WEBVTT - Trump is Down Five Runs in the 2nd.  Lanhee Chen Talks to A&G

0:00:02.320 --> 0:00:09.039
<v Speaker 1>The armstrong and getting so Democrats by nature a nervous

0:00:09.320 --> 0:00:13.160
<v Speaker 1>they they're so traumatized by two thousand and sixteen. They

0:00:13.200 --> 0:00:15.960
<v Speaker 1>have to get over it, all right, And I get

0:00:16.000 --> 0:00:18.680
<v Speaker 1>this all the time. I'll change. Please don't say that,

0:00:18.720 --> 0:00:20.439
<v Speaker 1>because if people think we're gonna win and not to

0:00:20.480 --> 0:00:23.319
<v Speaker 1>combine Vook, that's the idiotic We're going to win. What

0:00:23.360 --> 0:00:26.320
<v Speaker 1>do you want me to do? Biden campaign has actually

0:00:26.360 --> 0:00:29.000
<v Speaker 1>been pretty good. He gets pretty good in the debates,

0:00:29.320 --> 0:00:32.000
<v Speaker 1>and of course he's gonna make gas between nine election

0:00:32.080 --> 0:00:36.400
<v Speaker 1>day and it just sends the the Democratic Party into

0:00:36.880 --> 0:00:40.760
<v Speaker 1>some kind of state of depression. Get over it, tough enough, people,

0:00:41.000 --> 0:00:43.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm sorry, that's just the truth. Deal with a Democrats.

0:00:43.880 --> 0:00:48.600
<v Speaker 1>You're gonna worry. James Carville saying, look, we're gonna win. Well,

0:00:48.640 --> 0:00:51.319
<v Speaker 1>there are a lot of polls out there that are

0:00:51.400 --> 0:00:53.480
<v Speaker 1>not favorable to Donald Trump right now. And I thought

0:00:53.520 --> 0:00:55.720
<v Speaker 1>we'd talked to somebody who knows a lot about being

0:00:55.760 --> 0:00:59.320
<v Speaker 1>involved in presidential campaigns. And you know where we are now.

0:00:59.360 --> 0:01:01.480
<v Speaker 1>We haven't talked about about this sort of stuff because god,

0:01:01.520 --> 0:01:03.960
<v Speaker 1>we're four months out and well and and well, I

0:01:04.000 --> 0:01:06.960
<v Speaker 1>tell you what, let's bring long he in and and

0:01:06.520 --> 0:01:09.479
<v Speaker 1>include him in the conversation lot and he j Chen

0:01:09.959 --> 0:01:13.880
<v Speaker 1>David and Diane Stephie fellow in American Public Policy Studies

0:01:13.880 --> 0:01:16.560
<v Speaker 1>at the Hoover Institution. Uh joins us. Now on here,

0:01:16.560 --> 0:01:18.920
<v Speaker 1>how are you, sir? It's good to be with you

0:01:18.959 --> 0:01:20.679
<v Speaker 1>this morning. Think I got your title right? I forget

0:01:20.680 --> 0:01:22.720
<v Speaker 1>to put on my glasses, so I'm squinting like a fiend.

0:01:22.840 --> 0:01:25.720
<v Speaker 1>And you and you you have been involved in a

0:01:25.720 --> 0:01:31.479
<v Speaker 1>couple of big time, major presidential campaigns, correct, four of them,

0:01:32.200 --> 0:01:35.040
<v Speaker 1>including as a as a senior aide to romney in

0:01:35.959 --> 0:01:39.600
<v Speaker 1>and a senior aide to Marco Rubio. And you're and

0:01:39.720 --> 0:01:42.560
<v Speaker 1>you're a student of history and teach all this stuff.

0:01:42.600 --> 0:01:45.520
<v Speaker 1>So um, good person to ask some of these questions. One,

0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:52.560
<v Speaker 1>do numbers move very dramatically from this point to election day?

