CBS News political panel dives into election trends

[0:00] Joining us now, our homegrown political panel, Executive Director of Elections and Surveys, [0:05] Anthony Salvato, is back with us. We're also joined by political correspondent Caitlin Huey [0:10] Burns and senior White House and political correspondent Ed O'Keefe. Good to have you [0:15] all here. And you're rarely here. You're on the trail quite a lot these days, the both of you. [0:20] I want to start with the two of you. More Democrats are telling pollsters like Anthony, [0:25] he explained that they intend to turn out to vote and a smaller number of Republicans intend to do [0:32] so. Does that track with what the both of you are seeing in the field, Caitlin? Yeah, absolutely. [0:36] And what is really interesting here when I talk to Republican sources, they say the thing that [0:40] they're most worried about when they look at this polling is a dynamic that they haven't really seen [0:45] before, which is that Trump is underwater on the economy. And that has always been his calling card. [0:50] And a lot of this is self-imposed when it comes to tariffs and when it comes to the Iran war, [0:55] as the effect on diesel and gas prices. So those are huge undercurrents in this race, obviously. [1:01] But the other underestimated factor I think running here is that Trump has to convince voters to turn [1:07] out down ballot in a time where he has shown no deference to Congress. In fact, contempt for it [1:14] at some points. And this is a Congress that has really ceded so much of its authority to the executive [1:20] branch. And Trump has gone at it alone on a lot of policy fronts. So I think that really adds to [1:27] the challenge that he has here, which is to convince his own voters to show up for Republicans [1:32] for whom he has shown some contempt. [1:35] It's a good point. Show up to vote for the body that I might not pay attention to myself. [1:40] Yeah. And I don't think there's any dispute that Democrats are eager to get out there for the most [1:43] part. If you are a partisan Democrat who has no love for the president and maybe no love for [1:48] whatever Republican is on the ballot. But the challenge they're going to face and the part of [1:53] where our travel has taken us is to these traditional Republican states. Part of the challenge for any [1:58] of these Democrats will be finding enough independent voters to vote for that person and then peeling [2:03] off enough Republicans. I was struck in your poll. Did you say only 5 percent of Republicans in Texas [2:08] are willing to vote for Tallarico? I would think he needs a number bigger than that in order to help [2:14] him in such a large state where Democrats haven't done well. And it's going to be the same dynamic in [2:18] Kansas, in Iowa, in Alaska to some extent, and in any of these other states where suddenly the [2:25] Republican incumbent is on the ropes. Anthony, I want to follow up on Texas. You laid out tighter [2:31] than expected, just two-point lead, right, by Tallarico in Texas at this point. It's also tight for [2:36] the governor's race. Yeah. So what does that say to you about the dynamic? Early voting, I know, [2:42] gets underway tomorrow. Right. The big picture here, picking up off what you said in the end, [2:46] is also that I asked people, okay, no matter what your party affiliation, what do you typically do [2:52] when you go to the polls? And Tallarico is pulling 9 percent of people who said that they usually are [2:57] always vote Republican, but they're going to make an exception perhaps this time. So that's one part [3:03] of the dynamic that's in play there. The other part, of course, is the down-ballot effect or the [3:07] coattails, perhaps, if a Republican governor is related to a Senate race. And that's going to be the [3:13] case in a number of these states, number two. But again, on the point of turnout, you can look [3:19] at a poll and say, okay, that's just 1 percent, that's just 2 percent. But in a big state like [3:23] Texas, that's hundreds of thousands of voters. Anybody who does any kind of business or marketing [3:29] knows that to get 200,000 people to change what they normally do takes a lot of money and a lot of [3:36] time. Do the Democrats have that operation to do it remains a giant question. [3:41] And that's the gamble the president continues to make by making these stops, is that if he shows [3:45] up, the last 10 years of electoral history shows, his voters show up. And so if he can continue to [3:50] visit, as he's going to again in the coming days, Texas, Georgia, he's headed to Michigan, finally, [3:56] other parts of the country, the churn, they hope, is that enough of those people who were sitting [4:02] on their hands before get up and go. And if anything, keep the margins closer. [4:06] And that's what he means when he says vote like I'm on the ballot. [4:08] Yeah. I also, in this poll, was struck 59 percent of likely voters told Anthony Ken Paxton does not [4:16] have the right personal character to serve as senator. 