Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

New Poll Numbers for Kansas; Senate Battleground Map Growing; U.S. Bombers Moved Back to U.S. After Threat; Supreme Court Kicks Off New Term; Cancer Cases Linked to Infections; Battle over the Arctic. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired October 05, 2026 - 08:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:31:27]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, political tongues wagging this morning with the latest "New York Times"/Siena poll from Kansas. All tied up between the incumbent Republican, Roger Marshall, and the Democrat, Adam Hamilton. Kansas has not sent a Democrat to Washington in nearly 100 years, which is a long time.

CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten is here.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: That's some good math.

BERMAN: So, why? Why is this going on? What are some of the reasons behind this tight race?

ENTEN: Yes. OK. So, Kansas has not sent a Democrat to the United States Senate since 1932. That's 94 years ago for those who don't want to do the mental math this early in the morning.

What is going on? And that is, President Trump is historically unpopular for a president -- for a Republican president in the great state of Kansas.

Take a look here. OK, what are we looking at here? Republican presidents net approval ratings in Kansas. I absolutely buy the idea that this race is close, because just take a look at these. OK, GOP net approvals in Kansas about at this point in a term. Look at this. George W. Bush coming off of 9/11 was at about plus 45 points. Even in 2006, he was still in the positive territory at about plus one. In his first term, look at this, Donald Trump at plus five points. Look at how much less popular Donald Trump is than he was in term number one at this point. He's way down in the basement, 15 points underwater. That's a 20-point shift away from the president of the United States. That is 16 points less popular than any other Republican president at this point in a term this century. And, in fact, while we don't have the polling data, if you look at the national polling data, I would say that Donald Trump is probably, at this point in a term, the least popular Republican president probably since, well, Herbert Hoover.

BERMAN: So, you're looking at this. And it's the president's unpopularity in Kansas that might be driving part of this. But Kansas, if it were talking, would say, you know, it's not just you, it's me.

ENTEN: Yes, it's not just you, it's me. You know, you take a look at this polling data. You know, hmm, I'm not necessarily sure I quite trust it, but Kansas has actually been shifting away from the right the last couple of presidential election cycles.

Take a look here. OK, states more Republican than Kansas. This is a two presidential election average. You know, there were only seven states that were more Republican than Kansas in '04- '08. '08-'12, look at that, nine states were more Republican than Kansas. Then 2012- 2016, 12 states. Then 2016-2020, 15 states. Now there are 17 states more Republican than Kansas. If you take a look at the average of the last two presidential elections, what this essentially means is, versus the national average, Kansas has actually been moving to the left. It has been shifting away from the right. And, in fact, in terms of the state rankings, this is the lowest ranking in terms of Republican of Kansas in over a century. Kansas, one way to measure it, is less Republican right now than it has been in over a century versus the national average.

BERMAN: This is a really interesting way to look at it. And this had not occurred to me. And this is something I think we're all learning right now, Kansas, maybe not as ruby red as it once was.

ENTEN: Exactly right. It is still leaning Republican, but not anywhere near as Republican as it once was.

BERMAN: So, if Kansas could talk, it would say it's not just you, President Trump, it's not just me, the state of Kansas, but it might also be a little bit of him, the Democratic candidate.

ENTEN: Yes, that's right. Adam Hamilton, who is doing very well, in part because Adam Hamilton is popular. Take a look at this. OK, key Senate races. The highest net favorable rating of any of the candidates that "The New York Times" tested is Adam Hamilton in Kansas, the Democratic nominee. His net favorable rating is plus 12 points. The average candidate that "The Times" tested was actually a point underwater.

And more than that, as Johnny B. and I were talking about backstage, his unknown is actually pretty high. And the people who do know him, they actually like him more than the average Democrat.

[08:35:04]

And so, I wouldn't be surprised if it is those people who are unknown, that he gets even higher net favorable ratings at this point. He has room to grow, and he's already more popular than the average candidate. In fact, the most popular candidate in a key Senate race in the entire nation at this point, at least according to "The New York Times."

BERMAN: This is why Senate Republicans are dumping $14 million into this race to try to drive this number down.

ENTEN: That's exactly right. This, to me, is potentially a mathematical perfect storm. A historically unpopular Republican in Kansas and Donald Trump, an historically popular Democratic Senate candidate in Adam Hamilton, that may be the equation that gets Kansas its first Democratic senator in 94 years.

BERMAN: Context. We call this important context.

Harry Enten, thank you very much.

ENTEN: Thank you, my friend.

