Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Dr. Paul Offit is Interviewed about RFK Jr.'s Comments on Vaccines; CNN Hero Ron David Alvarez; Comparing Trump's Poll Numbers; Democrats Grapple with Loss; Future of Supreme Court; Amanda Zurawski is Interviewed about Reproductive Rights; School Staff Stops Potential Shooting. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired November 08, 2024 - 08:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[08:30:00]

DR. PAUL OFFIT, MEMBER, FDA VACCINE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: We need to really see the data. He's implying the data are being hidden (ph). That somehow there is an unholy alliance between the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA to hide the truth from the American public. A truth only he will reveal. So, he's basically claiming that there's a problem that doesn't really exist.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Let me play something else. He said that entire departments need to be eliminated.

Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. (D) FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In some categories work - their entire departments, like the nutrition departments at FDA, that are - that have to go. That are - are not doing their job. They're not protecting our kids. Why do we have Froot Loops in this country that have 18 or 19 ingredients, and you go to Canada and it's got two or three?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Look, with Republicans in control of the Senate, it is possible that Kennedy could win confirmation for a number of top jobs, secretary of Health and Human Services, FDA commissioner, the director of the CDC. To that you say what to the incoming Trump team and the senators who might consider his confirmation?

OFFIT: Well, listen to what he just said. He just said that he thinks that Froot Loops claim certain - contain certain ingredients that are dangerous. Fine. I mean and so what he should do, were he a reasonable manager, he would then go to the group, whether it's the FDA or the USDA, and say, look, I think this might be a problem. Let's look at this, right? And then look at the data, because I'm sure there are things they know that he doesn't know. And then if there is a problem, it can be investigated and fixed. You don't just eliminate agencies.

But when he talks about eliminating agencies, he's tipping his hand with the fact that he's a conspiracy theorist and he thinks that all these groups are lying to the American public. I worry about him greatly, but I don't think he could really be confirmed as head of the CDC. I just can't imagine that people, knowing what he does and knowing what he says, would confirm him for that position.

What worries me is that some of his anti-vaccine cronies, like Dr. Joseph Ladapo in Florida, would be confirmed for that position because at least Ladapo is credentialed. He's an M.D. Ph.D. from Harvard, but he too is a virulent anti-vaccine activists, as he's shown in Florida. I worry for this country's children.

BOLDUAN: Dr. Paul Offit, who has spent his entire career taking - trying to take care in saving this country's children. Thank you so much, Dr. Offit.

OFFIT: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, did voters hand Donald Trump an overwhelming mandate? We're going to run the numbers for you coming up next.

And happening right now, fires rage in California, destroying homes. The wind spreading flames so quick families fled with nothing. What firefighters are facing at this hour ahead.

But first we want to introduce you to one of the top five CNN Heroes of 2024. Raised in the slums of Caracas, Venezuela, Ron Davis Alvarez found hope through music, becoming a skilled violinist, conductor and teacher. Inspired by the refugee influx to Sweden in 2015, he later moved there and launched what is known now as the Dream Orchestra.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RON DAVIS ALVAREZ, CNN HERO: One, two and three and four.

Dream orchestra is open to anyone who want to learn an instrument, especially families who are arriving to Sweden.

And it's an orchestra where the main language is music.

I need one more chair.

We have more than 300 people, kids, parents, youth, more than 20 language, and more than 25 nationalities. And kids who born here. We all need to learn from each other.

This orchestra offer more than just notes. This orchestra offer something for your soul.

Music connects us. Dream Orchestra is a dream, but it's a dream who come true.

(END VIDEO CLIP) SIDNER: How beautiful. That orchestra offers something for your soul. What a beautiful thing to say. Go to cnnheroes.com to vote up to 10 times a day for your favorite hero.

And we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:38:20]

BOLDUAN: During his victory speech, President-elect Donald Trump said voters gave him a, quote, "unprecedented mandate." Harry Enten decide - decided to look into the numbers.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: I looked into the numbers. I walked into the frame.

BOLDUAN: Yes, you did. And only the way that Harry Enten can.

How - talk to me about how his support in this election compares to what - compares to the past.

ENTEN: You know, I think the breadth of the improvement that Donald Trump had, holy Toledo.

All right, Trump gained ground in 49 states and the District of Columbia compared to 2020. I went back through the record books. When was the last time a party gained in so many different places? You have to go all the way back to 1992 when Bill Clinton improved upon Michael Dukakis' performance in 49 states, plus the District of Columbia. The bottom line is, no matter where you looked on the map, Kate Bolduan, no matter where you looked, Donald Trump was improving on where he did four years ago except for Washington state. It is no wonder that at this particular point he looks like he's going to be the first Republican to win the popular vote since George W. Bush back in 2004.

