Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: November 8, 2017 Guest: Gary Peters, Donna Edwards, Jess McIntosh, Mark Walker
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: -- Trump has taught us, it is that we can do better. But many of us already knew that, didn`t we? That`s HARDBALL for now, thanks for being with us. "ALL IN" with Chris Hayes starts right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Tonight on ALL IN.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are back by popular demand!
HAYES: The Democrats strike back.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Democratic Party is back my friends!
HAYES: Tonight, fallout from last night`s wholesale rejection of President Trump.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are better than this!
HAYES: How the resistance moved from the streets to the polls.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This one is for you!
HAYES: And how the Trump agenda could increase the size of a Democratic wave.
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), SENATE MINORITY LEADER: The Republicans should look at the elections last night and it should be a giant stop sign for their tax bill.
HAYES: And about that Steve Bannon playbook.
STEVE BANNON, FORMER CHIEF STRATEGIST, WHITE HOUSE: Those Trump issues, those kind of populist/nationalist issues are winners.
HAYES: Why the spectacular failure of Trumpism without Trump means big trouble for Republicans.
BANNON: All of a sudden Gillespie caught fire because he`s embracing Trumpism.
HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Good evening from New York, I`m Chris Hayes. Donald Trump won the Presidency of the United States one year ago tonight, but not with a majority of Americans. He lost the overall popular vote by nearly 3 million people. Last night, after stunning victories from Democrats across the nation in nearly every contest, there came a reminder that this is not Donald Trump`s America, including the marquise Governor`s race in Virginia where Democrats had been quite worried that Lieutenant Governor Ralph Northam could lose to Republican lobbyist, Ed Gillespie. Ed Gillespie who cynically embraced the President`s grievance playbook with ads about kneeling NFL players and protecting Confederate monuments. Instead, Northam absolutely crushed Gillespie, winning by nine points, and nearly doubling Hillary Clinton`s margin over Trump in Virginia last year.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RALPH NORTHAM (D-VA), GOVERNOR-ELECT: Something that I am so proud of and I remind you all the time, we live in a very diverse society. It is getting more diverse every day. It is that diverse society that makes this country great!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: That vision of a pluralistic, multicultural America was a direct repudiation of Trump`s white nationalist politics and it was embodied in the candidates who walked across Virginia. In addition to also winning the two other statewide races for Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General, Democrats in a staggering result took at least 15 seats in the House of Delegates. And depending on how re-counts go, they could win up to four more seats and take control of the chamber for the first time in 18 years. Among the winners was Danica Roem, the first openly transgender person ever to be elected to a U.S. Statehouse, who focused her campaign not on hot- button social issues, but on -- wait for it -- traffic in Northern Virginia. Roem defeated Robert Marshal, a 13-term incumbent who introduced an anti-trans-bathroom bill and would only use male pronouns to describe Roem. He once proclaimed himself Virginia`s "chief homophobe."
Also, victorious last night were the first two Latino women ever elected to Virginia`s House of Delegates, Elizabeth Guzman and Hala Ayala, as well as Lee Carter, a Marine Veteran backed for the Democratic Socialist of America who unseated the House Majority Whip. Now, this story wasn`t just confined to Virginia. Despite racist flyers, Hoboken elected New Jersey`s first Sikh Mayor, Ravi Bhalla. And in Washington State, a victory by Indian American Democrat Manka Dhingra and a state senate race gave her party full control of that state`s government. Indeed Democrats were triumphant everywhere. Democratic Mayor re-elected New York City for the first time in 32 years. A Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate winning overwhelmingly in New Jersey amid toxic approval rating for outgoing Governor and one-time future of the Republican Party, Chris Christie.
One major theme last night was the Trump effect. And he sure didn`t seem to help. In Virginia, 17 percent of voters said one reason for their vote was to express support for Trump but 34 percent, double the percentage, said they were voting at least in part to express opposition to the President. Trump sought to play down last night`s results, first disavowing Gubernatorial Candidate Ed Gillespie and then posting this picture to Twitter, in which he gives a thumbs up and brags about his massive electoral college landslide victory, even though his electoral vote victory was not a landslide and was far from massive by historical standards. Plus, once again, he lost the popular vote, by a lot. The Trump effect was not the only factor last night. Crucially, Democrats seemed to win on the issues.
In Maine, voters resoundingly approved a Medicaid expansion that Governor Paul LePage is trying to stop it from going into effect. And the Virginia exit polls told a fascinating story about what voters actually cared about. 60 percent of Virginia voters said the monuments to Confederate leaders should be left in place. That`s the stance that the Republican gubernatorial candidate explicitly embraced and he`s advertising. But crucially, the issue didn`t drive their vote. Voters cast their ballots because of health care. 39 percent saying health was the issue that mattered most in their vote. A far greater percentage than chose immigration or abortion. And among Virginians who cared most about health care, Ralph Northam, a Democrat who wants to expand Medicaid in the state of Virginia won by a massive 54-point margin.
