GOV310 – In The News: A look at national politics through the eyes of Texas, June 8, 2016

In the news.

Welcome to IN THE News for American and Texas government Professor Eric McDaniel. Today, I’m joined by Dr.

Joshua Blank. He’s the manager of polling and research at the University of Texas Politics

Project at the Texas Politics Project here at the University of Texas. Dr. Blank,

welcome. Thanks for having me. It’s it’s it’s great to have you here.

So let’s start with the kind of the some of these we’re talking about today. So. Well, the first is we’re talking

about is really what happened yesterday with the outcome of the primaries. But then also we’ll talk

about Mr. Trump as well. Some of the comments, some of the stuff he’s said in reaction to

the outcome of the Democrat Craddick primaries, but also someone with more recent recent controversies.

And we’ll also take that somehow those controversies relate to Texas. But furthermore, some of the claims

that Hillary Clinton has made about the state of Texas and what she hopes to do in the presidential election.

But first, let’s start off with yesterday’s outcome. So we if we take a look,

we’ll see what’s going on, that Hillary Clinton has basically won

California, won New Jersey, and given the number of superdelegates, has enough to win.

She you guys are going to she won handily in California. She won by with 13 by 13 points, 56

percent of the vote. Yeah. So she so she did very well in California. People thought it maybe maybe

like a 52 48 split, but she did much better than almost polling. It was really tight there

until up until the end. And a lot of people thought, well, she can win by four points. She could win by 20 points or she could lose.

That’s basically what Nate Silver said. It was brilliant. Yeah. And so it was everything from the Radic. And I think also

one of the things that the Sanders campaign wanted was either a very close victory for Sanders to win most

or very close victories. So he could argue that I had momentum going into the going into the convention.

But as you can see, Hillary Clinton’s basically saying, no, no. But I think it’s pretty much over now.

And so if we roll a clip from her victory speech.

Seasoned I. But we are all standing under a glass ceiling

right now.

We’re not smashing this one. Thanks to you.

We’ve reached a milestone the first time,

the first time in our nation’s history that a woman will be a major

party nominee.

Tonight’s victory is not about one person. It belongs

to generations of women and men who struggled and sacrificed

and made this moment possible. Your efforts have produced a strong majority

of the popular vote victories in a majority of the contests. And after tonight,

a majority of pledged delegates. This has been a

hard fought, deeply felt campaign. But whether you supported

me or Senator Sanders or one of the Republicans, we

all need to keep working toward a better, fairer, stronger

America. Now, I know it never feels good to put your heart

into a cause or a candidate you believe in and to come up short.

I know that feeling well. The stakes in this election are high

and the choice is clear. Donald Trump is temperamentally

unfit to be president. OK,

so as you see there, Hillary Clinton say, look, we have a majority of delegates now, there actually is still one left. That’s

D.C. I don’t think Bernie Sanders could do so well in D.C. So not a lot of delegates yet.

Yeah. Also, I’m not a delegate, so it’s not going to be. But you can clearly see her trying to reach

out to the Bernie Sanders supporters and saying, look, I know you felt passionately about this.

I’ve been there. You know, come in. Let’s hug it out. You know, I’m sure we’ll sit down,

drink some fine wine. Listen, Teddy Pendergrass has some fondue and we’ll make up. All right. So.

Right. And that’s and this is this is the pivot. Right. This is where she says, hey, Sanders supporters, come

on over. As you said. Right. But also, you know,

first of all, it’s reminding everybody this is a historic candidacy. Let’s galvanize a big Democratic group, which

is women. Right. And also at the end, let’s start prosecuting the case, which is Trump

is unfit to be president, which we’re going to hear again and again and again. And over the last few weeks, the word

they’ve been using a lot is thin skinned. Right. In your service thinking that they’re going to start poking him and they’re

going to keep poking him because they want him to kind of continue with the sort of gaffes he’s been prone

to produce. And so this is sort of the preview of what the general election strategy is going to look like for Clinton.

Now, Bernie Sanders also made some comments. And so let’s run a clip of Bernie

Sanders comments. We understand that our mission

is more than just defeating Trump. It is transforming our country.

But you all know it is more than Bernie. It is all of us

together.

