IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

The Rachel Maddow Show, Transcript 5/2/2016

Guests: William Bogert

Show: THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW Date: May 2, 2016 Guest: William Bogert

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Good evening, Chris. Thanks my friend.


MADDOW: And thanks to you at home for joining us this hour.

It`s called an automated dialing announcing device. Did I get that right? Yes, automated dialing announcing device. When you get a phone call, pick up the phone and the voice you hear when you answer the phone is something that is not emanating from a live person, it`s a recording or like a robot voice or something. That means -- congratulations, you have been contacted by an automatic dialing announcing device.

In 1988, the great state of Indiana banned that. The idea was sort of a consumer protection thing. The law was aimed mostly at easing people`s annoyance with telemarketers, people calling in the middle of dinner trying sell you a timeshare somewhere.

But when Indiana passed what is arguably the nation`s toughest law banning these specific kinds of unsolicited phone calls from machines, the ban didn`t narrowly target telemarketers. It also put the kibosh on political campaigns calling to ask for your vote or to ask for a donation or more likely, in the case of robocalls, political campaigns calling to say though unprintably nasty about some opposing candidate in some election somewhere.

So, the law, it went after telemarketers and went after political campaigns. The same law also had probably an unforeseen but devastating effect on the ability of anybody to conduct public polling in Indiana. I mean, it`s not illegal to poll in Indiana. You can still do polls, but you have to have a live person dial each individual number and speak one on 2001 any human who answers the phone. And that form of live human to human polling, it`s fun. If you`re lonely, it can be nice to have a live person call you and interrupt your dinner and give you somebody to chat with.

But live human to human polling can be about 10 times as expensive as polling that is done by machine, where no, you don`t get to chat with the potential new friend who just called you, instead you just, you know, press 1 for John Kasich, press 2 for Jim Gilmore, press 999 for Herman Cain.

Indiana has the strictest law in this nation banning the press 1 to give your answer kind of polling, banning any kind of robocall including robocalls for political polling. Indiana takes this law seriously, not a vestige you can look up and that`s a quirk of the law they don`t enforce. They take it super seriously.

On March 21st this year, the attorney general sent out this threatening letter warning political campaigns they should not do any calls in Indiana that would violate Indiana state law, that means no automated calls promoting a candidate, no automated calls slugging off a candidate, no automated calls raising money, no automated calls asking people how they`re going to vote. And when I say this letter from the state attorney general was threatening, I`m not kidding.

Look at this from a letter. Quote, "Although automated calls are legal in some states, Indiana has chosen to adopt one of the strictest phone privacy laws possible. If your campaign gives the OK to blast out robocalls to Hoosiers, you are disregarding our state law and my office will take swift action to bring you before court. The attorney general also then notes that if you break this law, you could face a $5,000 penalty for each call.

And so, because of Indiana`s peculiar and singular hostility to the automated dialing announcing devices among us, that`s the reason why honestly we have no idea what`s going to happen tomorrow in Indiana. I mean, since Indiana has become so crucial in the presidential nominating contest in both part parties, we have at the last minute had a few polling companies jump in and do surveys in Indiana and decided, a few polling companies that decided to shell out the big bucks to hire live callers to call humans in Indiana instead of those illegal but cheap robocalls. The don`t have many of those polls, no longer trend data term showing trends in the state or who has had the momentum over the course of the campaign or who`s been moving up or down.

In fact, as recently as two weeks ago, zero polling had been done on the presidential race in either party.

Now, because Indiana has become so critical in these last couple of weeks, there has been some late rush but not a lot. And I think mostly that is because of Indiana`s super intense anti-robocall law with its $5,000 per call penalty. Indiana is also difficult to poll because it`s sort of an unattractive target for pollsters for other more naturally occurring reasons.

Pollsters also don`t like to target Indiana because there`s a real risk they will get Indiana wrong. For presidential polling in particular, there are two things about Indiana that make it hard to do good polling there, even if you are willing to shell out big bucks to hire live humans to do your polling, you still have a couple problems.

The first one is that Indiana voters don`t register by political party. You just register to vote in Indiana. You don`t register as a Democrat or a Republican or an independent. That makes it hard to target the kind of voters you want to get your simple built around.

