MELISSA BLOCK, HOST:
So claimant Clinton on Sunday, Republican Marco Rubio is set to enter a competition on Monday, and a expanding presidential margin is where we’ll start with a unchanging Friday domestic commentators E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post and David Brooks of The New York Times. Welcome behind to we both.
E.J. DIONNE: Good to be with you.
DAVID BROOKS: Thank you.
BLOCK: Now of march in 2008, Hillary Clinton was competing in a contested Democratic primary. It’s misleading if she’s going to have any vital Democratic antithesis this time. E.J., how does that figure her message? What’s her debate thesis this time around?
DIONNE: Well, we consider what a fear of a debate is is given there won’t be clever inner opposition, a press will spin her categorical opponent, and they might act that way. And so she’s going out of her proceed to start perplexing to urge family with a press. But we consider this go-slow, go-small proceed to her announcement, as my Washington Post colleagues Anne Gearan and Phil Rucker put it, is unequivocally smart. First, she doesn’t need a large lofty eventuality given she doesn’t need name recognition. And as Mara’s square suggested, she’s really good in tiny settings. And this is a proceed for her to uncover that even yet she is a strenuous front runner, she is not meditative that way. One of a mistakes she done a final time is she acted too many like a front runner. And so even yet this time she’s improved off than she was final time, she’s going to try to play a common card.
BLOCK: David, any obstacle to going slow, going small, personification that common card?
BROOKS: Yeah, it could be boring. You know, she wrote a book that was not accurately filled with intrigue, and she usually published an afterword that gave new definition to a word anodyne. And we do consider when you’re using for boss we have to take some risks and you’ve got to uncover people something uninformed and you’ve got to stay interesting. And we consider I’m extraordinary to know how she’ll do that. I’m also extraordinary to know how she’ll pierce her policies. The celebration has altered significantly to her left, a mercantile – Democratic mercantile groups and thinkers has altered significantly to a left. How distant will she go to be where a celebration is? How will she understanding with her contacts with financial and Wall Street? There’s a ton of indeed kind of engaging questions, and we’ll find them all out eventually. But we usually hope, frankly, for her and for us that she does something interesting, takes some risk, gives us something new so she doesn’t seem like a figure that we’ve famous for a final 20 – 25 years.
DIONNE: You know, we usually wish to contend for Hillary Clinton, a integrate of months of tedious would be good compared to what happened to her about a month ago. And we consider this is almost…
BLOCK: You’re articulate about a e-mail servers.
DIONNE: Yes, exactly. And this is roughly designed to be boring. The thing people forget – yes, she has a same alliance to some of a Wall Street folks that Bill Clinton had, though she ran as many some-more of a populist a final time than Barack Obama did. She’s still got that in her. And we consider she is going to run a debate a proceed Bill Clinton did in ’92 perplexing to change – no, I’m not a radical – we trust in capitalism, though we consider people are removing a bad shake. And we consider inequality is going to be a large partial of her campaign.
BLOCK: Well, this week a Republican presidential margin combined Kentucky Senator Rand Paul to a ranks. And he announced his candidacy this way.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
SENATOR RAND PAUL: We’ve come to take a nation back.
BLOCK: Now, E.J., some people hear that phrase, and they hear a dog whistle. Take a nation behind from whom exactly? What do we hear?
DIONNE: Well, that is a arrange of a classical Tea Party slogan, and he is using for that vote. What’s fascinating about Rand Paul is that he seemed many stronger about a year and a half ago than he does today, partly given a Republicans were in a many some-more libertarian, antigovernment and anti-interventionist mood in unfamiliar policy. And given a arise of ISIS and other issues, a celebration seems to have altered a other proceed again toward rendezvous and militancy. Senator Lindsey Graham, we think, released a many scornful criticism when he said, in many ways Rand Paul is to a left of Barack Obama in unfamiliar policy. Those are fighting difference in a Republican Party, and we consider that’s a conflict he’s going to face.
