The Daily - Senator Claire McCaskill on Losing Missouri and the Politics of Purity

Episode Date: December 20, 2018

If any Democratic senator representing a red state was going to survive the midterm elections and continue serving in 2019, it was thought to be Claire McCaskill. But she lost. We spoke with her as her time in office was winding down. Guests: Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, and Sabrina Tavernise, a national correspondent for The New York Times. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily.This episode includes disturbing language.

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Today. If any Democratic senator representing a red state was going to survive the midterms and make it to 2019, it was going to be Claire McCaskell. But she didn't. My colleague Sabrina Tavernisi spoke to her during her final week in office.

It's Thursday, December 20th. Back in August, Daily producer Lindsay Garrison and I went to Missouri to visit the state's only remaining abortion clinic. Justice Kennedy had just announced he would be retiring from the Supreme Court, basically guaranteeing a more conservative court. The thinking was that while this might not result in Roe v. Wade being overturned, it would probably mean that red states would become more like Missouri, increasingly emboldened to limit abortion. We wanted to see what that looked like. All right, we have to go all the way around the building to the end. But it turned out that it couldn't have been worse timing for abortion to come back into the national conversation.

Claire McCaskill was a Democratic senator trying desperately to keep her seat against a conservative Republican, Josh Hawley. And this was a state that had gone for Donald Trump by nearly 20 points. So when she lost, we knew we wanted to talk to her about what had happened and what she makes of it. So Lindsay and I went to the Capitol this past Tuesday, to Senator McCaskill's office. I feel like finding offices in these buildings is so confusing. It must be right around here.

Except it no longer says Senator McCaskill. Oh, look, there's no plaque. There's no name. There's just an empty plaque outside her glass doors. I think it's it. 503. No one's here. No one's here. The walls are bare. The bookshelves completely empty. Hi.

A couple of her aides took us down to her hideaway. So these are the elevators that would take you up to the Senate floor. In the bowels of the Capitol. Right, this is the part of the Capitol that makes you feel like you're in the 1800s. Where there was still a couch to sit on. Where is this? Hey, Claire. How's it going? Hi.

And there she was. Good, good. Come on in. Hi, this is Lindsay and Sabrina. Hi, guys. Hi. Welcome to my pared-down hideaway. Indeed, it is pared down. Yeah, all my pictures are gone, and my shelves are gone, and my normal desk is gone. On her iPad, with her shoes off. Yeah, all my pictures are gone and my shelves are gone and my normal desk is gone.

On her iPad with her shoes off. Yeah, here I am with an iPad. Thank you for taking the time, by the way. Sure, my pleasure. So I'm going to start in the beginning. And I want you, Senator McCaskill, to go back and remember for me what politics were like when you first started in politics in Missouri. Well, it was a blurry line back then because we didn't have the sharp divisions based on cultural issues.

There were a whole lot of anti-choice Democrats in the Missouri legislature. There were a whole lot of pro-gun Democrats in the Missouri legislature. There were a whole lot of rural Democrats in the Missouri legislature. Kind of hard to imagine today, right? It is. The Missouri legislature is dominated now by Republicans, by and large, because of the strength of the Republican Party outside of the two major urban areas. When did you start seeing that change? Well, you started seeing it really during the Clinton years when you started having a lot more issues come up,

whether it was abortion or whether it was guns or whether it was gay rights. And so as we began to address some of the inequities in our country as a party, there were a whole lot of white working class voters, particularly in rural America, that said, well, what about me? Hey, what about me? And really, that's the vein that Trump tapped into very, very effectively as a good marketer. And how did you navigate that, Senator McCaskill? Well, I mean, clearly not very well, because I lost. Two terms. Yeah. I mean, I think there's a whole bunch of voters in Missouri