The second problem is, it`s been a dog`s age, particularly on the Republican side since there was a genuinely contested important presidential primary in that state at a time in the overwhelm primary process when lots of people were paying attention and were very motivated to participate.

And so, those two factor, a lack of party specific registration information, the lack of any modern equivalent for the kind of primaries that Indiana`s about to have tomorrow, those things coupled with the fact that there isn`t much polling in Indiana at all because it is so expensive, all those things together make it hard to develop good reliable statistically sound models that help you pick a good representative simple of voters that will accurately predict how the whole state is going to vote on election day tomorrow.

So, in the process of picking the next president of the United States, Indiana turns out to be really important this year and if that were not exciting enough because of all this we`re super specific stuff of Indiana, this particular state comes with an extra dose of suspense. It`s a black box. Nobody knows what`s going to happen.

Still though, from the little bit of last minute polling that we do have, and more importantly from the behavior of the candidates right now, some things are starting to become clear in this race. I`m going to talk about the Democratic side right now. I`m going to talk about the Republican side in a moment.

On the Democratic side, one of the things you`re going to notice on our coverage of the Indiana primary tomorrow night, special coverage starting 6:00 p.m. Eastern, see you there. One of the things you will notice in our coverage tomorrow, is that even though Indiana is the only state voting tomorrow, Hillary Clinton, Democratic front-runner, will not be in Indiana tomorrow. Instead, she will be in Ohio. Didn`t Ohio already vote?

Usually when candidates choose not to be in the state that`s holding an election that night, as the election results come in, if the candidate isn`t there, it`s usually because they`ve gone to the next state down the calendar, right, the next state that`s due to vote in a couple days or week down the calendar, it kind of signals that they`re looking ahead and moving on. Usually, it means they expect to lose whatever state is voting that night, but they expect to do well in the next one and they want everybody to focus on that.

But Hillary Clinton is very much breaking that pattern tomorrow. She`s going to be in Ohio tomorrow. Ohio already held its Democratic primary way back on March 15th.

So, think about that strategically. This tells you a little something about what`s going on with the Hillary Clinton for president campaign right now and their strategy. They`re no longer basically bothering with what is happening in the Democratic primary, whatever competition happens to be happening in any particular day.

I mean, Hillary Clinton is going to be in Ohio team. She`s busy trying to compete already in general election swing states like Ohio. The Clinton campaign didn`t run any TV ads in Indiana in advance of this primary. In fact, they`re not running TV ads in any of the remaining Democratic primary states at all.

Today, Secretary Clinton did not campaign in Indiana. I think largely this is to signal they believe they are moving onto the general election part of the campaign. The Clinton campaign is basically campaigning as if she`s the de facto nominee already.

But part of it may also be that the Clinton campaign doesn`t expect to do well tomorrow in Indiana. The Clinton campaign has been privately downplaying expectations in Indiana to reporters today. What polling there is in the state shows Secretary Clinton to have a small lead over Bernie Sanders, but what try are telling reporters today and tonight they are downplaying their chances of winning in that state.

And as I said, Hillary Clinton is not running any ads, she wasn`t campaigning there today and she won`t be there tomorrow. In contrast, Senator Bernie Sanders held three rallies in Indiana just today, including one tonight with nearly 8,000 people at it. His campaign has run hundreds of thousands of dollars of ads in Indiana already. They are very clearly going all out in that state trying to win. He may yet win in Indiana tomorrow.

But no one is quite sure what that means for the end game now with the Sanders campaign. Senator Sanders held a remarkable press conference in Washington, D.C. yesterday to mark the one year anniversary of the launch of his presidential campaign. Rather than being a nostalgic look back at the past year, though, Senator Sanders used the occasion to talk about the way he sees the Democratic primary ending.


SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Let me be very clear: It is virtually impossible for Secretary Clinton to reach the majority of convention delegates by June 14th, that is the last day that a primary will be held. With pledged delegates alone. In other words, once more, it is virtually impossible for Secretary Clinton to reach the majority of convention delegates by June 14th with pledged delegates alone. She will need superdelegates to take her over the top at the convention in Philadelphia. In other words, the convention will be a contested contest.


MADDOW: The convention will be contested.

Now, this is not the first time that Senator Sanders has made this argument. He told me here on this show way back on March 17th that he expected to see the Democratic nomination decided not in the primary process but on the convention floor in Philadelphia.