BOLDUAN: And to put off, he gained ground with groups that Republicans do not generally count as part of their winning - a winning coalition, or really at all. How much ground did he gain?

ENTEN: Yes, holy - again, holy Toledo. It's just like, oh my goodness gracious. these are the types of groups you would never have thought that Donald Trump would have gained so much support among eight years ago when he first won against Hillary Clinton. Trump's was the best GOP showing among 18 to 29-year-olds in 20 years. You have to go all the way back to 2004. How about among black voters?

[08:40:00]

It was the best performance for a Republican candidate for president in 48 years, since Gerald Ford, back in 1976. And among Hispanic voters, the exit polls only go back since 1972. But - but Donald Trump's performance on Tuesday was the best for a Republican presidential candidate in exit poll history. He literally goes all the way back through history and breaks history. This is what we're talking about, Kate Bolduan. Groups that you never

thought that Donald Trump would do well among, even for a Republican candidate. That is what he did.

If the 2016 election was about Donald Trump breaking through with white, working-class voters, this election was about breaking through and going to that Democratic coalition and tearing it apart.

BOLDUAN: And it wasn't just what he did for his own support, it trickled down to helping the Senate and helping in the House?

ENTEN: Yes. So, you know, a lot of talk this morning and this week, as you know, the GOP's going to have a Senate majority. We don't know if the Republicans are going to have a House majority.

BOLDUAN: Right.

ENTEN: But we think that that's the most likely to be the case.

But I want you to look at the 2024 House GOP national vote showing. So, this is the House popular vote. Currently the GOP is ahead by 5 points. I expect that to shrink a little bit as some of the California results come in. But that if - let's just say he wins - the House GOP wins by more than 2.6 points, it will be the best House GOP showing in a presidential year, in the House popular vote, since 1928.

If there's any viewer out there who is that old, God bless you. But the bottom line is, it was probably the best House GOP national vote showing most of our viewer's lifetimes.

BOLDUAN: There are people -

ENTEN: In a presidential year.

BOLDUAN: Yes, OK.

It's good to see you, Harry. Thank you so much.

ENTEN: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: God bless you.

John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you very much. You as well.

With us now, Ron Brownstein, CNN's senior political analyst, senior editor at "The Atlantic."

So, Harry just laid out what happened.

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.

BERMAN: You have been looking into why. Why did Trump do so well in this way? And the answer may not be Trump in your mind exactly, it may be Joe Biden. BROWNSTEIN: You know, look, there's just no precedent - there really

is no precedent for a president's party holding the White House in an election when voters are this discontented with the performance of that president. We know that presidents with low approval ratings who run for re-election tend to lose. I mean Jimmy Carter in 1980, H.W. Bush in '82, the election Harry referred to, Trump himself in 2020.

What's less appreciated is that even if that president steps aside by choice or because they've hit the end of their two terms, Harry Truman in 1952, Lyndon Johnson in '68, Bush in - W. Bush in 2008, there party loses the White House in those cases too.

I mean what you see, I think very clearly through American political history and again last night, is that when voters are discontented with the status quo, they are willing to risk an unpredictable future over continuing an unacceptable present. And I think that dynamic was very much in place again.

BERMAN: Does this mean they didn't have concerns about Donald Trump?

BROWNSTEIN: No. In fact, you know, if you - that is, I think, really one of the most striking things that if you look into both the exit polls and the vote cast, it's not that voters did not hear the Democratic case against Trump. Fifty-five percent said Trump was too extreme. Fifty-five percent said he would - could - would steer the U.S. toward a more authoritarian system. Obviously, a majority of voters continue to support legal abortion. A majority of voters oppose mass deportation. A majority of voters wanted the government to do more to expand access to healthcare. But in each case, a meaning - a decisive slice of voters with those opinions were willing to take the risk of voting for Trump.

What - here - I mean one quarter of women who describe themselves as pro-choice voted for Trump. One quarter of Latinos who said they oppose mass deportation voted for Trump. They were willing to take the risk that he will deliver what they want, you know, an economy that gives them more stability at the price of potentially - you know, they downplayed the risk that he would do the things they don't want.

And so that - that dynamic, I think, was absolutely critical. A large number of voters with doubts about Trump viewed the devil they know, which was a continuation of the Biden approach, as more threatening than taking this leap into the unknown. A little like Carter and Reagan in 1980.

BERMAN: It is interesting. And I mean like one - the flipside of that in a way -

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

BERMAN: Although I think it also bolsters your argument in a way, is - just in the elections that I've covered in my career, you know, 2004, for instance -

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

BERMAN: After W. Bush was re-elected with the majority.

BROWNSTEIN: Right.