0:01:52.600 --> 0:01:55.280
<v Speaker 1>I mean is that common they? You know? Can can

0:01:55.320 --> 0:01:58.080
<v Speaker 1>you make up ground? Did they tend to say you're

0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:01.800
<v Speaker 1>eight points down in a pivotal swing? Stated? Sure? Did

0:02:02.040 --> 0:02:04.320
<v Speaker 1>do numbers like that change in the last four months?

0:02:04.360 --> 0:02:09.040
<v Speaker 1>Does that happen regularly? Yeah? The numbers definitely will bounce

0:02:09.400 --> 0:02:12.399
<v Speaker 1>all over the place. Trends will change based on events.

0:02:12.800 --> 0:02:15.639
<v Speaker 1>You know, if you look at the campaign as an example,

0:02:16.200 --> 0:02:18.560
<v Speaker 1>you had you had a race that was not close

0:02:19.400 --> 0:02:22.320
<v Speaker 1>for a large part of the of the summer months

0:02:22.320 --> 0:02:26.960
<v Speaker 1>and then closed quite rapidly after the first presidential debate,

0:02:27.000 --> 0:02:30.560
<v Speaker 1>which was in early October in Denver. So yeah, that

0:02:30.639 --> 0:02:34.200
<v Speaker 1>the numbers can absolutely change. The margins are are big now,

0:02:34.240 --> 0:02:36.240
<v Speaker 1>don't get me wrong. I think Joe Biden has a

0:02:36.320 --> 0:02:39.519
<v Speaker 1>very healthy lead nationally. Some of the swing state polling,

0:02:39.560 --> 0:02:43.880
<v Speaker 1>which has been notoriously inaccurate in the past, the sort

0:02:43.880 --> 0:02:46.720
<v Speaker 1>of throw weight of that swing state polling suggest that

0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:49.600
<v Speaker 1>Trump is also in trouble. So, I mean, those numbers

0:02:49.639 --> 0:02:52.680
<v Speaker 1>I think reflect where we are today, but they are

0:02:52.720 --> 0:02:55.160
<v Speaker 1>not necessarily a reflection of where the race will be

0:02:55.200 --> 0:02:58.200
<v Speaker 1>in September or October. Well, not necessarily. But has anybody

0:02:58.240 --> 0:03:00.320
<v Speaker 1>ever come back in one who is this far down

0:03:00.360 --> 0:03:05.760
<v Speaker 1>four months out? That's a good question. So um, I

0:03:05.800 --> 0:03:11.200
<v Speaker 1>believe Buchanan was down thirteen points Jack and fairly fairly

0:03:11.240 --> 0:03:13.880
<v Speaker 1>modern phenomenon. But I just don't remember anybody being this

0:03:13.960 --> 0:03:17.200
<v Speaker 1>far down and coming back and winning. Yeah, I mean,

0:03:17.280 --> 0:03:19.680
<v Speaker 1>there are certainly people who held onto leads, obviously, but

0:03:19.960 --> 0:03:22.120
<v Speaker 1>I don't I don't know about coming back, And I'm

0:03:22.160 --> 0:03:24.280
<v Speaker 1>just trying to rack in my brain thinking about people

0:03:24.320 --> 0:03:26.959
<v Speaker 1>that have come back to win. Uh, and and it's

0:03:26.960 --> 0:03:32.560
<v Speaker 1>been rare. Clinton wasn't doing particularly well um against George H. W. Bush,

0:03:32.800 --> 0:03:35.440
<v Speaker 1>and then things kind of turned around for him late

0:03:35.480 --> 0:03:37.440
<v Speaker 1>in the race. So that might be one race to

0:03:37.480 --> 0:03:39.720
<v Speaker 1>look at where I would say Clinton was probably down

0:03:39.760 --> 0:03:41.760
<v Speaker 1>at this point came back to winning and not down

0:03:41.800 --> 0:03:44.920
<v Speaker 1>by a small number either. So um. You know, part