Here is what this movement is about. Next Tuesday,

we continue the fight. And the last primary.

And then we take our fight for social,

economic, racial and environmental justice to Philadelphia.

I am pretty good in arithmetic, and I know that the fight in

front of us is a very, very steep fight, but we will continue to fight for every

vote and every delegate. So you

see from that clip from Senator Sanders, he’s clearly argued, look, I’m a I’m a push this, but he also is be

painting this as this is more than just an election. This is a social movement. This is about a massive

cultural change within America. And so in many ways, this allows him to save face that if

he does lose, like, look, you know, I may have lost the battle, but I have not won. But I’ve not

lost the war. And so I think this is an extremely important change we’re seeing. It’s

truly important. Ruddock was saying, look, I’m going to keep pushing this fight because this is not about the presidency. This

is about how America operates in general. I think he’s dropped a lot of the language in regards

to this being rigged and things of that nature, because, again, the majority of pledged delegates,

meaning those won in the primaries, went to Hillary Clinton. And in order for him to beat Hillary

Clinton, he would have to base recruit hundreds of superdelegates, which in many ways

would be seen as usurping the will of the people. And so he’s he’s in this weird situation

where he argued the superdelegates are biased against us. The superdelegates are rigging this. However, in order

from the win, he has to win over the superdelegates. And I think he can’t push that any further. And he would have to

win among several hundred superdelegates. And considering that he was a Democrat

and so less than a year ago, I think it could be a little bit difficult for him to be successful

and successful in doing right. And not only that, but the other thing is, is that, you know,

in winning over those superdelegates, his argument has to be Hillary Clinton is weak. Well,

how do you make that claim when she’s won more states than you have? She’s won more votes than you have. She’s won more pledged delegates

than you have. And you’re gonna say, well, but you should still superdelegates come over and vote for me. That’s a

it’s a very challenging case for him to make at this point. But you’re right now he’s kind of on this outside trajectory

from the campaign. We see Clinton turning towards Trump in the general election. We’ll see a clip in a second, or we see Trump turning

towards Clinton and with some very notable features. And now at this point, Sanders is saying, what can I do

with what I’ve done and still be effective? And people are kind of wondering, is he going to stick around? There is this sort of talk

months ago about him getting out of the race like he should get out. Galloway for Clinton, he said, now we’re going to fight this to Philadelphia.

At this point, he’s no longer really talking about a convention fight over the nomination. He’s really trying to think about, OK, well, what

do I do with this now? How do I leverage this into some sort of power for myself in my ideas?

And so I think, you know, in the next I think, you know, obviously through D.C., he’s going to keep going on this message. But I bet after

D.C., it’s going to be pretty quick when he basically says, all right, now what? Yeah, I think it’s all about

change the part with the platform of the convention. I mean, you really see the difference in terms of the number

of delegates that we have a real quick. We have a slide which demonstrates the gap

between Sanders and Clinton in regards to the number of pledged delegates. Again, those

one of the primary, the superdelegates, where you see has a clear a clear advantage over this.

Now, if we look at the comparison of this from through twenty sixteen,

it’s one in two thousand eight. We see the actual 2008 competition was much more intense

than you’re seeing here in 2016. And so and Hillary Clinton eventually bowed out. And so Hillary Clinton’s

doing is doing better against Sanders than Obama did against her 2008.

And so this argument about the lack of unity amongst the party may

not necessarily be there. I mean, specifically, if Sanders can make can push forward a few policy positions

on the conservative platform, the Democratic Party in when they meet in Philadelphia, he you

maybe get the Sanders supporters over there. Now, along with this, you had

the reaction from, again, the presumptive nominee for Republican Party, Donald Trump, who

is speaking to a crowd and hear his comments. I’m going to be America’s

champion because you see, this election isn’t about Republican or Democrat.

It’s about who runs this country, the special interests or the people. And

I mean the American people.

Every election year, politicians promise change. Obama promised

change and it didn’t work out too well. And every year they fail to deliver.

Why would politicians want to change a system that’s totally rigged in order to keep

them in power? That’s what they’re doing, folks. Why would politicians want to change

a system that’s made them and their ends very, very wealthy?

I beat a rigged system by winning with overwhelming support. The only

way you could have done it. Recent polls have shown that I’m beating Hillary Clinton.