I`m joined now by Senator Gary Peters of Michigan who is the only Democratic freshman elected during the last midterm election, 2014, when 12 Republican freshmen were elected and who hails from a state that, as we all know, Donald Trump won last year to the surprise of many. And Senator, from your unique perch in Michigan, from the perspective of someone who managed to win a victory in 2014 against the odds with an electorate unfavorable Democrats, what`s your lesson from last night?
SEN. GARY PETERS (D), MICHIGAN: Well, I think the most encouraging lesson that I see from last night was just the incredible turnout of people. You know, in Virginia, a record turnout of folks who showed up. And basically, you know, I`m seeing in Michigan an energy that I haven`t seen in years. Democrats who want to make sure their voice is heard. They want to get involved in politics. They`re finding ways that they can interject themselves into this debate. And I think they`re very motivated to vote. But we didn`t really have a test of that until last night. And Virginia, I think, showed that when Democrats come out to vote, we win. And if we can keep that enthusiasm going into the midterms, it`s going to have a significant impact in Michigan and I think in a lot of other states, as well.
HAYES: Yes, if I`m not mistaken, I think there was a special election in your state in the upper peninsula, in a district that had gone (INAUDIBLE) for Trump that won plus 20 for the Democrats last night, to your point. What do you say to people who say, well, look, most -- Hillary Clinton won Virginia, anyway. She won New Jersey. New York City is a very Democratic town. The House Delegate races were largely won in districts that Hillary Clinton won. From someone who`s in Michigan, where Donald Trump did manage to win that state, what do you say to that?
PETERS: Well, I say, you just have to look at the numbers of turnout. Still, although those states did vote Democratic, in Virginia`s case, you had a huge surge. You know, if I recall, just before the election, all the polls show that that race was going to be very tight. When everyone counted the ballots, it wasn`t tight. It was a pretty big victory. So that shows a surge of Democratic voters that are coming out. I think we`re going to see that in Michigan in 2018, as long as we can keep this kind of enthusiasm.
You mentioned the race up in the upper peninsula. That was a race the Republicans thought they could win. They put in substantial resources and the Democrat won in a place that is sometimes not real friendly to Democrats. So those are all very encouraging signs, but I would also say we can`t let up the energy. We can`t let up our focus in making sure we have a positive message, talking about opportunity for all Americans. Democrats have to be for something. And when we are for something and when we are aggressive talking about that, we get our people out and we win.
HAYES: how does this affect what happens on Capitol Hill, in the Senate, particularly with tax reform? What do you see as a reverberation?
PETERS: Well, I would think Republicans would want to take a hard look at this tax bill that`s before us now. This Tax bill is skewed heavily, to very wealthy folks getting the majority of the tax cuts. And middle-class folks are left with very small piece of the benefit. And it should not be about just passing a bill. I think that the Republicans make a big mistake if they think they just have to pass a bill. I would argue, you actually have to pass a good bill. A good bill that helps middle-class families and those who aspire to be in the middle class have money in their pocket have the ability to make sure that they can pursue their version of the American dream. If they see a bill that`s stacked in favor of the wealthy, of corporations, of a bill that eliminates the alternative minimum tax, which means that wealthy folks may not even have to pay taxes. That`s not going to help the Republicans and in fact, it will only drive even more turnout from some of our base voters.
HAYES: You know, you were -- you were one of a number of Democratic Senators if I`m not mistaken, who was on a phone call with the President trying to sell this tax bill. And the theory of the case here is that folks like yourself in states that he won, in states like Ohio where Sherrod Brown I think was also on the call. You know, it`s going to be very hard for you to vote against this tax bill. The President also said that his accountants telling him he`s getting -- going to get killed on this bill, but he needs the state tax repealed. Like, what did he tell you on that phone call?
PETERS: Yes, it was -- well, it was -- it was a bizarre call. And he did say that rich folks like himself are going to get killed in the bill, but even though of course, that`s counter to all the experts and the facts of this bill, where folks like Donald Trump are going to do very well. In fact, you know, we don`t have his tax records, so it`s difficult to know exactly the impact on him. But the one tax record we do have, we know the only reason he paid tax is because of the alternative minimum tax. And under this bill, that alternative minimum tax is eliminated. It puts a $750 billion hole in the deficit and it basically eliminates the tax that we know, at least in that one year, that is why Donald Trump paid his taxes. The American people are not going to stand for that. If they see that bill that basically gives rich folks a free pass, that`s not going to be a good bill going into election time in 2018.
HAYES: Yes, given the contours of this bill, given the fact the President won your state and he`s going to be pushing hard for it and given what happened last night, do you feel political pressure to support this bill?
PETERS: I want to support a good bill. You know, I believe that we should do tax reform, we should make the system more efficient, we should make it fair, but we should focus on folks who need that relief which are middle- class families, and those aspire to be in the middle class. That`s the kind of bill that I want to support. We were hoping we could try to find some bipartisanship in doing that, you know, pass tax reform bills. The one that passed the last major one received over 90 votes in the United States Senate. But we can`t do that when the Republicans shut down the process, they may be putting out a bill tomorrow or the next day, and then doing a markup as quickly as Monday, without any kind of Democratic input into this bill. I can`t support a bill if we don`t have input and if working people in this country are not benefited, I`m certainly not going to support a bill that only helps those at the very top of the income scale.