But although he has been raising this claim for a while now, the implications of that strategy are getting more and more stark. This far down the calendar, when you look at where the numbers are in the Democratic race right now, Philip Bump at "The Washington Post" had a really helpful comparison to help I think for understanding what`s going on in the race right now compared to the last contested Democratic primary in 2008. And I think it points out the real radicalism of what Senator Sanders is proposing for how this campaign is going to end.

Here`s the comparison. In 2008, at the end of the Democratic primary process, Barack Obama was ahead of Hillary Clinton among pledged delegates by about 4 percent, about a 4 percent lead in pledged delegates.

Now, Barack Obama in 2008 did not clench the Democratic nomination ahead of the convention that year, at least not in the sense that Bernie Sanders is defining clenching the nomination. Barack Obama in 2008 did not have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination without the superdelegates.

And that`s not surprising -- 15 percent of the delegates in the Democratic Party are superdelegates. Nobody can clench and win the nomination ahead of the convention based on pledged delegates alone with no help from superdelegates unless it`s just a huge overwhelming landslide win.

Barack Obama got nowhere near that kind of win in 2008. But under Bernie Sanders` logic from this year, 2008 would have also been a contested convention, right? He didn`t clench the nomination, would need the superdelegates at the convention to put him over, he didn`t have enough pledged delegates to do it need the superdelegates to put him over and means a contested convention under Senator Sanders` logic this year, the reason it wasn`t a contested convention in 2008 is that Hillary Clinton did not contest it.

Even though she actually had a lead in the popular vote over then-Senator Obama, even though Barack Obama had only beat her in pledged delegates by 4 percent, even though he was nowhere near the delegate count needed to clench the nomination without counting superdelegates, at the end of the primary contest, Hillary Clinton made it clear that Barack Obama had won fair and square, she endorsed him, she dropped out of the race, she went to the floor of the convention in Denver not to fight for the nomination herself but to personally nominate him for president. It wasn`t a contested convention.

That`s what Barack Obama did in the last Democratic race, with a 4 percent lead in pledged delegates. Right now, Hillary Clinton has an 11 percent lead in pledged delegates. And so, no, an 11 percent lead in pledged delegates, that is not a big enough Democratic landslide that she`s on track to clench the nomination with pledged delegates alone not counting any superdelegates but she is way out ahead by every measure. She is way, way further ahead of senator Sanders than Barack Obama was ahead of her in 2008.

And Senator Sanders promised yesterday that he is nevertheless going to contest that nomination, basically saying he won`t concede, he won`t drop out of that race, he won`t endorse her and at that convention, he will fight to -- he will still be fighting to get the nomination by trying to flip the superdelegates to him at the Democratic convention in July in Philadelphia. And the Sanders campaign is increasingly insistent on this point now.

There had been a little confusion on the top tier of the Sanders campaign. We heard different things from different top folks from the Sanders campaign. But now, the candidate himself made it clear in increasingly insistent terms that what they`re going to do is fight to win that nomination at the convention in Philadelphia in July, no matter how far ahead Hillary Clinton is. And they are increasingly insistent about it, but it is honestly fantastical, which is not the same thing as fantastic.

And so, 10 more states will vote on the Democratic side, including Indiana tomorrow and we will see what happens when the numbers come in. But barring a wholesale shift in the race, like an earth shattering shift in the race, Secretary Clinton`s lead, by any fair measure, I think, should be seen as insurmountable at this point.

Please send your hate mail to Your accusations and swear words do hurt my feelings, but they also make me stronger.



SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, as y`all know, we`re here on the Hickory basketball court. And Bruce who travels with me, Bruce, I want to ask you something. Do you have a tape measure with you? Tell me something, how tall is that basketball rim?

BRUCE: Ten feet.

CRUZ: Ten feet! You know, the amazing thing is that basketball ring here in Indiana is the same height as New York City and every other place in this country. And there is nothing that Hoosiers cannot do.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Ted had a tough week. He went to Indiana, Hoosier country, stood on a basketball court and called the hoop a basketball ring.

What else is in his lexicon? Baseball sticks? Football hats? But, sure, I`m the foreign one.

CRUZ: Listen, Donald Trump has accused every one in this race of being a liar. Donald cannot tell the truth in one minute.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`ll find out tomorrow, Indiana don`t want you.

