The Daily - The Dilemma for Red-State Democrats

Episode Date: October 9, 2018

Democratic senators in states that President Trump won had concluded that their best path to re-election was to campaign on local issues. Then came the confirmation fight over Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. Guest: Jonathan Martin, who covers national politics for The New York Times. For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily.

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Today, Democratic senators in states won by President Trump had concluded that their best path to re-election was to campaign on local issues. Then came Brett Kavanaugh. It's Tuesday, October 9th. Jonathan, hey, it's Michael. Hey. Thanks for doing this. Yeah, happy to do it. Okay, let's jump in. Jonathan, we are literally reaching you on a layover at the airport,

and I believe you have about 20 minutes until you have to catch your next flight. Where exactly are you headed back from? On the way home from Fargo, North Dakota. And before that, I had been in Bismarck, North Dakota. And what took you there? So I was out there to cover the Senate race. Senator Heidi Heitkamp is probably the most vulnerable Democratic incumbent running this year for re-election in the Senate. Jonathan Martin covers national politics for The Times. She was first elected in 2012, and it's just a very Republican-leaning state nowadays. So it's really gotten away from Democrats. It's become harder for them to win there.

And she's facing a challenge from Kevin Cramer, who is the at-large congressman who was also elected in 2012 to save yours, Heitkamp. So tell us about the kind of race Senator Heidi Heitkamp was running there until last week. So Senator Heitkamp, like a lot of red state Democrats, was trying to run more of a locally oriented regional campaign. Tariffs are really bad for North Dakota. There was a study out today showing the 10 top states will be affected by these tariffs. North Dakota is number 10. In her case, a lot of folks on tariffs. And so I think this is absolutely the wrong direction. We should be promoting trade,

not disrupting it. North Dakota is a heavy ag state. A lot of wheat in the north and west and a lot of soybeans toward the east. And the soybean issue was especially resonant because of the tariffs that the Chinese imposed. And that's a huge market for soybean farmers in North Dakota. I'm Heidi Heitkamp and I approve this message. China is canceling their contracts to buy soybeans. North Dakota is losing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of business. But when you ask Kevin Cramer why he supports the trade war, he criticizes farmers.

I hear all kinds of hysteria. There's potential short-term pain. We don't have a very high pain threshold in the United States of America. Mr. Cramer, that trade war is costing my family a lot of money, and you don't seem to care. And so she was hoping to kind of use that to drive a wedge between Kramer and the broader electorate in the state, which obviously is more supportive of free trade

because of the farmers' need for foreign markets. You know, it's like globalist is a bad word. To me, recognizing that we're in a global economy is no different than recognizing that the sun comes up in the east. And that's been happening all year. Heitkamp almost singularly focused issue-wise on tariffs. And then along comes Brett Kavanaugh. So tell us what changes when Kavanaugh was nominated. So suddenly, Senator Heitkamp is forced to talk about the last thing that she wants to talk about,

which is national issues, high stakes, ideological issues, where there is a clear red versus blue divide, and where President Trump is on one side of the divide and our party is squarely on the other. With Judge Kavanaugh's nomination, the president has put women's reproductive rights and vital health care protections at grave, grave risk for every American who cares about women's health, about protections for people with pre-existing conditions, about civil rights, labor rights, LGBTQ rights, environmental rights. Now is the time to fight. Now. Look, she is somebody who does not want to talk about the culture wars. She does not want to get into the ideological balance of the Supreme Court. Those are political losers for her in a

state that is overwhelmingly pro-Trump and heavily Republican. President Trump has nominated another great judge for the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh. He treats everyone fairly and has a record of applying the Constitution just as it was written. So Heidi Heitkamp has a decision to make. Does she support Kavanaugh and prove she's on the side of the president and you? Or does she side with the radical liberals in Washington, D.C.? Tell Heidi Heitkamp her decision on Kavanaugh is something you won't forget. And that is where she found herself for the month of September and going into October. And so that's created real challenges for her. So basically, she understands that the national issues that divide Republicans and Democrats are exactly the issues that she should be avoiding

in this campaign. Well, anytime you're talking about red versus blue, you're talking about Democrat versus Republican, tribal partisan issues where people tend to go to their ideological corners. That's a bad moment for her because her state is overwhelmingly Republican. New polling out from Fox News shows Heidi Heitkamp's Republican challenger up 12 points. That's quite a lead. And they were supportive of confirming Judge Kavanaugh. Support for Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court, is strong in North Dakota.