HAYES: All right, Senator Gary Peters of Michigan, thanks for being with me tonight.
PETERS: Good to be with you.
HAYES: I`m joined now by Jess McIntosh, Executive Editor for ShareBlue, former Senior Adviser to Hillary Clinton`s Presidential Campaign, and former Democratic Congresswoman, Donna Edwards of Maryland, Senior Fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. All right, well, different night last night than a year ago.
JESS MCINTOSH, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, SHAREBLUE: Just a little, yes.
HAYES: Well, what is your -- what`s your reaction? How do you feel?
MCINTOSH: OK, so today is the one-year anniversary of the day that 26 percent of Americans and a good chunk of Russia decided to make Donald Trump the President. And I think last night reminded us that there are more of us than there are of them. This is, like you said, not Donald Trump`s America. And the inclusivity that we saw in the slate of candidates that was elected last night was a full repudiation of the absolute racism, white nationalism, xenophobia, and misogyny that today`s Republican Party has decided to embrace. It was rejected. Full stop.
HAYES: Donna, what`s your feeling?
DONNA EDWARDS, FORMER CONGRESSWOMAN, MARYLAND: Well, I certainly agree with that. I mean, it`s really clear when you look from the mayors who were elected to the state legislators, really up and down the ballot, across the country, it was a clear repudiation of Donald Trump and of all of that nastiness that went on over the course of the -- has gone on over the course of the last year. And I think voters said, you know what, we want to pay attention to our bread and butter issues. We want the people who represent us actually to look like us. And we saw that all across the country.
HAYES: You know, there`s been a lot of talk about Democratic infighting. And if you`re online, it feels like there`s a lot of it. And it was sort of striking to me last night that the kind of ideological slot that you could put many of these candidates and really ran the gamut.
MCINTOSH: Right.
HAYES: I mean, you had them -- the Marine Veteran who`s a socialist. Northam ran a fairly progressive campaign, but himself was a two-time George W. Bush voter, not a real -- doesn`t come out of the liberal wing of the party. You have that sort of spectrum. What does -- what does it say about the sort of state of the Democratic Party in what happened last night?
MCINTOSH: I think it says that our differences are much, much smaller than you would see if you put it under a partisan microscope, that the beltway pundits tend to do. I mean, internet infighting is interesting because it involves personalities and big personalities and who did what to who and what egos were involved where. When it really comes down to the voters, when it comes down to the actual grassroots army that`s fuelling this resistance, it`s about the issues. And on the issues, we really -- we disagree on the margins.
HAYES: I think the point about the issues Donna, is so interesting to me because Gillespie by the end was sending out a mailer about kneeling during a national anthem like he was running to be commissioner of the NFL or you know, flag celebration observance. But you know, what happened was at some level, Republicans touched the stove on health care, and one way to understand what happened last night is that they paid for it. Is that a credible theory of last night to you?
EDWARDS: Well, I think it is. I mean, I think, for example, if you look at the ballot measure in Maine on Medicaid expansion, voters in New Jersey who clearly were casting a vote around issues of health care, I think across the board, you know, people were rejecting this agenda over these last now 11 months and saying, we`re not going to -- we`re just not going to take that. I mean, what I look at is you know, if you think about the array of candidate who won last night, from you know, a transgender woman to a Sudanese American woman to a refugee, former refugee mayor up in Helena, Montana, across the board, it really did represent the diversity of this country. And I think voters really rejected that and they said, you know what`s important to me, and they weren`t listening to the chatter that we all engage in in Washington.
HAYES: Yes, I mean, a black mayor in Helena, a former refugee, a Black mayor, I believe, in St. Paul, Minnesota. A Black woman in Charlotte, North Carolina, if I`m not mistaken, the first two Latino women to serve --
MCINTOSH: Seven transgender Americans across the country.
EDWARDS: In Topeka, Kansas.
HAYES: And Topeka, Kansas and seven transgender candidates winning across the country.
MCINTOSH: I mean, this was absolutely enormous, the diversity and the slate that we saw come in last night.
HAYES: And what -- so, you know, there`s this question about motivation. It`s really interesting to listen to Senator Peters, right? That`s someone whose live -- whose livelihood and career is going to depend on that, right? I mean, next time he`s up in 2020, he`s got a presidential election in his favor. But what -- as someone who`s been an organizer, who`s worked on campaigns, what -- there was this question about whether the resistance that we saw, we saw protests the first night he was elected, right, election night. We saw one of the biggest marches in American history a few days later during the inauguration. And we saw these series of mobilizations around these special elections where Democrats came up short. And there was really this question of like, is this a thing or is this not a thing?
MCINTOSH: One of the things that we said when we came up short in those special elections, they were in redder areas, was if we saw this kind of voter turnout in moderate areas or in Democratic-leaning areas or in Republican -- in slightly easier to win areas, it would be a huge sweep. And that`s what we saw last night.
HAYES: Yes, Montana was over-performing by ten points or nine points in Kansas. But those are places where Republicans are up 20 points as a baseline.