CRUZ: Sir, you are entitled to have your -- I tell you what --


CRUZ: Sir, America is a better country --


CRUZ: Thank you for those kind sentiments. Let me point out I have treated you respectfully the entire time. And a question everyone here should ask --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you Canadian?


MADDOW: Ted Cruz having a tough time with some Donald Trump supporters today who are just not having it. The direct quote there was, "Indiana don`t want you."

We were talking just a moment ago about the thinness of the polling in Indiana for a variety of reasons and we know a little bit about what that means on the Democratic side of the race and expectations there. The polls are also thin on the Republican side. For what it`s worth, the prediction markets have been very specific about Indiana in the sense they`re absolutely collapsing for Ted Cruz.

On the eve of this Indiana primary, which he described as pivotal and crucial for his campaign, Bloomberg Politics has been tracking Ted Cruz`s fall in various betting and prediction markets. One of the betting in prediction market is called Predict Wise. They had a pretty good track record this year. They correctly predicted the winner in 66 out of 77 individual contests this year, in which they`ve made predictions in the primary.

But look how their prediction for Ted Cruz in Indiana has fallen over time? On April 7th, they said Ted Cruz had a 64 percent chance of winning Indiana. Then, a little bit -- a couple weeks later, the New York primary April 19th, Ted Cruz`s chances of winning Indiana fell below 50 percent to 47 percent. As of this weekend, Ted Cruz`s chance of winning Indiana had fallen to 9 percent.

Granted, these are prediction markets, right? But you take data where you can find it.

In the Gallup data tracking poll of how Republicans view their various candidates, this past weekend marked the first time that anybody on the Republican side surpassed Donald Trump in terms of how unfavorably they are viewed by Republican voters.

Congratulations, Senator Cruz, you`ve now passed Donald Trump in a poll. People now like you less than anybody else in the Republican race. This comes at a time when Ted Cruz is pulling out all the stops to try to win Indiana. He has done all his tricks.

If he was hoping for a bounce in the polls from his big stump announcement of Carly Fiorina as his fake would-be running mate, that bounce if it existed at all is what`s commonly called a dead cat bounce, which is not a nice thing to say about either Carly Fiorina or a dead cat.

Incidentally, when Carly Fiorina fell down off the stage today as she was introducing the Cruz family, the Cruz campaign was quick to say she was fine, she was totally uninjured but, of course, the metaphor will live forever.

The other big stunt Ted Cruz pulled to try to win Indiana was to negotiate a big public deal with John Kasich, to basically clear Kasich out of Indiana so Cruz and Trump could have a one-on-one, man-to-man contest there. That was supposed to give Ted Cruz and unbeatable chance, right? Of beating Donald Trump, head to head, man-to-man in Indiana.

Well, NBC/"Wall Street Journal"/Marist, they did a poll in Indiana asking voters what they thought of that deal between Cruz and Kasich, 58 percent of Indiana voters said they disproved of that deal and they really care about it. More than one in five Indiana voters say that deal was major factor how they made their choice who to vote for.

And that is just one poll. That`s just one piece of data about the tough time that Ted Cruz is having, ahead of what is for him a must win contest in Indiana, a contest if he does not win it, a lot of people will start wondering when he is going to get out of the race.

But I got to tell you, that NBC/"Wall Street Journal"/Marist poll, saying that Hoosiers don`t like that deal he made with John Kasich, that polling data, take it for what it is, but that polling data was obtained painstakingly by live human beings phoning other live human beings in Indiana to find out what`s going to happen tomorrow. No robots, just people.

In terms of really finding out what`s going to happen tomorrow, our special primary coverage of the Indiana primary is going to start tomorrow night at 6:00 p.m. Eastern. That`s when the first polls close in Indiana and at that point, we`ll know for sure.

We`ll be right back.


MADDOW: Arizona Republicans held their state convention this weekend and the night before the convention, Donald Trump`s Arizona state chairman got himself thrown out of a hotel in downtown Mesa, Arizona. He and a few other people were tossed out of the hotel after they, quote, "heatedly argued in the lobby over which name should appear at a delegate slate at the Arizona Republican convention." Quote, "It was very loud argument with foul language."

According to a hotel source, quote, "Drinks were flung off a lobby table near the elevators."