And with all of her many problems and the tremendous mistakes that she’s made and she

has made tremendous mistakes, we expect our leaders to continue

to grow and grow substantially. To all of those Bernie Sanders voters

who have been left out in the cold by a rig system of superdelegates, we

welcome you with open arms. My goal is always again to bring

people together. But if I’m forced to fight for something I really

care about, I will never, ever back down and our country will never, ever

back down.

I fought for my family. I fought for my business. I fought for my employees.

And now I’m going to fight for you. The American people.

Nobody has ever fought before. There’s really notable that that speech

to me is the fact that, one, how bland it was. This is not, you know, his normal

speeches or at least the things I’ve can say in the last few days that are getting all over the news. But also the other

notable thing that’s hard to insiders is the fact that he was using a teleprompter. And that was kind of

a big deal, because when he says in the past helped me, obviously teleprompter and wusses and he isn’t needed, he can just talk for an hour

off the cuff. But over the last couple of weeks, he’s been saying really controversial

things off the cuff. And he’s been getting criticized by a lot of people about them. And I think Mitch McConnell said it right, which was

that, you know, he needs to start acting more presidential. He’s start prosecuting the case against Hillary Clinton. And

you can see they’re a very tame and focused trial. Now, the question is, how long does

this last? But also what it what what does it what does the teleprompter and the calm demeanor, reaction

to everything that he said last week? So what did he say over the last couple of weeks and just got in hot water?

Well, he’s he’s made quite a few comments, specifically attacking a federal judge who is prosecuting

the Trump University case. So I guess let’s give a little bit of background on what Trump University is.

Trump University is not a real university. It’s basically a set of classes helped to

designed to help people in real estate. So Donald Trump is most famous for being a real estate mogul.

The Trump University was designed as a way to teach people the skills to become millionaires

like him by investing in real estate. There’s been a lot of controversy over this because

people are saying, no, it was a rip off. People were promised that it could they

would meet Donald Trump and take a picture with him, only to find out that took a picture with a cardboard cutout of Donald

Trump that people were being hired as instructors who had no experience in

real estate whatsoever. And so many people have argued this was a con and this is basically a way to get a bunch

of my money. And so he’s his face is being sued in several states.

But he’s particularly gone after a federal judge in regards to this. And this is where

a lot of controversy has sparked that riot. So so,

you know, to the extent that people started looking into this as one of his, you know, a shady or business venture, and truth is like, look,

if anyone ever promises you that they can teach you how to be a millionaire, don’t give them money.

Yes, they don’t need it. Right. So there’s a lot of the news

media who’s been looking into Trump University as they start to vet him further because he’s going to be running for president. All of his business

dealings are basically open to be looked at at this point. And this one was particularly

now unavoidable in some ways because of the type of people that these sorts of schemes tend

to Tintin’s snare. Right, which is people who have less education, who are looking for a get

rich quick scheme, that kind of thing. So they were looking into this. And then

the biggest case, I guess, is in California and the district court where the judge, Gonzalo

Curiel, only reads, I don’t know. I think if they say his name right. Donald

Trump referred to him as a Mexican judge, even though he’s born in Indiana.

And however, if you go to France, there is a Tex Mex restaurant

named Indiana. So maybe he spent some time in France and got Indiana

and. Mexico mixed. OK.

There is horrible. Just lets you know it’s horrible. So. So basically the thing that started this was that Trump said

the Donald Trump said, you know, he can’t judge me fairly because he’s Mexican. So let’s see that.

I want to ask you about comments he made about the judge in the Trump University case. You said that you thought it was

a conflict of interest, that he was the judge because he’s of Mexican heritage, even though he’s from Indiana.

Hillary Clinton said that that is a racist attack on a federal

judge. Know, she’s so wonderful. You know, I mean, here’s a woman that should be put in jail for what she did with her emails

and she’s come into. Let me just say you so let me just say first, I have had horrible rulings.

I’ve been treated very unfairly by this judge. Now, this judge is of Mexican heritage. I’m building a wall.