MCINTOSH: If you apply the kind of turnout that lost us the election in Georgia Six across the country, we would take back the House. That would be a massive wave. So we`re starting to see that that -- despite the losses, which meant everybody wanted to talk about what was going wrong, that didn`t depress these people. Like the resistance has managed to turn from that to the streets, to the polls, which was the giant question about it, to begin with. I mean, I think we`re seeing a massive backlash to the Trump Presidency. And it`s coming electorally, which is incredibly heartening.
HAYES: How much of this, Donna, how much of this is about the President? How much of this is the President essentially being this kind of force of polarization, that forces people to choose sides and maybe even pushes people in some directions in a more progressive or a more pluralistic direction, who may not have been before, because they`re so repelled by him?
EDWARDS: Well, I think, clearly, you know, the President and all of his actions and his xenophobia, homophobia, I mean, you could make the list, account for a lot of the mobilization and the energy out there. But the fact is, even with all of that, you can`t win elections unless you`re for something. And all of these candidates all across the country demonstrated, yes, you can mobilize some people around voting against Donald Trump, but you have to motivate them to come to the polls, to show up, to volunteer, to be candidates after all.
I mean, many of these races that we saw, we put up candidates up and down the ballot with some people who would never even thought about running for electoral office a year ago. And so, it`s a combination of the against Trump, but let`s be for something as Democrats. And I think that we`re beginning to find our voices. And there, in our voices are in the array of diverse candidates that we run all across the district, not being afraid to run -- to run toward our identity and embrace issues that allow us to represent many different kinds of districts. It`s a really exciting night. And you know what? We can`t let up.
HAYES: Yes, that`s the big question, right?
MCINTOSH: One of my favorite stories about last night, and Donna is absolutely right about the first-time candidates, is a 32-year-old black woman in New Jersey who decided to run when the state legislator posted a sexist joke about the women`s march, saying he hoped that they were all home in time to cook dinner. She saw the joke and thought, I`m going to take his job. And last night she did. 20,000 women have called Emily`s list, called, called Emily`s list and asked, how do I run, can you help me? Those women were on the ballot last night and they`re winning. I mean, we were worried.
Honestly, I was a little worried on the Hillary Clinton campaign about what the backlash to women would be, should we elect the first female President, in the same way, we saw racists wildly emboldened by the election of the first African-American President. What was that going to mean for women in American when this happened? Of course, that I did not need to worry about that because the election did not happen, but now I`m seeing this. I`m seeing actually three weeks of sexual predators being toppled followed by this record number of women running and winning. And I think maybe we`re the backlash.
HAYES: Jess McIntosh --
EDWARDS: What -- you know, I don`t know if you have time Chris but I mean, the reality is, is that when you run women and more women, more women will actually win.
HAYES: Jess McIntosh and Donna Edwards, thank you both for being with me. That was great.
Next, the Republican Hail Mary to close out a disastrous 2017, but even tax reform, their signature legislative effort doesn`t look promising. The Republicans scramble in two minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCHUMER: The Republicans should look at the elections last night and it should be a giant stop sign for their tax bill. Where did they get clobbered in the suburbs? Where does the tax bill clobber middle class and upper-middle-class people in the suburbs?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: You might think last night`s sweeping victories by Democrats across the country would give Republicans pause before they rush into their tax bill. But you`d be wrong. Democrats like Ralph Northam, who won the Virginia Gubernatorial Race, won largely with the help of suburban voters in relatively affluent areas, places with high cost of living for housing as well as state and local taxes. Republicans resoundingly lost voters in those areas last night. And here`s the thing. Those are precisely the voters that the Republican tax proposal could also hit the hardest. Tax policy center estimates that at least one-quarter of all taxpayers would see their tax bill actually go up under the Republican plan. That`s especially true for people in places with high housing costs and high state and local taxes, which sure sounds like a lot of suburbs. Republican leadership faced with last night`s election loss is vowing to press on even harder with their tax proposal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PAUL RYAN (R-WI), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: It doesn`t change my reading of the current moment, it just emphasizes my reading of the current moment, which is, we have a promise to keep and we`ve got to get on with keeping our promise. And one of the chief promises we made when we ran for office, all of us, whether it`s the President or Congress in 2016, was that we would do tax reform and tax cuts for families, for people. And so we have to get on with doing that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Republican Congressman Mark Walker of North Carolina calls the tax bill a move towards, "pro-worker, pro-family conservative ideas." And Congressman, I don`t think this probably applies in your district, but in you`ve got folks like Darrell Issa who`s come out and said he can`t support this bill and Peter King and Lee Zeldin and Leonard Lance and others, how is it that a Republican Majority is going to raise taxes on families with children in suburbs? How are they going to be able to go back and sell that to their voters?
REP. MARK WALKER (R) NORTH CAROLINA: Well, I think the very premise of your question, I don`t know if it`s completely accurate because you`re looking at the majority of people who pay taxes, the other half, the 45 percent don`t pay any taxes. So anytime that you make any adjustments, it`s going to impact those, plus, you`re looking at the first $24,000. And I don`t want to do talking points --
HAYES: Congressman, respectfully though, I just have to -- I just have to interrupt one place there. It`s not true that 45 percent pay no taxes. They may pay no income tax, but of course, there`s lots of other taxes they pay, just to be clear.