That same gentleman, Donald Trump`s Arizona chair, was also caught on video shouting at his own Donald Trump staffers for something having to do with the campaign`s delegate operation.


JEFF DEWIT, TRUMP ARIZONA CHAIR: Call me, I was up all night, I didn`t sleep. Call me, I told you to call me. You put names on there you don`t even know who they are?


MADDOW: You put names on there you don`t even know who they are?

That was this weekend.

The Trump delegate game is still a hot mess. It seems like it`s a hot mess everywhere, but Arizona seems like it was particularly hot and particularly messy.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Governor Brewer is an example of someone on our slate who is neither a delegate nor an alternate, even though our button was selected more than any other. And again, I believe this isn`t the only example of this.

JAN BREWER (D), FORMER ARIZONA GOVERNOR: My name didn`t show up on the ballot.

REPORTER: How do you explain this?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s called fraud.


MADDOW: Arizona`s former governor, Jan Brewer, a Donald Trump supporter, saying technical glitches prevented her from being picked as a delegate. Not only did Jan Brewer not get picked as a delegate this weekend she lost a coin toss that would have made her the first alternate delegate. She picked tails. It was heads. She picked tails.

Thanks to for the video of her reaction on scene.


BREWER: I`m very disappointed. I think it was improperly ran. I was a chief election officer and when there`s a glitch, you stop the process and you fix the problem and you start over. It`s wrong.


MADDOW: It`s wrong.

For the record, the leaders of the Arizona Republican Party say their convention was run properly, even if the outcome was not what Donald Trump and his supporters wanted. Ted Cruz once again cleaned up and electing with his supporters as delegates in Arizona, even though Donald Trump won easily with the voters. We have seen this happened in a lot of places now. Arizona this weekend, before that in Louisiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, this weekend, Arizona.

Also Virginia this weekend, Ted Cruz won 10 of the 13 delegates up for grabs at that state`s convention. Remember when Trump won Virginia?

The Trump campaign keeps saying they`re going to get better at state conventions and they hire delegate gurus. It`s pretty clear they`re not getting better at this. Maybe the whole primary fight on the Republican side depends on how well this hot mess of a delegate game gets played out in this terrifying conference rooms and state conventions all over the place. But maybe not.

Part of the way the Trump campaign has explained away how bad they are at these delegate fights in the state is that they basically think these delegate fights in the state won`t matter. They think Donald Trump will win the nomination outright just by winning enough state primaries and caucuses, so all this madness who the delegates support in their heart of heart, it will end up being beside the point. They think enough of the delegates will be formally bound to vote for Donald Trump at the outset of the convention that there`s not going to be any horse trading and dealing at the convention after the first ballot.

Is he right? And how much does it depend on the results in Indiana tomorrow?

Joining us now is Mark Murray, senior political editor for NBC News.

Mark, it`s really nice of you to be here.


MADDOW: The Trump campaign is bad at the delegate thing. They say it doesn`t matter because they`re going to win outright. They`re going to get 1,237.

What`s your professional view on how right they are?

MURRAY: I`d rather be the Trump campaign than Cruz at this delegate selection. There`s no doubt, as you pointed out, Ted Cruz has dominated the delegate selection from places all the way from Wyoming, to Colorado, now, Arizona, a state that Donald Trump won decisively.

But where they did, where the Trump campaign did do well was unbound delegates in Pennsylvania. And that was so essential to their math. The one place they needed to do it right, they did in Pennsylvania. And when you end up looking at the math right now, a victory by Donald Trump in Indiana either by 1 percentage point or 15 percentage points makes his path to 1,237, that majority you need to wrap up the convention for Donald Trump, makes it into almost a layup in basketball terms.

MADDOW: Really?

MURRAY: Yes. It really puts him on a glide path towards hitting that number on the first ballot.

And, Rachel, it`s not only the math. It`s also the will of these delegates. A lot of news organizations have called these delegates who are Cruz people and now, they`re starting to get squishy and warming up to Donald Trump, and say, well, you know what, maybe we need to reflect the will of the voters.

This is what happens when you run off six consecutive wins as Donald Trump has done and tomorrow might be seven.

MADDOW: Although those delegates to the extent their preference matters, they may be in a Trump mood today and they maybe in a Cruz mood in July, a lot of things could happen between now and then.

But you`re saying in terms of just lining up the map, that the margin in Indiana tomorrow doesn`t matter that much?