0:03:44.920 --> 0:03:47.440
<v Speaker 1>of a challenge for for Donald Trump as I see

0:03:47.440 --> 0:03:50.880
<v Speaker 1>it now, is that there's two things. One is the

0:03:51.840 --> 0:03:55.480
<v Speaker 1>self sort of self made errors I think has finally

0:03:55.560 --> 0:03:58.400
<v Speaker 1>begun to accumulate. I think people are beginning to see that,

0:03:59.240 --> 0:04:00.880
<v Speaker 1>and the set things they I would just saying there's

0:04:00.920 --> 0:04:04.400
<v Speaker 1>some you know, recent news about this is that it's

0:04:04.440 --> 0:04:08.160
<v Speaker 1>not really clear what his second term agenda will look like.

0:04:08.320 --> 0:04:10.600
<v Speaker 1>And I think he and his campaign probably need to

0:04:10.600 --> 0:04:12.480
<v Speaker 1>get out there and to find that a little better.

0:04:13.080 --> 0:04:15.880
<v Speaker 1>Uh if if, if he wants to close this gap, right,

0:04:16.040 --> 0:04:19.240
<v Speaker 1>I mean, even Trump fans who are friends, relatives of

0:04:19.560 --> 0:04:23.159
<v Speaker 1>mine and ours will admit to some Trump fatigue, um,

0:04:23.240 --> 0:04:27.120
<v Speaker 1>and he absolutely needs to balance that with a powerful

0:04:27.120 --> 0:04:29.680
<v Speaker 1>as he would probably put it, a positive message for

0:04:29.720 --> 0:04:32.480
<v Speaker 1>the second term. So listen, Lon he j J And

0:04:32.640 --> 0:04:34.440
<v Speaker 1>I am, I'm a sport that did you? Are you

0:04:34.440 --> 0:04:38.040
<v Speaker 1>a sports fan at all? Have we ever talked about this? Yes? Yes, right, okay,

0:04:38.160 --> 0:04:40.360
<v Speaker 1>I am, I'm I'm I'm a big sports fan. What's

0:04:40.360 --> 0:04:45.440
<v Speaker 1>your favorite sport? I would say it's baseball? Okay, all right, fine,

0:04:45.480 --> 0:04:48.359
<v Speaker 1>I'm a I'm a Dodger fan. Well, oh my god,

0:04:48.720 --> 0:04:51.960
<v Speaker 1>we can't be friends anymore. Sorry, Uh no, I can't.

0:04:52.360 --> 0:04:55.280
<v Speaker 1>Um a lot of fabulous Dodger fans listening to the show,

0:04:55.320 --> 0:04:57.480
<v Speaker 1>and we're as willing to pander to you as dandy.

0:04:57.520 --> 0:05:02.440
<v Speaker 1>But so if if you took a snapshot of where

0:05:02.440 --> 0:05:04.200
<v Speaker 1>we are right now in terms of the Trump campaign

0:05:04.200 --> 0:05:07.960
<v Speaker 1>and the numbers we've been discussing, is he down two

0:05:08.080 --> 0:05:11.880
<v Speaker 1>runs in the fourth inning or how would you how

0:05:11.880 --> 0:05:14.080
<v Speaker 1>would you put? How does he stand? How nervous should

0:05:14.080 --> 0:05:18.880
<v Speaker 1>Trump fans be? I think they should be nervous, but

0:05:18.960 --> 0:05:22.239
<v Speaker 1>they shouldn't be overwhelmingly so, so I would say he's down,

0:05:22.520 --> 0:05:24.279
<v Speaker 1>you know, I'd say five or six runs in the

0:05:24.279 --> 0:05:26.520
<v Speaker 1>second inning. That's how I would That's that. That's how

0:05:26.520 --> 0:05:29.880
<v Speaker 1>it put. Interesting, it's a pretty it's a pretty big lead,