WALKER: Fair enough point but when we`re talking about the tax reform here, the first $24,000, sometimes you hear it in the vernacular of doubling the standard deduction. But the fact that you`re going from $12,000 to $24,000, that directly impacts the lower and middle-class families in a very positive way.
HAYES: Right. I know, and yet, and yet, somehow your colleagues have written a tax bill that`s going to raise taxes on a quarter of filers. It`s just remarkable to me the Republican Party, the Republican Party, if I live in a Republican district in the New Jersey suburbs, what the heck is the point of voting for a Republican Congressman if he`s going to raise my taxes?
WALKER: Listen, I appreciate the Democrats` newfound concern with deficit and raising taxes. It`s something that we haven`t heard much about in the last 19 years --
HAYES: No, no, I`m asking -- I`m asking you just a simple question of representation. What do you tell a constituent whose taxes are going to be raised by the Republican Party why they should vote for a Republican?
WALKER: I would probably tell them the first thing what report you reading off of because our numbers are saying something that`s completely different. It`s very important that people understand that this is tax relief for people across the board. Now, if you`re looking at calculating that over ten years, there may be some rise and up depending on which bracket you may move in and out of based on your income, but when it comes across the board, this is tax -- this isn`t just tax reform, this isn`t just something that we`re making up. This is genuine tax relief not only in the individual market but also the pro-growth when it comes to the corporate or the business side --
HAYES: Believe me but that`s precisely where you run into problems, right? You talk about, well, ten years out, some taxes might rise. I mean, the tax policy center says a quarter of filers are going to see their tax bill go up over that ten-year span, right? The problem is you`re giving $4 of tax relief to corporation for every dollar you could give to households. But those households are going to see actual increases in their tax bills.
WALKER: Listen, these so-called corporations that you`re talking about, these are local businesses in our communities that are creating jobs for many people. One of the reasons that we`ve seen the job growth --
HAYES: Sure.
WALKER: -- the unemployment rate continue to track down, 17-year low, is these -- the consumer index is off the charts.
HAYES: But Congressman --
WALKER: This is something that we can put right back into our communities and I think that`s crucial.
HAYES: OK. I understand -- I understand your case on the corporate side. I won`t -- we won`t argue about it. I get it. But you still got a problem. And the problem is still the way the math works right now is that there are people in Darryl Issa`s district, and MacArthur`s district, and Leonard Lance`s district, and Lee Zeldin`s district, and Peter King`s district and on and on, Barbara Comstock, whose taxes will rise, who will see their tax burden go up because you`re going to go after the mortgage interest deduction, you`re going to go after the state and local taxes deduction. They have kids and they`re going to see their taxes go up and you`ve got to tell them why the Republicans raised their taxes.
WALKER: OK, Chris, I`m more than happy. I`ll tell them and you right now, it is not encumbered upon Members of the United States Congress to bail out states that have overtaxed their populations, whether it`s New York, whether it`s California. Some of these state legislatures, as well as city officials, have been irresponsible at the tax burden they`re putting on their private citizens.
HAYES: Right. Well, OK, but you can -- you still got to -- you don`t represent New Jersey, so that`s an easier thing to say from North Carolina. Let me ask you this. If I`m -- if I`m a Republican and I`m pro-life, right?
WALKER: Sure.
HAYES: And I`ve adopted someone because -- partly because of my belief system, maybe because of other reasons, I would get an adoption tax credit, right? That`s in the code right now?
WALKER: Right.
HAYES: Why should I have to give up the adoption tax credit and pay more in taxes so that Donald Trump`s family can inherit more of Donald Trump`s money?
WALKER: Well, I don`t know about what Donald Trump`s family can inherit, but can I tell you this --
HAYES: Well, you would agree that the estate tax zone out -- phase-out will benefit them?
WALKER: Well, I don`t know that it has a direct impact on the child tax credit or the adoption child tax credit and I`ll tell you why.
HAYES: Money in, money out.
WALKER: I was -- I was the first one last week to put this -- (INAUDIBLE) out to make sure that the adoption child tax credit is something we fight for. And here`s why. This directly impacted lower and middle-income families. This is pro-life. These are the people that are going out and rescuing children that are sometimes unwanted.
HAYES: Right!
WALKER: In fact, this Sunday, we`re giving a community hero to a couple that adopted a special -- a child with special needs. That`s important for us to continue to fight for those people as well.
HAYES: No, I agree. I read your statement on this. My question is, why would the Republican Party get rid of that tax credit?
WALKER: Well, I think the overall thought process was that if you`re doubling the standard deduction for these particular people, it wasn`t designed for wealthy people to necessarily always go overseas, but we want to make sure that it`s targeted legitimately to the lower incomes.
HAYES: Let me ask you this. If that stays in, if they get rid of the adoption tax credit, which I know means something to you, and you`ve spoken out about it and many members do. And I`ve seen churches talk about it and may pro-life groups.
WALKER: Sure.
HAYES: If that stays in, is that a deal breaker for you on whether you vote for this bill?