MURRAY: Well, the margin actually makes it a difference between a layup and a slam-dunk for Donald Trump to 1,237.


MURRAY: Here is how the math works. If Donald Trump, if our poll is correct, NBC News/"Wall Street Journal"/Marist poll that had Trump up 15 points, he ends up getting all 57 delegates that way. You win every congressional district, it`s winner-take-all statewide, and also in congressional districts.

If it`s a one or two point race, you will see Ted Cruz and Donald Trump dividing up the delegates. The lion`s share goes to the statewide winner, but they essentially give-and-take some of the 57 delegates. But what is important to realize about Donald Trump is that the math that I`ve done and everyone else has done, Donald Trump could get shut out at a flat zero in Indiana and still have a path to 1,237.

But that layup or slam dunk turns into a 25.3 foot shot that he needs to be able to make, where he has to run the table in California. He has to do very well in West Virginia. He has to make sure he doesn`t lose in any other delegate fights and delegate selection process. So, but -- Indiana, a great night for Donald Trump, he really doesn`t have to worry about what happened in Arizona and other places. But every delegate does matter, they just end up mattering a little bit less if he runs the table tomorrow night.

MADDOW: And if he does win in Indiana, he doesn`t need to win in California in order to clinch? It will be great, but he doesn`t need it.

MURRAY: Well, he needs to win delegates in California. The math, you have 172 delegates on the final day of voting on the Republican side. It just depends how many he has to win.

My calculations when I run things looking at the current polling, I think - - I project him getting 120 out of 172 delegates. That is a really good share.

But at the same time, the way the race has gone over the last two or three days, he could end up getting 150 or 160 out of 172. But all -- but if he ends up getting -- if he gets shut out in Indiana, it means he has to maximize that California haul, the West Virginia haul and winner take all in New Jersey, every little contest matters.

But if we get to tomorrow night he wins them all I think the Republican race looks a lot like the Democratic contest, where it`s almost a zombie race, yes, someone is running but the math makes it all insurmountable, as you pointed out in your previous segment.

MADDOW: No wonder Ted Cruz looks like he`s seen a ghost. I think he has.

Mark Murray, senior political editor for NBC News -- fascinating. And you just stated that much more clearly than everybody else has.

Thank you, Mark. Appreciate it.

MURRAY: Thanks, Rachel.

MADDOW: All right. We`ve got lots more ground to cover tonight. Lots of news, lots of stories, and we`ve got a very, very special first guest for the interview, somebody who`s there live on set, who you will not believe I was able to book but I got him and he`s here next.

Stay with us.


MADDOW: 1964 was a really good year for advertising, at least it was an ambitious year for advertising.


AD ANNOUNCER: This is modern man, a true contemporary. He`s man with imagination and drive. He`s a man with a Galaxy 500 XL --


MADDOW: Bonus points for the music and the hat regardless of what you think of the car.

But the same year that brought us that amazing Galaxy 500 also brought us one of the strangest and most ambitious and most riveting political ads of all time. It was called confessions of a Republican. There`s a lot of renewed interest in it because of this year`s Republican presidential race and now it turns out, there is new news about it here next.

Stay with us.



BARRY GOLDWATER (R), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation and the pursuit of justice is no virtue.


MADDOW: In 1964, the Republican Party ran Barry Goldwater as their presidential candidate and they got shellacked.

But in that general election race between Barry Goldwater and LBJ, it`s interesting there were no televised debates between them that year. Instead, the TV hallmark of that election was the advent of some of the most ambitious, conceptually aggressive political TV ads of all time.

We, of course, saw a little girl counting daisy petals as a nuclear explosion went off. We watched the Eastern Seaboard being sawed off and falling into the sea.

My favorite ad from that incredible election was one we played previously on the show and the response we got when we played this ad was deafening, overwhelming. The ad doesn`t have anything stunning going on visually. It`s just a man talking to the camera, shot in one take, straightforward. It`s about four minutes long, incredibly long for a political ad, but it is absolutely mesmerizing, and, yes, it resonates a lot, not just about 1964 but about right now.



SUBTITLE: Confessions of a Republican.

BILL BOGERT, REPUBLICAN: I don`t know just why they wanted to call this a confession; I certainly don`t feel guilty about being a Republican. I`ve always been a Republican.