So no Mexican judge could ever be involved in a case that involves you. He’s a member of a society where,

you know, very pro Mexico, and that’s fine. You’ll find something you’re calling an excuse

himself because he’s anything. So say it. Does he know the lawyer on the other side? I mean,

does he know the lawyer? You know, a lot of people sometimes talking about that. That’s another that’s another

problem. You’re invoking his race when talking about whether or not he can do his job. I’m building a wall. I’m

trying to keep business out of Mexico. Mexico’s thing does nothing. But he’s a man. He’s an American.

He’s a Mexican heritage. And he’s very proud of it. So this has really been a big issue.

But he kind of doubles down on this over the weekend when

talking about Muslim-American judges. We have a clip of that as well. My question is, if I messed

up, if for were a Muslim judge, would you also feel like they wouldn’t be able to treat you fairly, fairly because of that policy

of yours? Possibly, yes. Yeah, that would be possible, absolutely. Isn’t there sort of a tradition, though,

in America that we don’t judge people by who their parents were and where they came from? It’s not getting better. I’m talking about common sense.

So this is really made a big issue for Mr. Trump in his presidential

nominee. Where he is basically arguing that because of somebody’s religious or ethnic background,

they’re going to be unfair specifically to him and his policies. Now, he has received some support from

former SA Attorney General Alberto

Gonzalez, who’s argued that the way he did it was incorrect. But there are reasons to kind of question

whether or not you’re receiving a fair trial. So he said question whether or not we’re seeing a fair trial is part

of aim within your constitutional rights. But the way he did it was was incorrect. But this

also speaks to a larger problem. So, for instance, if Mexican-American judges cannot

or Muslim judges cannot properly prosecute or oversee a case dealing with Donald Trump,

does that also mean that white judges cannot oversee a case dealing with African-Americans specifically?

Let’s say it’s a Black Lives Matter protester. So this raises all kinds of questions

about really the the legal system. And many people argue that what he’s doing by

raising these questions is he’s deteriorating the legitimacy of the legal system. And to take

take your argument one step further. I mean, most judges, especially who deal with criminal proceedings,

have very, very comfortable relationships with district attorneys, people who prosecute

these cases, which is another claim that Trump is making about the judge in this case, knows the attorney on the other

side, which is very common. Right. But in this case, if you say if the judge knows the district attorney

who is prosecuting a case, can they not sit there? Well, I mean, that’s what happens in all

criminal cases. So it really undermines the whole idea of the legal system. And then there’s a sort of

two tracks of criticism going on here. One is sort of the well, you’re talking about,

you know, basically saying that a person can’t judge judge you fairly because of their racial or ethnic background. Right. Which

is interesting because I mean, it’s sort of it’s kind of the whole thing is surreal in a lot of ways. Right. Because he’s saying

he can’t judge me because he’s a Mexican, because he’s of Mexican heritage, because of things

I’ve said that might offend Mexicans or people of Mexican heritage. But I’m not a racist.

I just happen to say these things that make you incapable of judging me fairly. But that’s that’s

you know, that’s on you. You it’s been Speaker Paul Ryan actually denounced what

he said. Now, in doing that, he also makes sure to make clear that, yes, I don’t like what he

said, but I am supporting Hillary Clinton. Let’s roll that clip. I disavow these requirements.

I regret those comments that he made. I don’t think that claiming a person can’t

do the job because of their race is sort of like the textbook definition of a racist comment. I think that should

be absolutely disavowed. It’s absolutely unacceptable. But do I believe that Hillary Clinton

is the answer? No, I do not. Do I believe that Hillary Clinton is going to be the answer to solving these problems? I

do not. I believe that we have more common ground on the policy issues of the day and we have more

likelihood of getting our policies enacted with him than we do with her. But I do absolutely

disavow those comments. I think they’re wrong. I don’t think the right headed in the thinking behind it is something

I don’t even personally relate to. But at the end of the day, this is about ideas. It’s about moving our agenda

forward. So as you see, Speaker Ryan is really running, is trying to move it, move the party as far

away from his comments as possible, saying, look, we don’t agree with that idea. But overall,

we think he’s the best candidate. And the idea is, you know, Donald Trump, what he said was,

you know. Horrible, but we think if Hillary Clinton able get her agenda through. That’s even that’s even

worse. And so it’s it’s this very weird game that he’s playing, but

he’s really just want to say that, look, we’re not the party of racists and that’s some of the Democratic Party. I mean,

the Republican Party’s really trying to push back back from people, conservative parent, the party of racist

bigots, and then comments like this, just like you actually said. So that is the textbook definition of racism.