BERMAN: Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, thank you, gentlemen.

Joining me now, CNN's senior political analyst, Ron Brownstein.

You've got this new piece for CNN that makes the case that this election is suddenly being fought on Republican terrain. And, of course, in your piece, you mentioned Kansas. You also mentioned Nebraska, rural Wisconsin, even Mississippi.

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.

SIDNER: I mean what does that tell you about the potential size of this potential Democratic wave?

BROWNSTEIN: Yes. I mean, look, the key to this election is not only the depth, but the breadth of President Trump's declining approval, right? So, we focus on the depth that is, you know, his approval now is somewhere in the 30s. It's ten or more points below his vote. It's lower than his approval in 2018. Lower than Biden in '22, Obama in '10, Bush in '06, Clinton in '94.

But equally important, Sara, is the breadth of the decline. It's not only that the groups that move toward him in '24 are moving back away, Latinos, young voters, non-college, non-white voters. It's that groups that have been pillars of the coalition are wavering. I mean, you look at that "New York Times" polling yesterday in those five red states, his approval among non-college whites generally is only around 50/50. That's what it is in national polls. In '20 -- even back in 2018, 61 percent of non-college whites approved of his job performance in the -- in the exit polls. You're seeing a rural decline with diesel prices and tariffs disrupting export markets, and you're seeing decline among non-MAGA Republicans, important in a place like Texas.

And all of this is allowing Democrats to compete on a -- on a battlefield that is defined mostly by places that Donald Trump won. Don't forget, there are only eight House Republicans in districts that voted for Kamala Harris, even after redistricting. And in the Senate, Susan Collins is the only Republican that Democrats are targeting in a state that voted for Kamala Harris.

So over -- you know, overwhelmingly this election is being fought out on Republican terrain. But the cracks in Trumps approval, even among the core of the Republican coalition, is allowing Democrats to get a foothold there. SIDNER: Look, the Democrats, before they began to celebrate, what did

-- you have a warning in there because of some of the things you've learned in some of these places --

BROWNSTEIN: Yes.

SIDNER: For some of the obstacles that they still face. And if you look at some of these races, they are so close. It isn't as if there's like a blowout towards Democrats either.

BROWNSTEIN: No. Right. By the way, that's what's really interesting, right? I mean, one thing that's interesting about where we are in this election is that Democrats feel that they are expanding the map deeper into Republican territory. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee today, for example, announced six more seats that Trump won by astronomical margins that they're competing in.

But while that's happening, it's not like they are pulling away in the places that have been competitive all along. I mean, again, these are overwhelmingly districts that -- districts and states that voted for Trump in '24. They still have a lot of Republican tilt in their DNA.

I was in Alaska earlier this -- last month and, you know, the best asset that Dan Sullivan has in that race is the reluctance of many voters still to give Democrats control of the Senate. So, Democrats can't, you know, put these races to bed by any means, particularly in these red states.

But the reality is, is that during Trump's first term in 2018 and 2020, Susan Collins, in 2020, was the only Republican Senate incumbent or challenger who won in a state where his job approval was net negative. And in those "New York Times"/Siena polls, like other polls, he was at 41 percent or below in every one of those states where he won 55 percent or more of the vote. That's an historic erosion, if not collapse. And, you know, it's going to keep Democrats in the game, even in places that seem to have been drifting away from them.

SIDNER: It is all fascinating. Thank you for your reporting. Ron Brownstein, great to have you.

Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Some breaking news coming in overnight. An unspecified new threat and a sudden move by the U.S. military. All of the U.S. Air Force long range bombers, stationed at a critical air base in the U.K., now have been suddenly flown out. This comes after a, quote, the way it's described from a source, is "a real world incident."

The base in question, not only paramount to the U.S. alliance with the British military, but also used by the U.S. to project power to the Middle East. It has been used to launch strikes against Iran since the beginning of the war.

And all of this comes after five people were arrested in connection with an alleged Iranian plot to target that same airbase in the U.K. [08:40:05]

They were later released on bail. A sixth man arrested last week was also released.

Joining me right now is CNN military analyst, retired Colonel Cedric Leighton, for more on this.

It's good to see you, Cedric.

An unspecified threat, the way the source familiar with this situation called it was, the latest threat, "a real world incident." But all of them, not just flown out like to another place overseas, flown back to the United States. How unusual is this? What level of threat would lead to a big move like this?

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Well, good morning, Kate.

