We dive into analysis of the third and final presidential debate - the candidates who began the evening without a handshake were asked about SCOTUS, immigration reform, their latest campaign scandals, and more - and what exactly did Trump mean about Florida?; the controversy over Prop 60's mandate to use condoms in adult films; and a chat with KQED's FORUM host Michael Krasny, a veteran of Jewish wit and humor.
Did last night change anything?
The headline was Donald Trump's response to moderator Chris Wallace's question about accepting the election's results, that he would leave us “in suspense” until election day.
What did you think of the debate? Call us at 866-893-5722
Guest:
Scott Bland, Campaigns editor, POLITICO; he tweets
Carolyn Lochhead, Washington Correspondent, San Francisco Chronicle; she tweets
AirTalk history lesson: remembering Florida and what exactly Trump meant with that answer
After spending the past few weeks claiming the presidential election will be "rigged" in favor of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Trump was asked directly by Fox News anchor and debate moderator Chris Wallace if he would concede should he lose to Clinton.
"I will look at it at the time," Trump said. When pressed moments later, Trump added simply: "What I'm saying is that I will tell you at the time. I will keep you in suspense." Speaking in his defense, supporters of Trump compare his views to the contested presidential election of 2000. It was a tight popular vote between Democratic candidate Al Gore and Republican candidate George W. Bush, so tight in Florida that state law triggered an automatic recount, and a legendary battle followed.
Does the history of the Gore campaign's actions vis-a-vis the Florida results in 2000 justify Trump's statement last night? AirTalk will review what happened in Florida with campaign experts.
With files from the Associated Press.
Guests:
Franita Tolson, Professor of Voting Rights at Florida State University College of Law; she tweets
Sean Davis, co-founder of the Federalist, a conservative online news magazine
Pros and cons of Prop 60: Mandating condoms in adult films
California’s controversial Prop 60 would make it mandatory to use condoms in adult films.
Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation in L.A. is behind the measure, which would put language into state law creating a mandate for adult film actors to wear condoms in pornographic films.
Current worker safety laws already allude to condom use, and requires employees to be protected from bodily fluids that could cause infections. But this hasn’t always been enforced among adult film producers.
Prop 60 has stirred opposition from the porn industry. Many performers and studios argue that alternatives to condoms should be used to protect actors, including frequent testing for sexually-transmitted diseases (STDs) and prescribing PrEP, an HIV prevention pill.
But shouldn’t adult film performers want to take advantage of every option to protect themselves?
According to Chanel Preston, chair of the Adult Film Actors Association, the measure would do more harm than good because it would leave performers open to lawsuits. Under Prop 60, Cal/OSHA, a workplace enforcement agency, would be able to sue producers if condoms are not visible in adult films.
Larry Mantle spoke to Preston and the John Schwada, the spokesperson for the Vote Yes on Prop 60 campaign, to hear both sides of this highly controversial issue.
3 points of tension between proponents and opponents of Prop. 60
On adult film actors being subject to lawsuits if Prop. 60 passes
Chanel Preston: This is an industry of sex workers and film performers and we are subject to harassment and threats everyday. Sometimes people say that this is hyperbole, that people won't attack us through lawsuits. But that's not true. . . anytime there's a tool that people can use to hurt the industry or the individual, they will use it. If a lawsuit does occur, they would have access to our personal information, and that's a really big concern for performers.
John Schwada: This is special pleading on an industry that refuses to obey the law and wants to be exempt from the public exposure when they are accused of violating the law. Every other individual knows that when people are sued, and people are charged with criminal conduct, their names are made public. Often in cases you can find the names, but you can't find the addresses of the accused parties. I think some of this is scare tactics on the part of the porn industry.
On the chilling effect the measure could have on the porn industry
Schwada: I suspect that [the industry] will be able to thrive with these rules. . . The thing that they're really afraid of in this industry is that their own performers will sue them, and [performers] will be whistleblowers.
Preston: There's an assumption that performers don't have power in the industry and that's not true. . . As an organization we've been working on ways for performers to use condoms without feeling like they're blacklisted. . .We don't need Prop. 60 to make that happen.
On whether condoms are the best way to prevent STDs
Preston: In a professional setting, we're having intercourse anywhere from 30 minutes to hours on set. And it's very difficult to use condoms sometimes. . . It causes rashes, they break, you're still susceptible to [sexually-transmitted infections]. And so performers don't necessarily feel like that's the best means to protect themselves. . .We haven't had a case of HIV transmission on a regulated porn set since 2004, so that shows that our testing system is extremely effective.
Schwada: The industry doesn't like condoms and that's the gold standard for protecting the workers from STDs and HIV. The business doesn't like condoms because they don't believe condoms in porn films sell those films. So they basically sacrifice worker health on the altar of their profits. . . also condoms don't have to be visible in the films.
Guests:
John Schwada, communications director and spokesperson for the Vote Yes on Prop 60 campaign
Chanel Preston, adult film performer and chairperson of the adult performer advocacy committee; she has been campaigning for the No on 60 campaign
Voting has begun in California. KPCC is here for you and will help you develop your Voter Game Plan. Use our election guide to find your personalized ballot.
KQED’s Michael Krasny on Jewish humor
KQED’s “FORUM” host Michael Krasny is a familiar voice for news on current events, business, tech, culture and more – but he’s also a master of Jewish humor.
Krasny’s new book “Let There Be Laughter: A Treasury of Great Jewish Humor and What It Means” shares a favorite collection of Jewish jokes paired with annotations that can help any reader appreciate the comedy within one’s culture. Larry talks to Krasny about his latest work, comedic inspirations and current life.
Guest:
Michael Krasny, Ph.D., host of KQED’s “FORUM” and author of “Let There Be Laughter: A Treasury of Great Jewish Humor and What It Means”