That’s wrong. That shouldn’t be done. We openly try to say this is not the g.o.p.’s

stance. By the same time saying that, look, but he’s still our nominee. And I think

even though he was had a misstep here, I think in the long run he is the best

candidate. Well, that’s the thing. He’s not. He’s not even sane. But he’s our nominee. He’s saying, you know, the things that he’s said

may be racist, but at least he’s not Hillary Clinton. I mean, that’s really what he’s saying.

And I mean, and that’s actually, you know, sort of an open question as we sort of transition here a little bit towards Texas.

Maybe, you know, the Trump University has a specific Texas story attached

to it. Right. Which is that the Texas attorney that the Texas attorney general’s office

was looking into a fraud prosecution against Trump

University with a clip that kind of goes through some of the background on this. We open up

and it really was successful from the beginning. Trump University has drawn new attention

this week thanks to a California judge’s order, unsealing documents in a lawsuit against the controversial

training program. That attention has included Texas, where state leaders nixed

a lawsuit six years ago against the school, Trump University. The decision has been tied to

then Attorney General Greg Abbott. But Friday, the former head of The Age’s Consumer

Protection Division, David Morales, says he, not Abbott, was the one who decided not

to sue Trump U following a seven month investigation back in 2010. Moralez added

The lawsuit became unnecessary when Trump you decided to leave Texas. His statement comes

after several news outlets reported some A-G staffers wanted to ask for a $5.4

billion settlement over allegedly illegal business practices. One former deputy said

his bosses gave Trump special treatment. That deputy has now received a cease and desist

letter from Paxton, accusing him of breaching his legal duty to keep client information confidential.

Meanwhile, Abbott took to Twitter to call the stories about his involvement bogus. More

than three years after Trump you closed up shop in Texas, Trump donated $35000

to Abbott’s campaign for governor. Critics have seized on the contribution to accuse Abbott

of wrongdoing. Abbott’s office says it’s absurd to suggest any connection between

the case and the donation. So Greg Abbott’s response is not super surprising. But

also, this is kind of a nice little microcosm of what you’re going to see all over the country. I mean, right now,

Paul Ryan is a good example there. Paul Ryan is trying to create separation between downballot

Republican candidates and Donald Trump saying, hey, he may be saying these things, but he doesn’t represent our

party with those views. Right. If you look in Texas, here’s a good quick example where,

you know, Trump University’s connection to Texas, however tenuous it may be,

is enough to say, hey, the governor did some wrongdoing. Now, the truth is, you know, thirty five thousand dollars

three years later, that’s that’s a that’s a tough, tough case to make, especially when Abbott raised,

you know, close upwards of $30 million in that gubernatorial campaign. This is just a drop in the bucket

for him. He’s a prodigious fundraiser. He gets money from everybody. And really a part of this also is it

is a Texas specific thing, which is that, you know, the current attorney general, Ken Paxton,

is in so many different kind of scandals right now that even his involvement

to try to hush up the person who was trying to make the former staffer who is trying to make this

information available to the media, that’s just that just makes the media even more interested

in what’s going on here. So the other thing that kind of comes out of all this is, you

know, Clinton’s chances in Texas and say, well, where Clinton’s chances in Texas?

Well, you know, she said a few weeks ago in a New York magazine interview when asked

what state she might participate in or might have made it, let’s say, compete in that would you

wouldn’t expect she instantly said Texas. And that said, everybody off running to kind of

like cover this as if this is a real thing. So let’s see how I feel about it. Let’s let’s learn

a little bit about this. Hillary Clinton says she could break what’s been a lengthy Republican run in

the Lone Star State. She beat Barack Obama in the Texas primary back in 2008

and fared well here against Bernie Sanders on Super Tuesday. She beat Bernie Sanders 65 35.

She does very well in small town Texas. Former Texas land commissioner Gary Morrow

is the chairman of Texans for Hillary. It’s very simple. You look at any poll

anywhere in America and Trump’s doing very well with white males.

He says Clinton. Does well with groups of people the likely GOP presidential nominee does not.