My father is, his father was, the whole family is a Republican family. I voted for Dwight Eisenhower the first time I ever voted; I voted for Nixon the last time.

But when we come to Senator Goldwater, now it seems to me, we`re up against a very different kind of a man. This man scares me.

Now maybe I`m wrong. A friend of mine just said to me, "Listen, just because a man sounds a little irresponsible during a campaign doesn`t mean he`s going to act irresponsibly."

You know that theory, that the White House makes the man. I don`t buy that. You know what I think makes a president -- I mean, aside from his judgment, his experience -- are the men behind him, his advisors, the cabinet.

And so many men with strange ideas are working for Goldwater. You hear a lot about what these guys are against -- they seem to be against just about everything -- but what are they for?

The hardest thing for me about this whole campaign is to sort out one Goldwater statement from another. A reporter will go to Senator Goldwater and he`ll say, "Senator, on such and such a day, you said, and I quote, `blah blah blah` whatever it is, end quote." And then Goldwater says, "Well, I wouldn`t put it that way."

I can`t follow that. Was he serious when he did put it that way? Is he serious when he says I wouldn`t put it that way? I just don`t get it. A president ought to mean what he says.

President Johnson, Johnson at least is talking about facts. He says, "Look, we`ve got the tax cut bill and because of that, you get to carry home X number of dollars more every payday. We`ve got the nuclear test ban and because of that, there is X percent less radioactivity in the food."

But -- but Goldwater, often, you can`t -- I can`t figure out just what Goldwater means by the things he says. I read now where he says, "A wave - - a craven fear of death is sweeping across America."

What is that supposed to mean? If he means that people don`t want to fight a nuclear war, he`s right. I don`t. When I read some of these things that Goldwater says about total victory, I get a little worried, you know?

I wish I was as sure that Goldwater is as against war as I am that he`s against some of these other things. I wish I could believe that he has the imagination to be able to just shut his eyes and picture what this country would look like after a nuclear war.

Sometimes, I wish I`d been at that convention in San Francisco. I mean, I wish I`d been a delegate, I really do. I would have fought, you know?

I wouldn`t have worried so much about party unity because if you unite behind a man you don`t believe in, it`s a lie. I tell you, those people who got control of that convention: Who are they?

I mean, when the head of the Ku Klux Klan, when all these weird groups come out in favor of the candidate of my party -- either they`re not Republicans or I`m not.

I`ve thought about just not voting at this election, just staying home -- but you can`t do that, because that`s saying you don`t care who wins, and I do care. I think my party made a bad mistake in San Francisco, and I`m going to have to vote against that mistake on the 3rd of November.

AD ANNOUNCER: Vote for President Johnson on November 3rd. The stakes are too high for you to stay home.


MADDOW: One of the most compelling political ads of all time.

Don`t you want to know what that guy would think of this year`s Republican race? He`s here! Seriously, that actual guy, I swear.

Stay right there. He`s here next.



BOGERT: I`ve thought about just not voting at this election, just staying home -- but you can`t do that, because that`s saying you don`t care who wins, and I do care. I think my party made a bad mistake in San Francisco, and I`m going to have to vote against that mistake on the 3rd of November.

AD ANNOUNCER: Vote for President Johnson on November 3rd. The stakes are too high for you to stay home.


MADDOW: Joining us now for the interview, I`m very happy to say, the star of that ad, the actor who really was a Republican and really was in crisis over Barry Goldwater`s nomination, Bill Bogert.

Mr. Bogert, thank you so much for being here.

BILL BOGERT, "CONFESSIONS OF A REPUBLICAN" ACTOR: Thank you so much for having me.

MADDOW: You look like the same guy. You still have amazing hair.


MADDOW: You`ve held onto your good looks. Are you still working as an actor?

BOGERT: Rarely.

MADDOW: Rarely.

BOGERT: But sometimes.

MADDOW: When you got hired for that job, were you a Republican and --


MADDOW: -- were those thoughts -- how close was that script to your actual feelings?

BOGERT: Identical. Yes. Because when they hired me to begin with, they were going to use my name. They were going to put William Bogert on the screen. And I said, well, if you hire me as an actor, I`ll say whatever the hell you want me to say. But if you`re using my name, then it`s got to be stuff that I believe.