34 percent of likely voters in North Dakota said they would be less likely to vote for Heidi Heitkamp should she be a no vote on Kavanaugh. So that was a tough stretch for her. It was not the kind of stuff that she wanted to be focused on. So given this pressure that the Kavanaugh nomination puts on her, does Senator Heitkamp change her strategy? Yes. One of the most important jobs of any U.S. senator is to fully vet

and consider nominees to serve on the United States Supreme Court. So Senator Heitkamp was forced for roughly a month to address questions that she did not want to address. Today, Judge Kavanaugh and I had a thorough and substantive discussion about the importance of the rule of law, precedent, ethical standards at the U.S. Supreme Court, reaching more consensus on the court, and avoiding activism from the bench. So I think all those things will help the court be shielded from politics. First, just on the sort of general issue of his confirmation. I learned more about his judicial record and temperament, which will also hopefully become

clearer during the Senate hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee next month. And then, after these allegations came out, the even more sensitive topic of his conduct and his past. North Dakota Democrat Heidi Heitkamp saying she, quote, supports Senator Jeff Flake's call for a nonpartisan FBI investigation into the allegations about Judge Kavanaugh, quote, which I've been pressing for. We need to get politics out of this process and allow an independent law enforcement agency to do its job. Keep in mind, she supported Neil Gorsuch to the court last year. She was one of three Democrats in the Senate who did so. So when this pick was first made, there was some thought that she'd be open to confirming Kavanaugh. But she wants desperately not to have to say this. Yes, that's correct.

Okay, so tell us about the lead-up to Senator Heitkamp's vote on the nomination. Sure. So Senator Heitkamp did not say what she was going to do on the vote for weeks and weeks after he was nominated, even after the allegations. In North Dakota, Democratic Senator Heidi Heitkamp is still undecided on Kavanaugh, but she is quickly losing support of women. And now she's running 12 points behind her Republican challenger, Kevin Cramer. And if Heitkamp votes against Kavanaugh, twice as many say they would be less likely to vote for her. It was not until about 48 hours before the first vote last week.

We're following breaking news. North Dakota Senator Heidi Heitkamp has just told a local television station that she will vote no on Brett Kavanaugh. But she said that she would oppose Judge Kavanaugh. Hi, everyone. I wanted you to hear directly from me about why I'm voting against confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh. My understanding is that what finally spurred her opposition, at least this is how she tells it. In addition to the concerns about his past conduct, last Thursday's hearing called into question for me Judge Kavanaugh's current temperament, his honesty and his impartiality. These are critical traits of any nominee to serve on the highest court in our country. She was very disturbed by Judge Kavanaugh's conduct at the hearing. And in particular, that exchange that Kavanaugh had with Senator

Klobuchar from Minnesota, where the judge kind of snapped back at Senator Klobuchar and said, have you ever blacked out? I think Heinkamp was bothered by that. She didn't like that conduct. She's a former state attorney general, so she sort of has spent some time in a courtroom. And I think in her mind, that was not the kind of temperament that she wanted to see on the high court. Dr. Ford gave a heartfelt, credible, and persuasive testimony. It took a great deal of courage,

and it also came at great personal cost to her. Politically, there was obviously pressure on her to support Kavanaugh, and I think it would have been more daring to have opposed him before the allegations. I really think once the allegations came out, that put her in a tough spot to support his confirmation. I've spent much of my life in public service

focused on combating domestic violence and protecting women and children from abuse. Our actions right now are an important signal to young girls and women across the country. She has spent a lot of years in her career dealing with issues related to sexual assault. And, you know, she may be losing so significantly that her vote wouldn't have mattered.