45 percent said Tallarico does not. [4:21] Does that match what both of you have heard on the ground? [4:23] I think so. I mean, you go ahead. [4:26] Absolutely. I mean, I was in Texas last week. And I mean, this is why the president went there [4:29] three times in the span of nearly three weeks, because he has to pull Paxton over the finish line. [4:34] He's wildly unpopular. But when it comes to Texas, the thing that I've been saying is everything has [4:39] to go wrong for Republicans and exactly right for Democrats in order to win there. So it's not just [4:45] enough that people don't like Paxton and depressing the Republican vote. It's also that you have to turn [4:50] out those independents and convert voters to the Democratic side in a deep red state. Tallarico is going [4:55] to have to build a coalition that no Democrat has been able to do in over 30 years. It's a tall order. [5:01] I will say we were there first in March when the primaries were held and Tallarico was already on this [5:07] focus on corruption, which I think we've seen Democrats everywhere else, especially in the last [5:12] few weeks, really begin to pick up on such that it's starting to show up in polling. [5:16] For the president or for Paxton? [5:17] For everyone. But in that case specifically, [5:19] he was linking Paxton and Trump together. Got it. [5:22] Emphasis on Paxton ahead of the general. And now you see Democrats across the country [5:27] focused on corruption, either against the president or the Republican they're running [5:30] against or, you know, the governor in that state. So he was, in essence, a leading indicator or, [5:35] you know, he saw something coming with the uniquely unpopular candidate that he has that other [5:41] Democrats have been able to pick up on with all the examples we've seen across the country. [5:45] You say they've got to pull off a miracle in Texas. Democrats need to pull off at least [5:48] four miracles on election night across the country in states where they've never done it before. [5:53] That's what makes this such a high bar for them to reach on election night. [5:57] I want to ask you about Michigan. I know you were just there. I like your vote bracelet, [6:00] by the way. [6:00] It's made by my daughter, yeah. [6:01] Very cute. [6:02] Get out of the way. [6:02] You, the president talks about this race all the time. [6:09] Yeah. [6:10] Specifically, the Democratic candidate there, who would be, if he wins, the first Muslim [6:15] senator to ever sit in Congress. This was one of President Trump's latest remarks. [6:21] Yeah, but Jihad is running in Michigan. He's not, like, leading left. He was so far left, [6:28] there is no such thing as the word. This guy's a Jihadist. [6:31] Abdul Al-Sayed, how is he handling that kind of rhetoric, which is basically accusing him of [6:37] being a terrorist? And is the Republican candidate comfortable with this? [6:43] Well, he's repeating it himself. We saw him give a speech this week just ahead of the vice [6:49] president on Thursday in the Detroit area, where he spent about 90 percent of his speech [6:55] laying out accusations similar to what the president is suggesting, that he has ties to [6:58] the Muslim Brotherhood, that he's too extreme for Michigan, that he hasn't denounced the IRGC and [7:04] thinks that Israel's a bigger threat than Iran. Al-Sayed has, in various ways, addressed this by [7:10] saying, first of all, no, he has no associations with the Muslim Brotherhood. He was asked by a [7:14] voter, does he disavow them? The answer was yes. It was followed by a long response targeting that [7:20] person for raising it at all and suggesting that the only reason Republicans are doing this is because [7:24] he's Muslim or Arab and is different. He ties himself to the legacies of John F. Kennedy and Barack Obama [7:30] in being firsts. But the difference was Kennedy and Obama, I'd argue, went out and sort of [7:36] proactively addressed the fact that they would be historic and different in speeches and did it in a, [7:42] in a, I guess, a more positive way. Al-Sayed continues to sort of raise it or answer questions [7:49] about it and then accuse people of being, why would you raise that? Well, he's the one raising it to some [7:54] extent by pointing out the history of it. But then when people ask these questions, it gets quite defensive and [7:59] aggressive about it. The thing is, he's anticipating that voters in Michigan are more upset about the [8:05] economy, more upset about the war, less concerned about him. It is quite the gamble. Uh, and one [8:11] that he continues to say he's going to win by 