WALKER: I don`t know that it`s a deal breaker. If we can go back and look at to make sure that we are not negatively impacting some of these same demographics, if you can prove to me that they`re still better off, then certainly it`s something that I`m going to support. This -- overall, and I heard the former guest talking about this is a referendum. I don`t believe so. You have to understand, go back six or seven years. Democrat governors had 27 governors. You`re down to 16, you picked up one last night. 32 Republicans, 17 Democrats. And the last point I`ll make, in President Obama`s first term, he lost 60 seats in the House, nearly unprecedented. So it is something --
HAYES: But you --
WALKER: -- so there are shifts here in the season.
HAYES: Well, of course. But you don`t feel like the pendulum just started to come back your way?
WALKER: Listen, I`m a straight shooter. Did the Democrats have a good night in Virginia, New Jersey, and some other places? Absolutely. Is it a little early to be saying this is the exuberance, this is a new trend? I don`t -- I think it`s a little early to do that because of the Republican strongholds that we have across the country.
HAYES: Let me tell you, Congressman, that is a very interesting and illuminating comment, the strongholds. Because you`re right, you`re going to be fine, I think, but you should go talk to Darryl Issa, who looks pretty scared about what you guys are about to pass. Congressman Mark Warner, thanks for joining me.
WALKER: Thank Chris. I appreciate that.
HAYES: Next, after last night`s decisive win for Democrats, a look at which the Republicans could face the Trump reckoning in 2018. And later, a closer look at just how wrong Steve Bannon is about America.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
BANNON: I think Virginia has shown that if you get back to these issues of sovereignty, get back to these issues of sanctuary cities, Kate`s law, illegal aliens, that you can put a winning coalition together.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: Statistically speaking, the person who woke up this morning with the most to fear about her own political future might be this person: Republican congresswoman Barbara Comstock tac of Virginia. And why? Because Barbara Comstock represents Virginia`s 10th district. It`s a distict which voted for Hillary Clinton by 2016 by 10 points and voted last night for Democrat Ralph Northam for governor by nearly 13 points.
She is what you might call a vulnerable Republican in 2018, but she`s not the only one. There are 23 Republicans across the country holding House seats in districts that Clinton won: 23. And Democrats, get this, neat 24 seats to take control away from the House away from the Republicans. After last night, I would expect all of those races to be very, very hotly contested.
So was last night`s blue wave a sign of what`s to come in 2018? We`ll talk about that with someone who has very, very good inside information, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: One of the reasons Democrats could pull off a wave election in 2018 is the conditions are ripe for it. Republican president is historically unpopular. There`s only 37 voters approve his performance. Democrats holding nearly a double-digit lead on the so-called generic congressional ballot. You ask people who they want to vote for, Democrat or Republican, and 29 House Republicans have left office or announced plans to leave within the last year. The big question is this, can Democrats leverage all of those conditions, which are very favorable, into a wave election nationwide in 2018.
And Tom Perriello, who campaigned hard in Virginia for his primary opponent, Governor Ralph Northam, joins me now. And also, you were part of a group whose task was basically in Virginia to try to build a mini wave in this election at the House Delegate level. You won 14 seats. There`s four outstanding. Am I right about that?
TOM PERRIELLO, DEMOCRATIC POLITICIAN: Yeah.
HAYES: So what`d you do?
PERRIELLO: It was everyone. I mean, part of what was so incredible about this was seeing progressive groups and new pop-up groups in the party working together. We fielded over 50 candidates. Most of that organically, people who, you know, women who organized a women`s march in their town and then decided to become a candidate. We were contesting in areas that hadn`t seen candidates for a long time. And people put together these amazing, inspiring campaigns.
HAYES: So you got the first step of it, it seems to me, is unique candidates, right? So when you`re looking ahead to 2018, you`ve got to contest everywhere. That seems to be one of the big takeaways of last night was, four years ago in Virginia, I think about half of those seats were uncontested. This year, I think they were almost all contested.
PERRIELLO: Every office, every zip code. We were in rural, ex-urban, suburban. We ran the most diverse set of candidates that we`ve seen in Virginia`s history. So I think both making sure we have diverse, dynamic candidates, making sure we`re contesting every office. Tom Perez has spoken to that power hopefully. But we`ve been saying this for ten years and not doing it. This time we`re actually doing it and I`m really proud that Virginia led the way.
HAYES: So there`s unique candidates, and you`ve got to contest and organize and knock on doors and do things like that, but then there`s this question about what the message is, what are these candidates talking about? How much is -- Trump is this sort of atmospheric force, right?
But i was listening to Danica Roem who won and she`s talking about traffic on Route 28, so, what was the connection between Trump out here as this sort of gravitational force and what these races were at the ground level?
PERRIELLO: I think it was a mix. We had great campaign run by Governor Ralph Northam in Fairfax and Herring. We were very clear in our progressive principles of standing against the hate and division. This was a referendum on an inclusive Virginia, but it was also on who was offering a better plan for transportation and schools and economic opportunity. And I think that`s why you saw people be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Be very clear what we were against, but also have a positive vision.
HAYES: One thing, when I look at the Northam ads, particularly the closing ads, it was about job training, investment in vocational training, it was about health care, which seemed key, he wants to expand Medicaid in a state that hasn`t expanded Medicaid, you saw that big referendum in Maine, and then it really was about this message about divisiveness. That seemed pretty front and center in his campaign and down the line.