Yes, it is pretty unusual because normally when a threat happens, they can be contained locally. And this is a situation where they felt, at the Department of Defense, they felt that this was a threat that they couldn't contain locally and had, you know, really the best way to solve that problem was to eliminate the target. And in this particular case, the target would have been the B-1 Lancer bomber. And this, of course, was a key instrument in the fight against Iran. It was used for some of the operations in this war, and it was a target that the Iranians had actually talked about. So, it was very logical for them to move the B-1B's back to the United States so they could be better protected.

BOLDUAN: How does it, or could it, if it was -- I've seen estimates of a dozen or more of the B-1 bombers would have been at that base. Does it -- does the move impact U.S. readiness?

LEIGHTON: Well, it can because it depends on, you know, how you define readiness. In terms of mission readiness, it could actually improve it because if they go back to the United States, they'll go back to their home bases where they've got their maintenance facilities, where they've got all those things that, you know, keep the airplane running.

Now, if you're talking about the ability to project power in the Middle East, it does impact that because, of course, the distance that you're talking about is much larger, basically doubling the distance from the United States to the Middle East, as opposed to the distance that you'd have from England to the Middle East. So, in that particular sense, it does impact our ability to respond quickly to a particular mission requirement. So, if there's an order from the president that says, let's go target something, it's going to take longer to get there if that something is in the Middle East.

BOLDUAN: One -- I was speaking with Matthew Chance, our correspondent in London, about this earlier. He said that he had reached out to -- I think he -- I think he said it was the defense ministry in the U.K. to ask for more information and was simply told they're not going to comment on another -- on a -- on a -- on a foreign ally's, you know, military moves here, essentially.

But also, I saw that the spokesman for -- with the prime minister was also saying essentially no comment on this. But there's just so many questions around what really is the threat or was the threat, and are these threats connected? Does it -- does it seem confusing to you that there is not -- there is so little information coming out about what the threat was, you know, previously that led to the arrest of men -- these men and then released, and now what is going on here?

LEIGHTON: Yes. Well, I think what we're seeing, Kate, is, we're in the middle of an investigation. And so, there are going to be a lot of threads that are coming together, both on the intelligence side, as well as the law enforcement side. And that involves working with the U.K. It involves, you know, something that MI-6, which is the British CIA equivalent, would have, perhaps MI-5, which is their FBI equivalent. So, those particular elements will be coming together. And what they're doing is they are, I think, in the middle of an investigation because the tip off was, of course, the five people that were arrested by the British a few days ago and then subsequently released. But there's another person that was arrested as part of this investigation or another investigation that seems to be related to this.

So, given all of these investigations, it seems like there's a much bigger plot that is afoot here. And what the British and the U.S. are doing is trying to not only figure out the nature of this plot, but also trying to figure out exactly how many pieces they can put together before they roll up various operatives. The Iranians have a lot of sleeper cells around the world, and some of them are definitely in the U.K.

BOLDUAN: It's great to see you, Colonel. Thank you so much for jumping on this morning.

John.

BERMAN: All right, this morning, the Supreme Court back in session, hearing oral arguments to determine whether states can hold energy companies liable for their role in climate change. Justice Samuel Alito has recused himself from this case after facing scrutiny over his personal investments in the oil industry.

Other cases this term include arguments on semiautomatic weapons, voter I.D. laws and President Trump's immigration policies.

Let's get right to CNN crime and justice correspondent Katelyn Polantz, outside the Supreme Court this morning.

[08:45:05]

A big opening day with a big case, Katelyn.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: A big opening day for a term that will still be shaping up. John, we're going to be seeing major cases this term. Immigration, you mentioned gun rights. Today, it's a climate change case that the justices are going to be hearing on this first day of term. There's also this big question mark about what else could happen this term from the Trump administration, what could fly up to the court very quickly.

But today, this argument, it's about not just climate change, it's about whether states, counties, cities, whether they would be able to sue across this country to hold energy companies accountable.

In this particular case, it's people from Colorado, the city of Boulder, Colorado, trying to sue two major energy companies, ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy, who's out of Canada, saying that they want to potentially get damages out of them, go to trial with juries to try and assess some sort of penalty because of all of the things that that county and the city of Boulder have to deal with related to climate change, floods, wildfires, property damage, emergency services that they'll have to spend money on.