BERMAN: You know, got - won the popular vote. There was all this talk, American politics changed forever. People were trying to understand the evangelical vote in ways they never did.

Dave Wegal (ph) wrote about this overnight.

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

BERMAN: And then what happened three and a half years later, just huge backlash landslide against Republicans, Obama wins. People are like, oh, absolutely rewriting political map, political history. In 2012 the Republicans did their autopsy -

BROWNSTEIN: Yes. Yes.

BERMAN: Which, you know, said do things that the Republicans ended up doing the opposite and winning.

They're - you don't know how it's going to play down the line.

[08:45:03]

BROWNSTEIN: Well, look, we - first of all, we are living through, I you could say unequivocally, the longest period in American history where neither party has been able to established a durable advantage over the other. The period since 1968 is unique in that way. Unified control of government is more rare and more fleeting. The last five presidents who went into a midterm with unified control of government, as Trump may have now, lost it. No one's held the Senate for more than eight years since 1980. That's never happened in American history. We've never gone 45 years where neither party has been able to hold the Senate for more than eight years.

The thing that I think I've learned the most in my life of covering politics, performance really matters. I mean, you know, Bush did win that re-election and then the war in Iraq turned south and people weren't happy with it and you got the backlash.

Trump has - if he has a mandate, it's to give people a more stable economy. It's not clear they are on board for everything else he want to do. And we'll see what happens if he goes down those roads and whether people will stick with him.

BERMAN: It will be fascinating to watch. Great explanation of it all.

Ron Brownstein, thanks so much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thanks for having me.

BERMAN: Sara.

SIDNER: All right, thank you, John. This morning, with Donald Trump heading back to the White House, he could have the opportunity to stack the Supreme Court in his second term. Three justices appointed by him, already there, as you know.

CNN chief Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic is joining us now from Washington with more on this.

What could the president-elect do here?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Good morning, Sara.

Well, President - former President Trump already really has a running start on transforming the federal judiciary. You know, that's one- third of the bench, those three appointments that he put on, and they're all young. They're all still in their 50s. And so many conservatives now are chomping at the bit for potentially more vacancies that they can fill with younger conservatives - even younger conservatives.

But, you know, one thing I like to say is that these justices don't go easily. Right now our oldest justice on the conservative side are Clarence Thomas at age 76 and Samuel Alito at age 74. Now, they - you know, to many of our viewers they'd probably think well that's old, near retirement age, but not for Supreme Court justices. They usually don't go till their 80s. And when you look back at the last dozen vacancies that were created, most of those vacancies were created either by death or serious illness. Even if we just go back four, we see the two - there were two deaths with Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. And most justices over time have, as I - in our modern era now, Sara, have left in their 80s. So, just want to provide a little bit of a reality check right now for this part of the segment because even though Donald Trump has already had such a strong hand on the Supreme Court, you know, causing - appointing people who enhance gun rights, diminished reproductive rights, and federal regulatory power, this is - we'll have to wait and see if any justice actually does lead and give him a chance to fill yet another seat.

SIDNER: Joan, you also have some new, interesting reporting on Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the youngest justice on the bench. How is she being viewed by her colleagues ideologically?

BISKUPIC: Sure. And, Sara, you know, when I talk about who's come on the court over the - in recent decades, when you go back and look at how Republicans have been able to stick this court, liberals have always been searching for a center. You know, over the last 20 appointments, Republican presidents got 15 of those. Democrats only got five. So, there's always been this quest for a center. And that's what we see now with the three remaining liberals on the court, trying to woo Amy Coney Barrett. And she has shown signs that she will engage with them on legal methods and doctrines. The three liberals that I see up on the screen there are Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and our newest justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson. And they are desperately trying to get some consensus at the center of the court.

And one of the points I make in my story is that while Justice Barrett has shown that she will engage with them on legal methods and doctrine, that she usually, however, returns to the conservative fold and she's voted in the last session 90 percent of the time with Chief Justice John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh.

So, you know, one point I'd make overall, these justices serve for decades. She is the youngest, as you just said. She's unlikely to have a long tenure. And we'll see how her role evolves over time. She was Donald Trump's final judicial appointment at the end of his first term. And she did make the difference in ruling against abortion rights. But she might start backing away with some of the - from some of those positions that she held before if the liberals get their dream on this one.

Sara.

[08:50:00]

SIDNER: Joan Biskupic, thank you so much for all your reporting there.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: Kamala Harris' promise to protect reproductive rights in America did not help her win the election, though seven states did vote to protect those rights through ballot initiatives this election. What does the future now hold for reproductive rights in Donald Trump's next term?