PERRIELLO: Well, I thought he ran a really principled campaign on the message of an inclusive Virginia, but it was Ed Gillespie`s decision to put Donald Trump on the ballot, by running the most racially divisive campaign I`ve seen in Virginia in my lifetime.
HAYES: Really, you really think --
PERRIELLO: And that says a lot.
HAYES: Yeah.
PERRIELLO: The Republicans have really become the identity politics party. When it boils down to it. And Democrats are the inclusive party. We believe in liberty and justice for all. But I was driving all around the state for these amazing candidates, and every radio ad from Gillespie was either about the fear of Latino gangs or the veneration of Neo-Confederate symbols. That was really all he had. And part of that is because the Republican economic message is falling apart.
HAYES: This is a great point to me. When people say, Gillespie chose us it`s like, one of the things that Donald Trump showed was that Paul Ryan isn`t even that popular with the Republican base.
PERRIELLO: Exactly.
HAYES: Go try selling it in a general election.
PERRIELLO: Yeah, no, I think this was a big part of it. Gillespie actually tried for six or eight weeks to go with the traditional tax and spend so liberal argument against Northam, who`s constantly underestimated and who is going to be a great governor, but I think one of the things we saw is people didn`t want it. They said, we tried that under George W. Bush. It bankrupted the country, it bankrupted the middle class, and I think as Jeff Flake has shown, there`s not really a pro-corporate constituency out there in that way.
And on the democratic side, you actually saw one of the boldest platforms in modern Virginia history. Two years of debt-free community college. Looking at issues of predatory lending, criminal justice reform, a living wage and Medicaid expansion.
HAYES: $15 minimum wage. Am I right about that?
PERRIELLO: $15 an hour minimum wage and the Republicans didn`t even pay to run ads against it. That`s how quickly we`re mainstreaming ideas.
HAYES: That single detail to me is really fascinating. $15 an hour minimum wage in Virginia, where you`ve got some folks that are like, I don`t know. That`s not the issue that Gillespie tries to beat him up on. I think there`s a lesson in that.
Tom Perriello, thanks for this.
PERRIELLO: And 400,000 might have gotten health care last night from Medicaid expansion.
HAYES: Also true. Thanks for joining us.
All right, what do we have next here? Coming up, the failure of Steve Bannon`s strategic brilliance as the Republican party reconciles on what to do with Trumpism without Trump, and a special anniversary edition of Thing One, Thing Two, next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: Thing One tonight, as we mentioned earlier, President Trump tweeted out this photo today on the one-year anniversary of his election win, touting what he deems a massive electoral college landslide victory.
Trump, of course, lost the popular vote by about 3 million votes and in terms of electoral vote margin, Trump`s massive victory ranks 46th out of 58 presidential elections. But he won and nothing wrong celebrating an anniversary with the people who made it all possible. Although, there seems to be something missing from this photo, and that`s Thing Two in 60 seconds. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: You know when you go to school reunions and they do a big photo of everyone from the class who`s made it to the reunion, but it`s obviously never every person, right? There are those who just couldn`t make it for travel or family or one reason or another. It`s kind of like with this photo that President Trump tweeted tout to celebrate his win one year ago.
You`ve got Hope Hicks, Stephen Miller, Jared Kushner, Dan Scavino, and whoever that guy is on the left. It makes you think of all the people who couldn`t be there on Air Force One for that photo, not because they missed the trip to Asia. I`m talking about those who have moved on, or were forced to move on. The ones who is got cut before the first anniversary. What a difference a year makes. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HAYES: Two days before the election, Breitbart`s News Executive Chairman, former Trump Senior Strategist, Steve Bannon, was already taking a victory lap, telling The New York Times, quote, "I think the big lesson for Tuesday is that in Gillespie`s case, Trumpism without Trump can show the way forward. If that`s the case, Democrats better be very, very worried."
But that`s just a taste. This is how Bannon saw the race just 48 hours before Gillespie`s big loss.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BANNON: You had a guy like Gillespie, who was essentially eight, ten points down four weeks ago, when the Gillespie campaign starts to really embrace the Trump, you know, the Trump agenda, and all of a sudden Gillespie caught fire because he`s embracing Trumpism.
I think it`s pretty straightforward. If you look in Virginia, you see the grassroots are fired up. They`re coming out now to embrace the Trump agenda. And as Gillespie has now articulated it. Well, if the grassroots up, we win.
Sanctuary cities was not even an issue two and a half or three weeks ago. Now it`s a huge issue and could be a defining issue. I think Virginia has shown if you get back to these issues of sovereignty and get back to these issues of sanctuary cities, Kate`s law, illegal aliens that you know, you can put a winning coalition together.
So I think that whether Gillespie wins on Tuesday or not, he certainly closed an 8 1/2 or 9-point gap in 3 1/2 or 4 weeks, based on these issues. And I think those Trump, those kind of populist-nationalist issues are winners. And I think we can win in 2018 if you just stick to the program and don`t try to force amnesty down people`s throats.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Turned out Gillespie did not close the nine point gap but lost by nine points running on those Trumpian themes. But of course to the Trump cult, Trumpism never fails, it can only be failed. The Gillespie sin, they say, parroting Trump himself, is that Gillespie did not embrace Trump enough.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS: Gillespie never jumped on board the Trump train. He`s an old bush hand.
