITCHELL:  No, but I think...

Mr. CARLSON:  But this question of empathy, it strikes me as ridiculous.

MATTHEWS:  But don't you need--well, I'm not going to make the case.

MITCHELL:  I think that empathy is real important...

Mr. GORDON:  It is.

MITCHELL:  ...to most voters.  And, you know, Teresa Heinz said the other day

when hit for being wealthy, `It's un-American to criticize people for

accumulating wealth.' And I think there is a generous open spirit; it is the

American dream, Chris, as you said.  People really want to feel that this is

something they can aspire to.  It's like anybody can win the lottery.

MATTHEWS:  Well, these questions about tax rates, I think the Republicans

score big with middle-class voters by saying, `I care about your tax

situation.  I'm in business, you're in business, we're getting hit by these

regulators.' I think that's the kind of empathy you like.

Mr. CARLSON:  No, I'm not sure I care about empathy, again, one way or the

other.  The only question--because, in the end, empathy is so easily

manipulated by politicians.  `I care about you.'

MATTHEWS:  You mean phony empathy.

Mr. CARLSON:  `I grow moist about the eyes when I hear your story.' Who

cares?  The question is, are you doing the right thing?

Ms. KAY:  And Bush, at the moment, seems to have a problem of being

un-empathetic, because he seems to have been too cozy with big businesses and

to...

MATTHEWS:  OK.

Ms. KAY:  ...Enron-type business and energy industry.

MITCHELL:  This is why you see all the clearing brush...

Ms. KAY:  And I think that is a problem with them.

MATTHEWS:  I know.

MITCHELL:  ...even with a wealthy George W. Bush.

MATTHEWS:  Some guys would rather clear brush than be on this show.  Let me

ask Katty Kay.  Tell me something I don't know.

Ms. KAY:  Next week the 9/11 commission issues its report.  It's going to be

not a very good day for President Bush because the chairman has already

suggested that they think that 9/11 could have been avoided.  But I think that

with 9/11 out of the way, with the Senate Intelligence Committee report out of

the way, with Iraq slipping off the front pages, then perhaps the worst is

behind them.

MATTHEWS:  Governor Kean's committee--he's a Republican--is actually going to

say, `We could have avoided 9/11'?

Ms. KAY:  He has suggested that they could have avoided 9/11.

MATTHEWS:  That would be unbelievable if he did that.

Mr. GORDON:  We're going to see in the next two or three weeks a tremendous

push to get the minority vote out, far more than you've seen heretofore.  And

the reasoning and the person behind it is very ironic.  It's George Bush's

decline of the NAACP's invitation to speak to the convention that will spur

this.

MATTHEWS:  Julian Bond, the PUSH chairman.  Yeah.

MITCHELL:  The Republican administration attempt to court Cuban-American

voters in Florida is actually backfiring because of this recent crackdown

that's preventing Cuban American from going back to Cuba with money for their

relatives, except, you know, once every three years rather than once a year.

It's actually causing resentment, and it could have a big effect in Florida.

MATTHEWS:  Tucker:

Mr. CARLSON:  I believe Ralph Nader will get out of the presidential race

because of trouble getting on the ballot, A, and B, overtures from the

Democratic Party, which will mean that the winner of this year's election will

be the first president since 1988 to win the majority of the vote.

MATTHEWS:  Will he show up at the convention and endorse the candidate?

Mr. CARLSON:  I think it will come after the convention.

MATTHEWS:  OK, thanks for a great round table.  Katty Kay, Ed Gordon, Andrea

Mitchell, Tucker Carlson.

I'll be right back to debunk some conventional wisdom about how tight this

presidential race will be.  Don't miss it.  Stick around.

(Announcements)

MATTHEWS:  THE CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOW is going to the conventions.  Join us from

Boston with the Democrats and from New York with the Republicans.  Be right

back.

(Announcements)

Announcer:  Closed-captioning provided by...

(Announcements)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Commentary: Matthews contends 2004 presidential election will not

end in tight race

CHRIS MATTHEWS, host:

The voters' choice between Bush and Kerry could be close, but if it is, it

will be the first close re-election decision in modern history.  Of the four

presidents to win second terms, Dwight Eisenhower won by 15 points, Richard

Nixon by 24, Ronald Reagan by 18 and Bill Clinton, in a three-way race with

Ross Perot and Bob Dole, by 8 percent.  Average re-elect margin, 16 percent.

What happened to the others?  Harry Truman got stuck in Korea and decided not

to run for a second term.  Lyndon Johnson, mired in Vietnam, also opted out.

The appointed Gerald Ford lost narrowly when he tried to win election in 1976.

Jimmy Carter, hit by the humiliation of 50 American hostages in Iran, lost his

re-election by 10 points.  The senior George Bush won in 1988 with 54 percent

only to lose it four years later with 38 percent, a plunge of 16 points.

What works; what doesn't?  For the two-termers, it was blue skies.  The future

looked brighter; the country was moving forward in peace.  For the political

failures, it was cloudy skies:  stalemate in war, a sense of national unease,

a sense that leaders didn't care about the problems of real people.  Will most

Americans decide that President Bush is moving us in the right direction or

will Iraq prove his Waterloo:  too far-reached for our country's good?  The

one historically tested prediction is that today's conventional wisdom about

the election being tight will turn out to be wrong.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Sign-off: NBC's The Chris Matthews Show

CHRIS MATTHEWS, host:

That's the show.  Thanks for watching.  See you here next week.