This morning, staff at a Wisconsin elementary school are being hailed heroes for quick thinking in stopping a potential school shooting.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SIDNER: Seven states just passed measures protecting abortion rights. But in the south, access remains limited. And abortion rights advocates are very concerned things may get worse now that Donald Trump is the new president-elect.

Joining me now is Amanda Zurawski. She sued the state of Texas over its abortion law after facing life-threatening complications and nearly dying after being denied abortion care.

Thank you so much, Amanda, for joining us this morning.

I do want to ask you what your biggest worry is now that Donald Trump has a mandate. He won the popular vote and he's also got the Senate and potentially the House as well. What does this mean to you for reproductive rights?

AMANDA ZURAWSKI, SUED TEXAS OVER ABORTION LAW: Yes. First of all, thank you so much for having me and happy to be here. I wish it was under better circumstances because you're exactly right, things are bleak in our country right now and it is quite terrifying to think about what a second Trump administration could look like. Already because of his first administration, women in this country are dying.

[08:55:04] We have seen that happen. And it will continue to happen. And so my biggest fear is the reality that we're up against, which is that people in this country will continue to die as a result of being denied basic healthcare that they should be able to access without question.

SIDNER: You know, Trump has said, and he's kind of gone back and forth in this, but said that he would not seek a federal - federal abortion ban. But then the country re-elected Trump, who proudly claims responsibility for the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. But in seven of the 10 states where this was on the ballot, voters did pass initiatives to protect or keep abortion rights in their state.

Does that give you some hope that the states themselves, now that it's been pushed back to them, voters have come out and said, look, we think this is important and we want to keep this or enshrine this in state constitutions?

ZURAWSKI: It does give me hope. You know, I think - again, we have seen time and again that when abortion is on the ballot, it wins. And I'd also like to point out that actually in an eighth state, in Florida, the measure should have passed because a majority did vote for it. Unfortunately, they failed to reach that 60 percent threshold that was required. But the majority did want to enshrine access to abortion care in Florida.

So, certainly have hope. Unfortunately, ballot measures are not an option in every single state. For example, in Texas, we don't have the option to put abortion on the ballot. And so, ultimately, what we need is federal legislation to protect and enshrine access to abortion and all reproductive care. And I think the one thing we know about Donald Trump is that he's unpredictable. So, I certainly could not predict what he's going to do as far as federal legislation. But all I can do is hope that he will listen to the American people when they tell him time and again that they believe in access to abortion and they do not think that these bans, these extreme bans, like the one in Texas, should exists.

SIDNER: I want to ask you about how you see things potentially getting more complicated for those who want to have access to abortion. We remember back when Republican-backed interest group urged a Trump- appointed federal judge to overturn the FDA's approval of Mifepristone, which is used in the vast majority of abortions, the medication. What do you see happening there?

ZURAWSKI: Well, I'm very fearful for the additional restrictions that will be impressed upon the American people. Whether that be access to birth control, IVF treatments, surrogacy, Mifepristone, which, by the way, it also used for miscarriage and hemorrhaging in delivery, oftentimes to save lives. So, I'm very fearful that we will have more and more treatments in the reproductive realm taken away from us. I'm also fearful for folks being able to access basic care - basic gynecological care, for example, as we see doctors fleeing states where there are bans. We see fewer medical students enrolling in residency and OBGYN because they don't want to practice under these extreme bans. And so what that means for Americans across the country, whether you live in a banned state or not, it's going to be harder to access care because for people who live in a state where abortion care is still legal and where they do still have, you know, ample OBGYNs in their area, those areas are being overpopulated with people coming from other states. And so it's putting a real strain on the system across the country regardless of where you live.

SIDNER: Amanda Zurawski, thank you so much for joining us this morning on a very important topic.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: Staff at an elementary school in Kenosha, Wisconsin, are being hailed heroes today after their quick action stopped the potential school shooter who was on the school's doorstep. Police later arrested the 13-year-old boy and are calling the incident - they're calling a potential school shooting after social media posts were discovered showing the teen holding a gun. Here's how parents reacted after the news started to spread.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just want to get my kids out of there. Just - and I don't know what to do. I know I can't keep them out of school, but I want them to be safe.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's terrifying, especially, like I said, I mean it's a - it's an elementary school. Like, what kind of a person would have intentions to do things like that?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: CNN's Whitney Wild is following this one for us.

This is a scary - it seems like a scary close call, Whitney.

WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT: It really was, Kate. I mean police are describing a very narrow, you know, narrow success here. And police go through this. Here's what they said happened.

They say that this child entered a secure area of the school after trying two side entrances. When he entered that secure area, that's when he was confronted by school staff. And immediately he appeared very nervous and ran away.

[09:00:02]

And police were called to this elementary school. They were able to get pictures that they circulated on social media.