0:05:29.880 --> 0:05:32.599
<v Speaker 1>but it's so early, okay, that is, and he's a

0:05:32.640 --> 0:05:36.719
<v Speaker 1>team that's won a lot, so right, right, I mean

0:05:36.800 --> 0:05:39.440
<v Speaker 1>you know, if so and all the players on the

0:05:39.440 --> 0:05:43.480
<v Speaker 1>other team are eighty years old, there, right, they all

0:05:43.520 --> 0:05:45.720
<v Speaker 1>have to they both torn their A C. L s

0:05:45.800 --> 0:05:50.680
<v Speaker 1>or at Tommy john Surgs Racing. Look, here's here's here's

0:05:50.720 --> 0:05:52.640
<v Speaker 1>how I would think about it if I were looking

0:05:52.680 --> 0:05:55.440
<v Speaker 1>at these polls. And I'm sure you know you've got

0:05:55.480 --> 0:05:58.680
<v Speaker 1>a very sophisticated listener base. So maybe I'm saying something

0:05:58.720 --> 0:06:01.719
<v Speaker 1>people already know, but you do not need to worry

0:06:01.800 --> 0:06:05.880
<v Speaker 1>so much about the national polls. The real worrisome numbers

0:06:05.920 --> 0:06:07.920
<v Speaker 1>that we're seeing if you're the Trump campaign or a

0:06:07.920 --> 0:06:11.000
<v Speaker 1>Trump supporter, are in the state five state And if

0:06:11.320 --> 0:06:15.160
<v Speaker 1>he's losing states like Arizona and Florida and North Carolina

0:06:15.640 --> 0:06:19.560
<v Speaker 1>that he won in twenty sixteen with decently healthy margins,

0:06:19.920 --> 0:06:22.080
<v Speaker 1>you've got to be concerned when you see a number like,

0:06:22.600 --> 0:06:25.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, down seven or eight in Arizona, down seven

0:06:25.279 --> 0:06:27.360
<v Speaker 1>or eight in Florida. We're looking at him down to

0:06:27.400 --> 0:06:31.120
<v Speaker 1>eleven in Wisconsin, down to eleven in Wisconsin, down ten

0:06:31.240 --> 0:06:34.679
<v Speaker 1>in Pennsylvania. Though, that's tough, and I think the numbers

0:06:34.720 --> 0:06:37.280
<v Speaker 1>even bigger in Michigan. I mean, you know, I think

0:06:37.640 --> 0:06:40.240
<v Speaker 1>we if you're the Trump campaign, you really do need

0:06:40.320 --> 0:06:43.360
<v Speaker 1>to focus on Arizona and Florida and North Carolina right now.

0:06:43.400 --> 0:06:46.040
<v Speaker 1>I mean, the fact that you're down in those states

0:06:46.240 --> 0:06:49.679
<v Speaker 1>is a is a major trouble sign. Uh. The other states,

0:06:49.680 --> 0:06:53.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean Michigan, Wisconsin, those those polls never really had

0:06:53.760 --> 0:06:55.799
<v Speaker 1>him all that close. And I think a few poles

0:06:55.800 --> 0:06:58.120
<v Speaker 1>at the very in may have had him closing in Michigan,

0:06:58.480 --> 0:07:02.280
<v Speaker 1>but the mission Michigan within polling, Pennsylvania polling never really

0:07:02.360 --> 0:07:05.159
<v Speaker 1>was all that friendly to Donald Trump at sixteen anyway.

0:07:05.200 --> 0:07:07.240
<v Speaker 1>So so that's why I say, if you look at

0:07:07.240 --> 0:07:10.280
<v Speaker 1>the two thousand twenty state by state polling, it really

0:07:10.320 --> 0:07:12.160
<v Speaker 1>is those states in the in the seven of the

0:07:12.200 --> 0:07:15.920
<v Speaker 1>South that are worrisome for Ms. Trump. Lana he Chan

0:07:16.080 --> 0:07:19.000
<v Speaker 1>is online, Hey, Lana he quickly maybe a minute on this,

0:07:19.120 --> 0:07:24.720
<v Speaker 1>but I'm looking at some COVID nineteen statistics. Um, when

0:07:24.800 --> 0:07:27.320
<v Speaker 1>when the book is written, perhaps by you, about the

0:07:27.360 --> 0:07:32.560
<v Speaker 1>politics of COVID nineteen, what's the headline, what's that title?