that don't make up their mind on party. And so my goal was always to work harder than everybody else, to show up, show respect. That counts for a lot. If we hadn't had the Kavanaugh spectacle, if Trump hadn't camped out in Missouri, I think we would have had a chance this time because we had a lot of motivation on our side and they weren't that enthusiastic. And I stressed issues, you know, my background was an auditor and a prosecutor. Well, who doesn't want safe streets and who doesn't want us to keep track of taxpayer money? So I did an awful lot of work in those buckets. And that appeals to those voters that are not identifiable by party in our state. And I thought I could get enough out of that middle to get it across the finish line this

time. But caravan, Kavanaugh, and Trump camping out were the three things that really amped up their side and ultimately caused the defeat. And part of this is journalism. I think journalism has really made this a much more difficult job. Now everyone can pick a network for affirmation and just kind of stew in their own juices.

You have places where you can find an echo chamber. And that is a problem. The broader public conversation is broken down. It's broken down. So my colleagues that are from bright blue places, they want to make sure that they're appealing to the base of the party almost exclusively. My colleagues are from bright red places, ditto. People that are from states like mine still understand that the two sides yelling at each

other or yelling about things that are not going to get done only increases cynicism. If we don't pull people into the middle, shave off the edges and find something we can agree on, we're never going to make any progress, especially on the tough stuff. I mean, that's where compromise is going to have to happen. And everyone is scared to death to compromise. So I started to understand the politics of Missouri this summer because Brett Kavanaugh had just been nominated to the Supreme Court, and we wanted to go to a state that had already pretty restricted access. So Missouri effectively only had one clinic.

Right. And I was expecting to find the state's one Democratic senator really be fighting for this, kind of be on the barricades about it, you know, be supporting this pro-choice position. And I was pretty surprised that you didn't. You weren't. You were quiet on it. And I talked to a lot of Democrats who were really upset about that. And I'm wondering if you understand why. Well, no, not really. My voting record is perfect. I think I have very been clear about my position.

I think the people you talk to, I'm willing to bet I could probably name three or four of them, are young women who have not spent any time outside of the group of people that agree with them. They probably don't understand that Trump's success had a whole lot to do with economic angst. And I knew that if I ignored the meat and potatoes of this election, which was all about, will people be able to get health care? Can they afford health care? What about the price of prescription drugs? These were all things that everybody in Missouri, when I'd go out to all the town halls, everybody would shake their heads. I think those people who were upset that I wasn't talking about it, shame on them if they don't know my voting record. And shame on them that they're not working as hard as they can for me and not trashing me because of my voting record in a hard state.

What did you want to say to them? Shut up. You know, really? I mean, this is hard. It could have been one thing if I'd ever wavered. But I've had to take a lot of tough votes over the years on this issue. I have been standing in the breach for women's rights as it relates to reproductive freedom for all of my adult life. And the fact that these young women didn't realize that and just be quiet, roll up

their sleeves and work their ass off for me was beyond irritating. Can you tell? I can tell. Yeah. So, you know, rather than go, oh, you know, to the New York Times podcast, you know, she's not doing enough. She's not talking about it enough. Well, get out there and work and reelect her and quit complaining because Josh Hawley thinks the morning after pill should be illegal. He has said publicly he wants to overturn Roe v. Wade. So to me, there was a huge difference in the two of us. And the fact they didn't appreciate that difference and they were willing to be critical that I wasn't talking about it enough, dumb. It wasn't that I was changing my position on the issue. It was it was not an issue that was going to bring me more votes.

So effectively, do you want to win or do you want to feel morally pure? Yeah, I want to win so that I can be there to vote the right way on issues that really matter to those young women and to me. And it's not like these young women, I get it. And I love their passion and I love that they're out there working on this. But they need to remember who their friends are and not make it more difficult for their friends. and not make it more difficult for their friends. So when the assault allegations came out against Brett Kavanaugh, were you thinking, oh, shit, there goes all my work at keeping things local? You were trying to walk that line and not be dragged into this kind of vortex of national politics.