What if campaigned on preserving history respectfully, Virginia first, law and order. Simple.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Yeah, real simple.
Meanwhile, the never Trumpers are saying I told you so very loudly. Rick Wilson tweeting " "Everything Trump touches dies." The recriminations just beginning in a party that already hates itself.
David Jolley and Ben Howe join me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REBECCA MANSOUR, BREITBART: There`s a resistance in general. It really is the gift to the Republican party as you`ve told us many times. Right now, you know, you`ve become, and you know that I`m your fan girl so I can say this. I would be your fan girl even if you weren`t my boss but, you`ve become basically the de facto leader of the Republican party.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Political acumen of Breitbart News Executive Chairman, Steve Bannon, former Senior Strategist of President Donald Trump, may need to be reconciled with the election results.
Former Florida Republican Congressman, David Jolly, and Senior Contributor Editor at RedState, Ben Howe, join me now.
Well, David, what do you make of last night, particularly given Bannon`s advice and Laura Ingraham`s idea that problem is that Gillespie didn`t go fully all in on the Trump agenda.
DAVID JOLLY, FMR FL CONGRESSMAN: This is the moment to remind the nation that Donald Trump has never won a popular vote. Steve Bannon did not architect a race where Donald Trump won a popular vote. The office of the presidency is only election decided by an electoral college not a popular vote.
What Donald Trump did and Steve Bannon did is they lost the popular vote but they declared a popular mandate. Ever since they have done that, January 20th, the president`s poll numbers have plummeted to where now they`re in the low to mid-30s. No Republican can win embracing a president with popularity in mid-30s and we saw that last night.
Democrats won virtually every race across the country for one simple reason, and it`s because Donald Trump is President of the United States and represents the Republican party and he was repudiated last night in races from east to west coast.
HAYES: That your analysis, Ben?
BEN HOWE, REDSTATE: Yeah, and what is interesting about watching it all unfold, lot of the people who last year were telling me that Trump is not going to define conservatism, they would acknowledge, he`s not really a conservative, we`re just hoping he can advance our agenda as Republican.
I had said I fear this man will start to define everything for us and everything will be about him. And now what`s happening? He`s saying that it`s him that need to be embraced. Not conservative principles, not the Republican foundation, none of that mattered. All that matters is being close enough to Trump.
And as far as I can tell, embracing Trump simply means earning liberal tears and upsetting people in the media and things like that. That`s victory. I guess Gillespie did not do enough of that.
HAYES: You know that`s a really good point, David. This idea that what it`s really about is this kind of cultural grievance and making the right people upset, making the right people angry. That can be effective if you`re a talk show radio host or if you run a heavily subsidized news organization like Brietbart, which gets millions of dollars from mercers, but it`s hard when you have to win races, because if you make a bunch of people angry at you, it turns out they might vote against you.
JOLLY: And we saw that with Ed Gillespie, right? by all measures, mainstream decent Republican who got caught up in this Trump kind of white nationalist thematic of a campaign, recognizing it was slipping away from him.
And listen, Chris, you`ve spoken to a lot of people, Republicans like myself, who have been critical of Donald Trump. And I`ll be honest with you, we`re in a weird spot today. As Republicans, it`s not that we`re excited about Democrats winning elections, many of us are committed to the party. But we have to accept last night as a necessary step towards the implosion of Trump`s Republican Party if we`re ever going to be able to rebuild the Republican Party in the image we believe it can be right for the American people.
This is a family conversation within the Republican Party. Gillespie got burned by it last night. And I think a lot of Republicans are going to get burned in `18. It`s why the congress is in jeopardy.
HAYES: Ben, there`s a question here about, OK, well, now what. And I think almost everything I`ve seen -- Paul Ryan basically said, look we are with Trump. We made that decision. It doesn`t seem like there`s any -- the only way out is through, is basically the message I heard on Capitol Hill today from Republicans.
Is that basically your sense of where non-never Trump conservatives are, where the Republican Party is?
HOWE: It seems that they feel that only way to get through this, is to hold Trump`s hand long enough, the day care that was talked about before, just babysit him long enough to survive this and hopefully manage his behavior in such a way that something good can come out of it and then in future elections try to make up for it.
I don`t think there`s any chance that the Republican Party post-Donald Trump is going to remember him kindly, even people who are now supporting him, they`re all going to suddenly have been against him the whole time.
But I think that he`s shooting the Republican Party on 5th Avenue. And it`s exactly what he said would happen, which is that he won`t lose support, no matter how much he damages the reputation of other people, no matter how clear it is that embracing him is bad for you, no matter how toxic he makes the divisions in this country, nothing will dissuade them because he`s got that R next to his name and that`s all that matters..
HAYES: All right, David Jolley and Ben Howe, thank you very much.
JOLLY: Good to be with you, Chris.
HAYES: That is All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow show starts now.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. END
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2017 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.