Now, the justices today, they're not going to be hearing just about climate change. They're going to be hearing about their role in this case. Specifically, some of the issues that the justices will have to deal with is, is this case even at the point in time where the Supreme Court can hear it? Is it too early? And also, is there some sort of federal issue here for the Supreme Court to step in, or can they let these types of cases proceed along in the state of Colorado and in other states across the country, the types of cases that energy companies said would be crushing them monetarily with liability, potentially. But the Supreme Court today, it really is a question if -- is if there's a role for this federal court at this time to step in and look at cases like these in Colorado and potentially elsewhere.

There is one thing that is a little bit unusual about this morning. It's the justice, Samuel Alito. He will not be on the bench listening for this case. He's recused. Although he is in the news. He's been out there talking to CBS. He has a new book out. And so, we have heard from him recently, just not on the bench this morning at oral arguments.

John.

BERMAN: Yes, very unusual, this type of recusal, at least from him, it seems.

Katelyn Polantz, great to see you. Thank you so much.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: Still to come, a new study linking millions of cancer cases to certain infections. We're going to have more detail on that.

And a bear attacking a car with the driver inside, all caught on video.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:51:43] BOLDUAN: New this morning, scientists are getting a clear picture of what may be behind some cancers. A new study is finding a surprisingly common factor could be playing a role in about one in eight cases of cancer worldwide.

CNNs Jacqueline Howard has much more on this.

Talk to me about what they're finding.

JACQUELINE HOWARD, CNN HEALTH REPORTER: Kate, what researchers found is that common infections in the body may be associated with more cancer cases than people may realize. When researchers looked at data from the year 2024, that's the year with the most recent data available, they found that more than two million cancer cases worldwide could be tied back to common infections. And many people are already familiar with how HPV is a viral infection that we know can cause cancer. But the researchers found some other infections playing a role here, too.

The top five cancer-causing infections globally in the year 2024, number one was actually H. pylori. That's a common bacterial infection found in the stomach. That was associated with the most cancer cases that year, mostly gastric cancers. It was followed by HPV, which we know is tied to cervical cancer and other cancers. And then Hepatitis B, which is mostly associated with liver cancers. Then Epstein Barr virus. That's a viral infection that we know can be connected to certain head and neck cancers. And then Hepatitis C came in number five, mostly associated with liver cancers.

But, Kate, the good news here is that we know we can test for these infections. We can treat them quickly to reduce the risk of cancer developing. And for some of these, we do have vaccines. So, it's good to have this information to really prevent cancer from developing down the road in people who may have these infections.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: Yes. I mean, you know, more data on what could lead to cancer, not just -- you never -- you know, you don't want to have one of these infections, but also down the road what it could mean because some -- which of these are there vaccines for?

HOWARD: Right. We do have vaccines for HPV and Hepatitis B. And, Kate, you make a good point that if you do have one of these infections, it does not guarantee that you will develop cancer. It just increases the risk.

So, when you treat something quickly, that can reduce the risk from cancer developing. It keeps the infection from lingering and raising that risk over time. So, vaccines are important, as well as testing and treating.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: And just raising more awareness around all of it. It's really important. It's good to see you, Jacqueline. Thank you very much.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right, thank you, Kate.

On our radar for you this morning, the Coast Guard is suspending its search for six people who were aboard a medical transport aircraft that went missing off Nantucket. The aircraft was flying from Bermuda to Boston Saturday when it suddenly plunged 13,000 feet in just a couple of minutes. Search crews located debris from the plane and scoured nearly 4,500 miles over more than 60 hours. The four-person plane crew had flown to Bermuda to pick up a patient and their relative. The next of kin have been notified.

Fury growing in Japan this morning after a U.S. Marine was arrested on suspicion of murdering a woman in Okinawa. Prosecutors are deciding today whether to formally charge the 20-year-old Marine with murder and robbery.

[08:55:04]

Police say 39-year-old Anna Yagi was found strangled to death in a hotel room Saturday. The case is drawing sharp criticism from Japan's prime minister and renewing long running concerns about crimes involving U.S. military personnel stationed on the island.

John.

BERMAN: All right, so a new book dives into one of the biggest geopolitical and geoeconomic fights unfolding today. I'm talking about the Arctic. The U.S., China and Russia all fighting over trade routes, natural resources, military dominance.

With us now, CNN global economic analyst Rana Foroohar and the author of "Sea Change: America's New Great Game in the Arctic Circle."

This book is phenomenal and a great read. And, Rana, you went sailing in the Arctic, which is something that I never want to do.

RANA FOROOHAR, CNN GLOBAL ECONOMIC ANALYST: I did.