And they were frightened by that. So, they went off in a corner and they came back and said OK, let`s try. So, we did and there was one thing that I wanted changed and I don`t remember what it was. But they did make the change.

MADDOW: So, they respected that you wanted to be true to your words there?


MADDOW: What kind of -- has this ad followed you through your career? No, it hasn`t.

BOGERT: No, you`re the first one.

MADDOW: Really?


And since you, I don`t know how to use a computer. I`m not a 21st century person, but it`s on the Internet and it`s gotten over 20 million hits.


BOGERT: I`ve gotten calls from friends all over the country.

MADDOW: Wow. I mean, just watching it now, I was watching you watch it in the studio as I was playing it. Do you feel like it is a historical piece or do you feel like it resonates with the Republican Party race or anything in politics right now?

BOGERT: I`m sorry to say I think it does. Because I look at the Republican contenders and I say to myself, this is the cream of the crop? You`ve got to be kidding me.

MADDOW: Do you have any of the same -- I mean, a lot of people have expressed, not just disagreement with Donald Trump, but the kind of worry that you said talked about with gold water in `64, that he would be a fundamentally different kind of person to put that close to the Oval Office, not that he`s somebody you would want to vote against but have fear for the country.


MADDOW: Do you have any of those --

BOGERT: I definitely do, because here, as you know, he`s never held any important job other than the head of Trump Industries, he`s never been an executive, either professionally or politically or militarily. Nothing. He has no background whatsoever.

And the ignorance which is demonstrated in so many areas is to me, terrifying.

MADDOW: In that election where that ad was run by the Johnson forces, I went back and looked at a lot of other Republican criticism of the Goldwater choice at that time. I was struck by Mitt Romney`s father, George Romney, who was the governor, a very influential governor at the time.


MADDOW: He basically said the Republican Party would be committing suicide if they nominated Goldwater. Goldwater did go on to get beaten in the general election, but the Republican Party didn`t, you know, self immolate, didn`t destroy itself, it didn`t become I think a fundamentally different thing.

Does that give you any sort of hope that even if they do pick Trump, it will be all right?

BOGERT: I guess so. I don`t know. I don`t think I told you this before but as I said in the commercial, brought up Republican -- I`m still in fact a registered Republican, but the last one I voted for was John Lindsey when he ran for mayor and then he changed bodies.

And there is no way that I can visualize myself voting for any of the Republicans this year. And it is my hope that the Republican Party will, in a sense, regress, and become the Republican Party that I grew up with, the party of Jacob Javits and John Lindsey and to somewhat less degree, Nelson Rockefeller. Those guys I was totally in favor of. These people, they make me very nervous.

MADDOW: William Bogert, I`m very happy that we found you. And I`m very happy that you wanted to come in and talk about this. And you`re as compelling making this case today here with me as you were in` 64 making that ad.

BOGERT: That`s enormously kind of you.

MADDOW: I`m really happy to have you here. Thank you, sir. Thanks.

All right. We`ll be right back. We got him.


MADDOW: So, our special coverage is going to start tomorrow night at 6:00 p.m. Eastern because that`s when these very first polls close in Indiana. But before that, the frontrunner on the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton, is going to sit down tomorrow for an exclusive interview with Andrea Mitchell on her show, which is "ANDREA MITCHELL REPORTS" at Noon Eastern here on MSNBC. You have to put that in your calendar and be there for that too.

We`ll be right back.


MADDOW: Update on a story we brought you a few days ago from Maine, where Maine`s Republican Governor Paul LePage recently vetoed a bill that would expand access to Narcan, which is the overdose reversal drug that saved thousands of lives. It basically keeps people over dosing alive until they can get to a hospital.

Governor LePage vetoed that. He said Narcan, quote, "does not truly save lives. It merely extends them until the next overdose."

So, according to Governor LePage, why bother saving your life, even if we can? Why bother? Not worth it.

Well, the update on the story is that the legislature has now overridden that veto. Governor LePage said no. Maine lawmakers overwhelmingly said yes to give people access to Narcan to save lives, even though Paul LePage doesn`t want to.

I know Paul LePage has been kind a king of the class clown of governors. But clearly, Maine lawmakers saw this one as life and death.

That does it for us tonight. Again, a really special thank you to our interview guest tonight, Bill Bogert.


Good evening, Lawrence.