If Hillary can continue to carry African-Americans overwhelmingly, can continue to carry

Hispanics overwhelmingly and continue to carry women overwhelmingly. There’s not enough

white males around. A Democratic consultant is right in the sense

that there aren’t enough white males around the long run, but there are a lot of white males and in Texas there are a

lot of Republicans and they vote at higher rates than everybody else. So there’s this again, this

discussion have been going on about whether Clinton can be successful in Texas, whether she can revamp the Democratic Party

here. And I mean, some of that may be true. I mean, the fact that there’s a reason that she mentioned Texas

specifically, part of it is that, you know, you know, sort of this it kind of goes back to the beginning with the super delegates and the party

regulars versus sort of the people who are really in it right now. Clinton’s been Democratic politics for a long time.

She sees value in trying to build up Democrats, you know, the Democratic chances in Texas in the long run.

She also knows that Texas is a place that has a lot of money going to donate a lot to Democrats. The fact that

she needs to at least handwave that she’s going to compete here if for no other reason than to open

up people’s purses. Right. But the reality is that, one, it’s super expensive

to campaign here. The fact that she’s not going to campaign in Texas over a battleground state. Right.

Because you have, you know, three of the biggest media markets in the country. It’s not like competing here is not just like a little thing that you just

decide you’re going to do. The other thing is, is that, you know, she has about one point two

five million votes to make up. If you look back at Barack Obama’s loss

to Mitt Romney here in 2012, you know, additionally, you

know, even if Hispanic turnout, because even if Trump’s comments, you know, drive up Hispanic turnout, drive

up African-American turnout. Fact is that, you know, it’s still not going to make up that 1.5

million votes. The final argument sort of for Hillary, of course, is, well, you know, she’s

a you know, Trump is just alienate himself from from Republicans. So maybe some of those

white men and some of those white Republicans are going to say, now, you know, Trump’s not not for me. Here’s the

problem with that. And we’ve a couple of slides from Texas polling. Republicans in Texas uniformly

dislike Hillary Clinton. So, you know, ninety one percent, I think, of Texas.

Republicans have an unfavorable view of Hillary Clinton. Another eighty seven

percent think she would make a poor or terrible president. And not only that, even if you

look at the the Republicans in Texas who have an unfavorable view of Trump, which in our last polling was about

forty one percent, that will go down in the next one. Now he’s a nominee. But if you look at the

even just those Republicans who don’t like Trump, they dislike Hillary Clinton even more than Republicans overall.

So about 90 to 95 percent of them say they have an unfavorable view of Clinton. So

it’s not as though these people are going to go start running to Clinton’s camp and she’s just going to surprise everybody here

in November. Sorry. No, I mean, I agree. I think Hillary Clinton has the same

chance of winning Texas as I do. Governor, Chippendales dancer by the November

election. And sell yourself short. I can work hard and I might have a chance. You know, I might actually

get an audition and call me Chocolate Thunder for a reason. But at the end of the day, I don’t

think it’s going to happen. I mean, look at Wendy Davis as well. That’s a horrible example to do, because

I think Wendy Davis campaign was like, hey, how not to run. But, you know, the thing about Wendy Davis is it’s funny. There’s this other

claim about Hillary Clinton in Texas, which is that, you know, she has a special connection to Texas. She and Bill do, because

they were registering, you know, Hispanic voters back in the 70s, which was kind of a crazy thing to make. But

now she has because of that, she has a strong connection. But actually, if you look at her favorability among Democrats,

she actually right now is two points lower than Wendy Davis was when Wendy Davis

was running for governor. So there’s this idea that Hillary Clinton is just somehow fundamentally different, that she’s

that she’s got this, you know, this extra connection here in Texas. And again, you bring up Wendy Davis is a great,

great counter-example. Wendy Davis look better than Hillary Clinton and she lost soundly to Greg

Abbott. Yeah. So these are some of things that we walk through to page two in the news.

And again, keep track of us. Things are going on. So we’ll see you here next week.

Have a good week.

The government 310 in the news podcasts is hosted by doctors Daron Shaw and Eric.

And it’s produced by the Liberal Arts US Development Studio and the Department of Government and the College

of Liberal Arts at the University of Texas at Austin.