Well, frankly, the oh, shit moment was when Kennedy resigned. Paint that picture for me. I was actually in my office, and I was actually having a picture taken for a magazine article. And they had me by a window in my office. It's right by the door that leads to my staff. And it was really quiet. And then the picture was clicking. And all of a sudden, this voice shouted out, oh, shit. And I thought, oh, God, one of my staff members is back there. And I was a little embarrassed. And so the photographer left and I opened the door. I go, what's going on? And I looked at the screen and it was Kennedy is retiring.

And so everybody in my office knew this was going to be a challenge because it was going to bring to the forefront issues that really divide us. So that's when I knew it was going to be a struggle. And then, as it turned out, it was even worse than I thought it might be before it was all over. And I still think I could have survived had perhaps it been handled slightly differently. So do you think the Democrats messed that up? Yeah. In what way? I think when the letter was received by the Judiciary Committee, it was imperative that even though the woman wanted confidentiality, the FBI is capable

of confidentiality. And had it been turned over right away, they could not have ever said that this was an 11th hour kneecap. It looked like this was political on the part of the Democrats doing this at the very end. And appearances matter more than substance sometimes, especially in the closing weeks of a contested election in a pretty red place. When did you realize that you were going to lose? So I knew the last three weeks that if we won, it was going to be incredibly close. And I knew the chances were good that we wouldn't win. Do you feel that the Kavanaugh hearing was pretty much responsible for your loss? That, along with the caravan optics and Trump camping out in Missouri,

those three things together really pumped up the other side. It got people who maybe don't vote that frequently, and certainly not in the midterm, but like are all down with Donald Trump and the idea of giving the finger to the establishment, it got them off the couch. We'll be right back. of a message in it that, you know, you lost in Missouri, Joe Donnelly lost in Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp lost in North Dakota. You guys were the ones that were really trying really hard to

connect to rural voters. I mean, you did, you know, you were really, really, really strong candidates who'd won before and you all lost. I mean, what does that say about where we are right now in politics? Is the middle gone? I mean, can a Democrat win in a red state? Well, yeah. You know, I mean, Kyrsten Sinema won a seat in the Senate in Arizona in a state that hadn't elected Democrat in decades. People, I think, you know, maybe 10 minutes ago would have called Arizona red.

people I think, you know, maybe 10 minutes ago would have called Arizona red. I think this is a Trump-inspired pendulum swing to the right, a little bit of a hangover from the Obama years in areas of our country that many of those voters voted for Obama, but nothing changed for them. They're still not doing as well as their parents did. They still can't afford to retire. They still lost their job at the car plant and are working for half the money and without the benefits than they were when the car plant was open. I've got those in my state. I know Joe Donnelly has those people in his state. And it was not long enough in the Trump administration for them to be as cynical about him as they

became about Obama. And why, Senator, do you think that people have not really been moved when it turns out that the policies aren't so great or it's kind of not what it is? Because they wanted to give him time. It's like the tariffs. How do you put tariffs on soybeans, the most important crop in Missouri, without there being a huge fallout? Well, because they believe him that,

just give me time. It's going to be better. You know, he knows what he's doing. He's a really good businessman. He knows how to negotiate. Slowly but surely, they're beginning to realize, well, maybe, just maybe the emperor doesn't wear any clothes. But not yet. Not yet. More importantly, maybe, is the question, what does it do for our candidates running for president against him? And how do we nominate someone who can compete in states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio, even if they can't win in states like Indiana and Missouri? Because the next step for the pendulum swinging back is for Donald Trump to be defeated in 2020. So I just want to make sure that all the people who have been elected to Congress from very blue districts listen to the people who were elected from Congress

that replaced Republicans, not defeated Democrats in primaries, if you know who I mean. Well, what's her name? Everybody's fascinated with New York. Cortez? I mean, God love her. But I hope she listens to people who defeated Republicans, because it's the people who defeated Republicans in this election that we need to be emulating, not the people who defeated Democrats in primaries. And that goes back to the kind of purer than pure base that doesn't understand the broader picture. Well, they may understand it, but they are so passionate about their beliefs. They feel that if everybody would just be more pure, more people