So if you're going to have a free vote, you may as well vote your conscience. Now, you would deny that, obviously, and she very much thinks that she's still in the game. But there's no question that she's trailing in the polls right now. Hmm. So let's talk about what you've been seeing on the ground there in North Dakota in the couple of days since Senator Heitkamp made this decision. Take us through your trip there. So I got to Bismarck on Friday, and it's the state capitol, and it's right in the middle of North Dakota. And then Saturday, I went to two breakfast places in Bismarck and just talked to voters. The first one was kind of a traditional diner, you know, a lot of folks there having their

scrambled eggs and bacon. More of a conservative place, and obviously there was a lot of support there for Kavanaugh. We talked to one fellow there who is very fond of Heitkamp but is no fan of Kramer at all. And he said that he thought that Kramer was a weasel and he was going to support Heitkamp. But politically, he thought that she had basically sealed her fate by opposing Kavanaugh. The other place I went to was more of a kind of a latte and scones place. And I talked to one table of four women. Are you generally Democrats to was more of a kind of a latte in Scone's place. And I talked to one table of four women. Are you generally Democrats, Republicans, or a mix of both? We're kind of a mix. We kind of don't talk politics. We have differing opinions,

but it's best not to try to move things. Three of the four were probably Kramer voters, and one was a Heitkamp voter. And it kind of illustrated to me the challenge Heitkamp is in, because one of the voters, also no fan of Kevin Cramer, said that, anti-abortion, and just could not stomach the fact that her senator opposed the confirmation of this judge. At the same time, another lady at the table, who was a Heitkamp voter, I think a Democrat, said that she would have been upset if Heitkamp hadn't have opposed Kavanaugh. I'm just the opposite. I would have been very disappointed if she would have voted for him. Tell me why. Because I truly believe that if he was not guilty, he wouldn't have reacted the way

he reacted. Things would have ran a little bit differently. But you know what? Then act like you didn't have to. And so that's the kind of challenge that she was in. You know, in some ways, you're kind of damned if you do, damned if you don't. When it comes to voters in North Dakota, Jonathan, what do you think that this ultimately will come down to? I mean, this is the challenge Hyde Camp has. Politics has gotten more polarized, as we all know, but it's also got more nationalized. And so the local issues and regional questions are increasingly less relevant in its federal races, like Senate races, to more straightforward questions of, are you on the red team or the blue team? And there's no question that it is a conservative state. And that's really

her biggest challenge, is just convincing Republicans to vote for her as a Democrat. Used to be a lot easier. It's harder now. So in other words, try as a candidate might to keep things specific and local. They may have no choice but to pick one of these national teams. Of course, you've got to pick one side or the other. And, you know, in the past, Democrats and more conservative parts of the country and Republicans, the more liberal parts of the country could blur those lines. They could rely on incumbency, could rely on the sort of politics of personality if they had a winning, charming persona that could really help. Those things matter less now because politics is so much more nationalized. And whether it's Republican in a liberal state or a Democrat in a conservative state, it's just not as easy to sort of create your own brand and avoid the perceptions and assumptions about your national party.

So post Kavanaugh, it's almost like the candidates are having to choose not just am I a Democrat or Republican, but am I with Dr. Ford or am I with Judge Kavanaugh? But am I with Dr. Ford or am I with Judge Kavanaugh? Yes. There is no question about that, that Ford and Kavanaugh have become stand-ins for Team Red and Team Blue. And if you support Ford, you're Team Blue. If you support Kavanaugh, you're on Team Red. And again, that is the last sort of issue that Heitkamp wanted to face here in the closing weeks of this campaign. He wanted to keep this race more local. And what about the candidates themselves? Did you end up talking to them?

Yeah. So I saw Kramer on Friday. We had coffee in Bismarck. I drink coffee. You got to power through it, right? I talked to him at some length, and he made a comment to me there. You know, you talk to enough people around here, you don't understand the value of saying what a lot of other people don't dare say but think? But what? Tell me. He is somebody who is willing to say things that others think but won't dare say out loud.