0:07:32.560 --> 0:07:34.880
<v Speaker 1>What what approach would you take? How do you see

0:07:34.880 --> 0:07:37.840
<v Speaker 1>this whole thing? Because there's been such a big political uh,

0:07:38.040 --> 0:07:40.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, part of part of this that is political,

0:07:40.680 --> 0:07:45.360
<v Speaker 1>I should say, I would call the book the Polarized Pandemic,

0:07:46.000 --> 0:07:48.760
<v Speaker 1>and and you sort of hit on the on the

0:07:48.840 --> 0:07:52.440
<v Speaker 1>really big dynamic here, which is fascinating is the degree

0:07:52.480 --> 0:07:55.440
<v Speaker 1>to which we as a society have been polarized over

0:07:55.960 --> 0:07:58.680
<v Speaker 1>everything when it comes to this pandemic. I mean, there's

0:07:59.040 --> 0:08:02.800
<v Speaker 1>literally almost no question that is not politically polarized. Where

0:08:02.800 --> 0:08:05.520
<v Speaker 1>did the pandemic come from? What should we call it?

0:08:06.200 --> 0:08:10.240
<v Speaker 1>Should people wear masks? How should society respond to it?

0:08:10.320 --> 0:08:13.440
<v Speaker 1>Who is responsible for the spike in cases? Why is

0:08:13.480 --> 0:08:16.720
<v Speaker 1>there a spike in cases? All of these questions are

0:08:16.800 --> 0:08:21.760
<v Speaker 1>politically tinged, politically motivated. People's answers will differ based on

0:08:21.800 --> 0:08:24.360
<v Speaker 1>how they see their their politics and who they like

0:08:24.520 --> 0:08:27.280
<v Speaker 1>in political life and who they don't like. And that

0:08:27.400 --> 0:08:31.000
<v Speaker 1>to me is staggering, because if you look at past pandemics,

0:08:31.000 --> 0:08:33.040
<v Speaker 1>not just here in the US, but around the world,

0:08:33.800 --> 0:08:36.800
<v Speaker 1>you will find, i'd submit, a much lower degree of

0:08:36.840 --> 0:08:39.200
<v Speaker 1>political polarization. And in fact, if you look at the

0:08:39.240 --> 0:08:42.120
<v Speaker 1>response that other countries have had, it has not been

0:08:42.200 --> 0:08:45.520
<v Speaker 1>driven as much by politics, and so our situation here

0:08:45.600 --> 0:08:48.880
<v Speaker 1>around COVID nineteen this will be a story people will

0:08:48.880 --> 0:08:52.000
<v Speaker 1>write for generations to come how polarized we've become around

0:08:52.000 --> 0:08:54.800
<v Speaker 1>this pandemic. Well, that sounds like a great quickie book.

0:08:54.920 --> 0:08:57.800
<v Speaker 1>I proposed the following, you do the work, I put

0:08:57.840 --> 0:09:01.240
<v Speaker 1>my name on it, and and we put it on

0:09:01.280 --> 0:09:03.800
<v Speaker 1>the market. I want you to think about that. Since

0:09:03.880 --> 0:09:09.520
<v Speaker 1>you're offer great, offer a loan. He's a fellow in

0:09:09.559 --> 0:09:12.280
<v Speaker 1>the American Public Policy Studies at the Hoover Institution and

0:09:12.320 --> 0:09:17.240
<v Speaker 1>it's always great to talk. Thanks Lonnie Armstrong and Getty