would come to the cause. And many of them have not been in a place where the math is unforgiving to that concept. And so I just want to make sure that we don't make a mistake and go so far to the left in nominating a candidate that we lose all those white working class voters that had been a huge part of our party decades ago. While we maintain great enthusiasm by young people, we need somebody who can bridge that divide. So we have an opportunity in 2020, as long as we don't go so far off the left side of the earth, that we alienate those people that when they hear the word free college, they hear that phrase, they think, oh, look, they're giving away something to other people

besides me again. I had to earn mine. Why aren't they having to earn theirs? That thing is real. Sometimes going too far, we turn off people and make election victories impossible. I'll tell you a true story. I'm at a gas station in Kingdom City, which is a stop in the highway. And this is about a month after President Trump was inaugurated. And there was a good old boy over by the gas pumps. And he said, hey, you, hey, you, which in Missouri is senator, senator. So I walked over and I said, what can I do for you, sir? And he started shaking

his finger in my face. He said, I voted for you before and I may vote for you again. But I want you to know why I didn't vote for her, Hillary Clinton. I knew she cared about women. I knew she cared about Muslims. I knew she cared about Mexicans. I knew she cared about homosexuals. I really knew she, you know, really cared a lot about black people, but I was pretty sure she didn't give a shit about me. So if we center on economics and how people are frustrated about their economic situation, we will have a great deal more success. And not that we don't want to be a party of opportunity and equality. Of course we do. Of course we do.

But we've got to make sure that in that, we don't miss the fact that a rural family living on the edge of poverty is no different than an rural family living on the edge of poverty is no different than an urban family living on the edge of poverty. And that's what's happened is many people in rural Missouri don't think we give a shit about them. That there's this contempt. Yeah. And that we think we're better than them, smarter than them, and don't get them. That is part of the Democratic Party's problem. Yeah, I mean, it did really strike us that, you know, particularly with, I mean, the abortion politics in Missouri was one example, right? But it felt like, you know, these two extremes are kind of what makes up everyday

politics when most people are sort of watching that on their television and just turning away in disgust. Yeah. The noise in the system is being generated by the ends, not by the middle. Nobody calls my office to say, I'm calling to ask Senator McCaskill to compromise. No one writes a letter saying, you know, can't you find the middle? Can't you? But they still expect us to get things done. And those are mutually exclusive propositions. And those are mutually exclusive propositions. Getting things done means you cannot be extreme or pure. You have to compromise. So people around here know that. And so there is compromise that happens, but it's not conflict, so it doesn't get covered as much. I mean, people in Missouri were priced out of getting hearing aids. Hearing aids were $5,000, $6,000, $7,000, not covered by Medicare. Hundreds

of thousands of Missourians could not hear very well and couldn't afford to get a hearing aid. We got a bill passed. It's going to bring it down to around 500 bucks. That's a big damn deal. Nobody in Missouri has any idea it happened because it didn't scare them. It didn't make them angry. And so part of this is that the shifting business models in journalism, that, you know, the idea that Beyonce's breasts are always going to out click, by gosh, Congress got something done on the price of hearing aids. It is really a problem. So the issue is when people run, they have to be smart enough to know in states like Missouri and many, many others that there's somebody out in the suburbs that's not watching cable news. And they're just trying to figure out if they can afford to send their kids to camp this summer.

And we need to be thinking about them. And smart people running for office will think about them, and they will take them into consideration, and they will win. Are you hearing from some of your constituents now? I mean, there is still this vast political middle out there, right? Even if, you know, perhaps politicians aren't quite behaving that way. What are they saying? Well, it depends on where I am. So I'm hanging out at my home, which is St. Louis. And it's quite emotional when I go out because people are incredibly kind, almost to a person. Are they bemoaning the state of politics? I mean, you actually sound quite hopeful, but I felt like your loss was, I don't know.