7%. I don't think the polls show that, but he's standing [8:15] by a vow to win by 7%. We'll see. Just quickly on Michigan, you interviewed Mike Rogers and you asked [8:22] him about his wife handing out $10 cards to go buy gas. Yes. Is that legal? Well, buying votes is not [8:30] legal, no. And I asked Rogers, what was your wife doing there? And he said, well, she paid for these [8:35] out of pocket and she was trying to raise awareness about her campaign. How does that make a difference? [8:40] That was his answer when I asked, right? I mean, you said this was on social media, people caught this, [8:44] but he also made the point that she was doing this in, in black areas of Detroit. He has made a concerted [8:50] effort to reach out to black voters in that city, believing that there is softness for I'll say it. [8:54] And the polling suggests there is. And certainly what we heard this week suggests that he still [8:58] has work to do there. But Rogers is trying to make inroads there, handing out gift cards, [9:03] meeting with pastors. He told me at one point that he met a black pastor who had, in his 70 years that [9:08] that church had existed, no Republican officeholder politician ever shown up. That might work on the [9:13] margins in close races. We'll see. Um, Caitlin, you have spent some time in Kansas, [9:19] President Trump's heading there. We were just talking about beef prices with the North Dakota [9:23] Senator. This is a problem for Roger Marshall in Kansas. I mean, I was there a couple of weeks ago, [9:27] not a place I expected to be in the final stretch of this campaign. No Democrat has won the Senate [9:31] race in Kansas since 1932. That's nearly a century. But there's a lot at play here that I think [9:37] speaks to the broader themes of this election. First of all, kind of going back to the point I made, [9:42] Roger Marshall is a candidate, a current incumbent that Republicans kind of feel meh about. They like the [9:48] president, but not necessarily translating to him. Everything you've been seeing across the country, [9:53] the cost of diesel, especially for farmers in Kansas is important. But I spent an afternoon [9:57] with a cattle farmer in Kansas who likes the president, supported the president time and again, [10:03] still supports him. But the decision that the administration made to allow beef imports into [10:09] the market, that is something that is directly affecting him. And he told me for the first time, [10:13] he is considering voting for the Democrat, Adam Hamilton here, who I interviewed. And he said, [10:19] you know, if you talk to him, he often references that he's a former Republican. [10:23] He's not campaigning on the national party brand, which he can't do in a place like Kansas, [10:28] but he's making it competitive because of kind of that perfect storm of complications that Republicans [10:33] have going for them. And then the nuances in a lot of these races, administration policies [10:39] directly affecting the constituencies that tend to vote for Trump. So that gets to the turnout [10:45] question. Is that enough to depress them and enough to convert a couple of them? [10:50] And that, Anthony, is what you're going to be focused on basically all night [10:54] Yeah. Well, look, there's national context to Caitlin's point is neither party not only is viewed [11:00] favorably, but neither one is viewed by most as able to help you financially. [11:05] Yeah. And that's important because yes, it speaks to localized races or state specific races. In many [11:11] cases, the Democrats would like this to be all nationalized because on the national level, there [11:16] is that opposition to the administration policies. But at the same time, when you talk about who owns [11:22] the economy and you ask that it is the Trump administration in the minds of most because of [11:28] some of those policies because of the war and because of gas prices. [11:31] Okay. Very quickly, Caitlin, any word on who's behind these 36 lawmakers receiving threatening [11:37] envelopes? Yeah, as suspicious substances, a lot of them intercepted before they reached Capitol Hill [11:42] offices, but not only for U.S. senators and lawmakers, but also for election officials, which is really [11:47] startling. It's been 25 years since the anthrax issue after 9-11. And what is really especially [11:55] jarring is they don't they haven't released who or talked about who may be behind this federal law [12:00] enforcement is investigating. But the uptick that we've seen in threats against lawmakers and their [12:05] families has risen in the past year over 50 percent. Yes, it's something we are tracking very much in [12:11] our public life these days. Thank you all for this panel. Get ready. It's going to be a fun two weeks. [12:17] ... [12:23] ... [12:29] ... [12:32] ... [12:38] ...