BERMAN: But first, I just want to show people a map that you have at the beginning of the book, which is like a different way of looking at the arctic there. That's what, you know, the earth looks like from the top. And it gives you a sense of how different it is. Why is this area so important, and why has the U.S. kind of fallen so far behind there?

FOROOHAR: Yes, it's a great question, John. Thank you so much.

And if you look at that map, you see that Russia is a very large swath of what's happening from the top down. And by the way, on Coast Guard boats that are in the Arctic, that's what you see, the world from the top down.

Basically, it's been frozen until quite recently. But climate change, global warming, is actually opening up ice passageways for longer periods of time. And because there are so many other shipping choke points around the world, you know, the war in Iran has made the Strait of Hormuz a choke point. The Suez Canal, the Panama Canal, these have all become choke points. A lot of countries, the Chinese and Russians most particularly, are starting to ship across the Arctic. And there's also a lot more security action around the arctic.

You know, you'll remember earlier in Trump's second administration, he came up with the term -- or the term was used, the Donroe (ph) Doctrine, which kind of, you know, plays on James Monroe, who was a president that said the U.S. should just pay attention to its backyard. Well, guess what's in our backyard? The Arctic.

We have -- when I was on board the Healy, the one Coast Guard vessel, one that we have up there, we now have three, but really just mainly one full time in the Arctic, I learned that the Russians and Chinese together have 50 in the area. And so, we are significantly outmanned in terms of shipping power, in terms of security power in the area. And it's becoming a really big deal geostrategically.

BERMAN: I mean we -- and it's staggering. When you were on the ship, that was the one.

FOROOHAR: The one.

BERMAN: The one U.S. Coast Guard vessel.

FOROOHAR: Yes.

BERMAN: Going up there now, there are three.

Can I ask what it was like to be on this boat, sailing way past Alaska, into the middle of almost the North Pole?

FOROOHAR: Well, you know how certain native peoples have like 40 words for snow? I now have 40 words for cold. Because I thought it was cold in Nome, Alaska. When you go through the Bering Strait to the Chukchi Sea, to the Beaufort sea, which is, you know, essentially where the North Pole is, you get very, very cold. Canada Goose makes special parkas, actually.

BERMAN: There she is.

FOROOHAR: I'm not kidding you. They're like sleeping bags, head to toe, for the -- there you go. There's me in my -- in my survival suit, which actually it uses the body's own warmth if you fall in the water.

I will tell you also, I tend to get a little seasick, John. I got my little Dramamine patch because 40 foot waves, not unusual in the Arctic.

BERMAN: And I learned from you, which I didn't know, that sometimes that can give you a little memory loss. Like it's scrambling your brain a little bit.

FOROOHAR: Yes, that's right. Don't ask me anything (ph). BERMAN: The book, also you focus on sort of the shipping shortage over

the last generation in the United States and the initiative to correct that.

FOROOHAR: Yes. Yes. And that's really part of this bigger story that you and I have talked about. And it's a huge political story of outsourcing our entire industrial base largely to China over the last 20, 30 years or so.

You know, this is a story that has -- it's been about the hollowing out of the rust belt. It's been about the hardening of populism on both sides of the political aisle. There's a sense that, gosh, we got a lot of cheap stuff by sending our jobs abroad, but we sacrificed resiliency, security. Shipping has become a big deal because China has 5,500 oceangoing vessels. America has 189. So, that's something that we need to rectify. And there's actually an interesting bipartisan collective of people that want to do that.

BERMAN: It's a staggering figure right there.

Since we have you here, one economic question of the day.

FOROOHAR: Yes.

BERMAN: Kevin Hassett, economic adviser at the White House, was out this weekend talking about sort of the dilemma he sees the White House in when talking about the economy.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: So, what is the president talking about when he says it's the best economic numbers ever? Is he misinformed or is he not telling the truth?

KEVIN HASSETT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: No, no. First of all, I just want to say that this is a characterization that very often the president's opponents make when I'm doing interviews, because it's a double-blind (ph) question. If I say, oh, people are wrong, the economy is great, then it looks like I'm insensitive. And if I then go into why the economy is great, then it looks like I'm insensitive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: What do you think about that?

FOROOHAR: Look, I think when most Americans wake up in the morning, what do they think about? Inflation, gas prices, the fact that, OK, maybe they're not getting fired, but jobs are not easy to come by. They're not getting hired either.

[09:00:01]

I think people feel that there's a real slowdown in the economy, and that's hard to just PR away.

BERMAN: Yes, it's the same problem that the Biden administration --

FOROOHAR: Indeed.