And so I asked him what he meant by that. And he went and did it again. He said, for example, just that you're supposed to believe somebody because they said it happened. He doesn't like this notion that women who claim to be assaulted have to be automatically believed. My wife is a great example. My wife and my daughters and my mother and my mother-in-law, they cannot stand this movement toward victimization. And sort of this B2 victimization moment,

and that there were tough prairie women out there, and they didn't like this trend towards victimization. These are tough people. So this whole sort of stuff is offensive to them. We're at this point now where this whole movement exists where you get to scream at a male senator, but if he ignores you or if he tells you to grow up, that somehow, you know, that's weakness to them.

I was struck by that. And so when I saw Senator Heitkamp on Sunday at a parade and festival of a Scandinavian event called Ufda Day, I talked to her at some length after the parade about the race. There's a whole lot of people who say, well, this is done, this is over. You know, this is a state where you can win with 150,000 votes. About North Dakota, about Democrats, about, you know, the sort of challenges of being a Democrat in a red state.

I think that people think the Democrats have focused too much on culture and culture that doesn't reflect their values. I think at the end of the day. It's a cultural stuff. Yeah, I think so. And I think, you know, when people don't think that you respect or honor their values, I think that they react. And then at the end, I said, I want to run one thing about you. And I told her what Kramer had said. Now I've interviewed and covered a lot of politicians. I don't think I have seen the level of fury in a politician rise as quickly as it did with Heitkamp.

When I read back to her what Kramer had said, at first I couldn't quite figure out why she was just so furious. And then she explained to me. I think it's wonderful that his wife has never had an experience and good for her. And it's wonderful his mom hasn't. My mom did. And I think it affected my mom her whole life. And it didn't make her less strong. And I want you to put this in there. It did not make my mom less strong that she was a victim. She got stronger and she made us strong. And to suggest

that this movement doesn't make women strong and stronger is really unfortunate. Her mother, who just passed away earlier this year, had herself been a victim of sexual assault when she was a teenager. And Senator Heitkamp got very angry and sort of spoke her mind about what she thinks about Congressman Kramer's comments. And then a little bit later at the festival, she saw me again and strode right toward me and said with disbelief, did he really say that to you? She was clearly angered by his comments. And again, that kind of speaks to what you mentioned earlier, which is this trend towards Kavanaugh versus Ford and being on Team Red or Team Blue, and then also the kind of collision of the Me Too movement and the midterm campaign, you know, happening in kind of real time.

It was extraordinary. What was your take, having talked to her, about how she feels about having taken this position on Kavanaugh. She wanted to avoid it. But now that she has no choice, she's embracing it. I resigned to what she had to do, not happy about it, kind of eager to move on and talk about other issues. But it feels, I think, deep down like it was the right vote.

down like it was the right vote. Jonathan, thank you very much. I know you're going to catch that flight. Thanks, guys. Appreciate it. Talk to you. Bye. In an interview with The Times, Senator Heitkamp's brother, Joel Heitkamp,

a former state legislator, acknowledged that his sister finds herself in a very tough spot less than a month out from the election. I can sit here and lie to you about it and say it's not a big deal, but it's a big deal. It's a really big deal, he said. Our hope is that people see it, they appreciate it for the honesty, and they move on to the overall message

of being anti-tariff and pro-farmer. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. Climate change is already affecting people, ecosystems, and livelihoods all around the world. On Monday, the United Nations released a landmark report describing a far more dire picture of the consequences of climate change than previously thought, and warning that avoiding the damage will require economic change at a pace with no historical precedent. The report, compiled by a group of international climate scientists, describes a world of food shortages, wildfires, and mass migrations as soon as the year 2040,

a period well within the lifetime of much of the global population. Early action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is possible. There are options available. There are signs that mitigation is going on. But if this is to be achieved, there's an urgent need to accelerate. The report's urgency stems from a new understanding of the temperature increase that would trigger such conditions. In the past, scientists thought that the threshold was a rise of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Now, according to the report, those same effects will stem from a rise of just 2.7 degrees,

something they predict by 2040. So I think that's all I can say. The message is over to governments at this stage. We've told you the scientific facts, the evidence, the costs. It is up to the governments now to decide what to do with it. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.