BROOKS: we agree. He did seem stronger a year ago in partial for a reason E.J. mentioned, in partial given he seemed like a some-more appealing personality, some-more of a happy warrior. This week was not important for happiness. It was important for several chip-on-his-shoulder behaviors, generally with some of a people who were perplexing to talk him. And we consider that E.J. is right, too, that a celebration is reduction libertarian on unfamiliar policy, also on domestic policy. The other candidates, Marco Rubio, who will announce shortly – a many some-more active supervision purpose to boost event for people, and Rand Paul arrange of left out of that. And I’ll be – he’ll have a younger organisation that he’ll – that will opinion for him. He’ll have a some-more different group, though it’s smaller than it was a year or dual ago.
BLOCK: David, we mentioned his chip-on-the-shoulder function in interviews, and let’s listen to some of that. Short-tempered and irritable is how he has certified to being generally in an talk on “The Today Show” this week. The host, Savannah Guthrie, was seeking Rand Paul about his past views that seem to have altered over a years, generally on unfamiliar process and invulnerability spending.
(SOUNDBITE OF TV SHOW, “TODAY SHOW”)
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Defense spending and now we wish to boost it 16 percent. So we usually consternation if you’ve middle-aged out.
PAUL: Yeah, since don’t we let me explain…
PAUL: …Instead of articulate over me, OK? Before we go by a litany of things we contend I’ve altered on, since don’t we ask me a question, have we altered my opinion on…
GUTHRIE: Have we altered your opinion…
PAUL: …That would be arrange of a improved proceed to proceed an interview. No, no – you’ve editorialized…
GUTHRIE: OK, is Iran still not a threat?
PAUL: No, no, no, no, no, no, no, listen…
BLOCK: David, we don’t know that Rand Paul’s core supporters are going to caring many if he’s brief gradual with a mainstream media, though what about a broader base? Is there a spirit to doubt – to worry about here?
BROOKS: we consider there’s a bit of that. Never tell an interviewer how to do an interview. we would never tell you, Melissa…
DIONNE: How brave we ask that question, Melissa?
BROOKS: You’re doing a smashing job.
BLOCK: Just don’t shush me, please.
BROOKS: You know, people – I’ve never seen people opinion for someone who seems defensive. And you’ve got – and a other thing is we consider we should be satisfactory adequate to contend hey, I’ve altered my mind, a contribution changed. That’s deliberate a liaison in politics. But we will contend one some-more thing about Paul – that we usually consider you’ve got to come off attractive. You know, when you’re using for president, you’re a guest in a vital room for 4 years. And this is something Chris Christie is training a tough proceed and Rand Paul is going to learn – that if people don’t consider you’re going to be around a vital room as a pleasing experience, they’re not going to opinion for we even if they determine with you.
DIONNE: we consider that’s positively right. However, what Ran Paul is now perplexing to do, meaningful he has dug this hole for himself, is he is perplexing to spin each talk into an conflict on him by a magnanimous media. And if there’s one thing that tends to play good with Republican primary voters, it’s attacks on a magnanimous media. So he might ramp this adult now given he’s already stranded with a picture of being rather testy.
BLOCK: we wish to hear really fast from both of we on a approaching entrance of Marco Rubio into a competition on Monday. David what do we design to hear?
BROOKS: we consider he’s a rising star. He’s vastly undersold. we consider he, Scott Walker and Jeb Bush are a usually 3 trustworthy candidates. And Marco Rubio is by distant a many intellectually creative. And if we were a Democrat, I’d be a small disturbed about him opposite Hillary ’cause he can play a generational card. He’s really smart. He might seem too young, though we courtesy him as – if not a many earnest Republican candidate, positively among them.
BLOCK: And E.J., quickly?
DIONNE: On paper, we consider he is their strongest candidate. we consider he needs to uncover a small bit of fortitude that he didn’t uncover on immigration when he upheld immigration – an immigration check and afterwards corroborated divided from it.
BLOCK: OK, E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post, David Brooks of The New York Times, interjection to we both. Have a good weekend.
BROOKS: Thank you.
DIONNE: Thank you.
NPR transcripts are combined on a rush deadline by a executive for NPR, and correctness and accessibility might vary. This content might not be in a final form and might be updated or revised in a future. Please be wakeful that a lawful record of NPR’s programming is a audio.