Oh, cheer up. Seriously, cheer up. You got to get over it. We're going to be fine. Trump is an anomaly in America. He is somebody who's so outside the norm. He is so bizarre. And most of America knows it.

And we're going to be fine. Thank you so much, Senator McCaskill. You're welcome. Great to meet you. Nice to meet you. All right, guys. Thank you. Thank you so much, Senator McCaskill.

You bet. Bye. Bye. Thanks. Have a good Christmas. See you. Thank you. It probably won't surprise my colleagues to know that I don't like much the idea of a farewell speech. But I want to respect the tradition, especially since I've witnessed so many Senate traditions crumble over the last 12 years. So I will do my best to get through this without breaking up. I'd be lying if I didn't say I was worried about this place.

It just doesn't work as well as it used to. The Senate has been so enjoyable for me, but I must admit it puts the fun in dysfunction. The United States Senate is no longer the world's greatest deliberative body, and everybody needs to quit saying it until we recover from this period of polarization and the fear of the political consequences of tough votes. Writing legislation behind closed doors. Giant omnibus bills that most don't know what's in them. That's today's Senate. Solving the toughest problems will not happen without tough votes. We can talk about the toughest problems. We can visit

about them. We can argue about them. We can campaign on them. But we're not going to solve them without tough votes. It will not happen. Something is broken. And if we don't have the strength to look in the mirror and fix it, the American people are going to grow more and more cynical, and they might do something crazy like elect a reality TV star president. I'm not kidding. That's one of the reasons this has happened.

But with all the problems I've outlined, know that I love this place and you. Almost all of you. You have filled my life with interesting work and unforgettable memories. We have argued, we have sang, we have fought, we have cried, and we have laughed. Together, just like family. You are family, and I will miss you terribly. Thank you very much. I yield't die.

You know, it's like one long death march around here. I mean, Jesus. I mean, I know everybody is sad for me, and I know, but I mean, I am fine. I'm fine. Honest, I'm fine. I didn't die. I can now go places I never dared go before. I can tear the bark off the tree if I feel like it. And so I feel great. I feel smart. I feel free. I feel cheerful. And I can't wait to get to it.

I was expecting dark and you're so light. No, no, not dark. Not me. I feel great. Here's what else you need to know today. We have won against ISIS. We've beaten them and we've beaten them badly. We've taken back the land. And now it's time for our troops to come back home.

In a surprise move on Wednesday, President Trump ordered that all 2,000 U.S. ground troops in Syria be withdrawn within 30 days, despite pressure from his own generals to keep a military presence there. In a tweet explaining the decision, Trump declared that the original mission of putting troops in Syria to defeat ISIS has been completed, a conclusion his own military and diplomatic staff have rejected in recent public remarks. Well, we have multiple objectives in Syria. So the military objective, very clearly,

the military objective is the enduring defeat of ISIS. And if we've learned one thing over the years, enduring defeat of a group like this means you can't just defeat their physical space and then leave. You have to make sure the internal security forces are in place to ensure that those security gains are enduring. The Times reports that Pentagon leaders and Republican lawmakers have sought to talk the president out of withdrawing the troops, arguing that it would cede influence in Syria to two U.S. adversaries, Russia and Iran, and risk allowing ISIS to reemerge there.

and risk allowing ISIS to reemerge there. The decision to withdraw an American presence in Syria is a colossal, in my mind, mistake, a grave error that's going to have significant repercussions in the years and months to come. And on Wednesday night, the Senate passed a short-term spending bill that would avoid a partial government shutdown on Friday, but would not fulfill the president's demand for $5 billion to fund a border wall.

The continuing resolution, if passed by the House and signed by the president, would fund nine different agencies through the first week of February, after which the president would face another budget showdown with a new Congress. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.