Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane, along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Farrow and Lisa Abramowitz. Join us each day
Speaker 1: for insight from the best an economics, geopolitics, finance and investment.
Speaker 1: Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple, Spotify and
Speaker 1: anywhere you get your podcasts, and always on Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App. Stephen Rashuder,
Speaker 1: the US Chief Economists, what's the common ground I'm talking
Speaker 1: about common ground of four central bankers right now? What's
Speaker 1: the common ground of the brilliant Rashoodo constem research at MISSOUI.
Speaker 1: What do you both agree on?
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, I think the answer is very very simple.
Speaker 2: Is that you know, there is a dynamic trade off
Speaker 2: going on between the global political forces and the global
Speaker 2: deflation or disinflationary forces versus the cyclical local inflationary forces
Speaker 2: at several of the Indie visual countries are experiencing. And
Speaker 2: it's this battle that's being reflected in the Yeeld curve.
Speaker 2: You know, the reason why long term rates can't mount
Speaker 2: a sustained upward movement is everyone looks at it and says, Okay, eventually,
Speaker 2: the FED is going to be successful at holding down inflation,
Speaker 2: So how far do we need to push By the
Speaker 2: same token, there's global deflationary forces out there that's pulling
Speaker 2: down long term rates. At the front end of the curve.
Speaker 2: It's all about domestic cyclical inflation stories, and that's pushing
Speaker 2: the curve. So the curve is in this inverted standpoint.
Speaker 2: It's been here for over a year, and people keep
Speaker 2: on expecting the curve to shift back to a more
Speaker 2: normal position, and the reality is it's probably just not
Speaker 2: going to happen.
Speaker 1: I'm talking on camera with smart people, like I say,
Speaker 1: I'm posing the Peterson Institute. I'm talking off camera with
Speaker 1: all the officials that don't want to talk to me
Speaker 1: on camera. Are they working out of the textbooks you
Speaker 1: used in school or are they making it up at
Speaker 1: Jackson Hall internationally.
Speaker 2: Well, they should be working out of the textbooks. They
Speaker 2: should be actually going back to the older textbooks, the
Speaker 2: Canesy and textbooks. Because the reality is, we learned from
Speaker 2: COVID that Knesy and Economics was the right brand of economics,
Speaker 2: and we've gotten the response we expected from a Cainsy
Speaker 2: and stimulus, and therefore a lot of the neuvel discussion
Speaker 2: is kind of should be put to the wayside. In fact,
Speaker 2: one of the things that worries the most that I
Speaker 2: hear from the Federal Reserve officials is this idea of
Speaker 2: as inflation comes down, real rates go up, and therefore
Speaker 2: the tightening gets greater. The reality is, corporate CEOs do
Speaker 2: not make decisions on after the fact, real interest rates.
Speaker 2: They make decisions based on what they expect nominal interest
Speaker 2: rates to be, and that nominal interest rate assumes an
Speaker 2: assumption for real returns and an inflation expectation. And if
Speaker 2: those nominal interest rates are rising, that's a bigger problem
Speaker 2: than them looking back and saying, oh, well, real rates
Speaker 2: will hire.
Speaker 3: All right, let's put this all together and raise a
Speaker 3: question about the soft landing narrative that seems to now
Speaker 3: be the consensus on Wall straight. It seems as though
Speaker 3: this has become a commonplace idea, even though it's been
Speaker 3: elusive historically. I see you laughing. Are you seeing material
Speaker 3: cracks that challenge the idea of this that people are ignoring?
Speaker 2: No, I don't see the material right now, but I
Speaker 2: think the reality you have to understand is that any
Speaker 2: recessionary tendency will wind up being a hard landing. You know,
Speaker 2: there are differences between crashes, credit crunches, and there are
Speaker 2: differences between recessions. And this is going to have to
Speaker 2: be an inflation recession and that's the result, and that's
Speaker 2: not necessarily a soft landing. A soft landing is this
Speaker 2: vague constant when you bring the economy back to trained
Speaker 2: growth and inflation comes back in that direction as well.
Speaker 2: That's not going to happen with a labor market as
Speaker 2: tied as we have today, and it's going to be
Speaker 2: hard to get inflation to go from four percent to
Speaker 2: two percent, a lot harder than it was to go
Speaker 2: from nine to four.
Speaker 3: So we're talking this morning about foot Locker, about Dick's
Speaker 3: boarding goods, about some of the results and retailers that
Speaker 3: have struggled in the past and that are now seeing
Speaker 3: that kind of come to a four. And we're raising
Speaker 3: a question, is this idiosyncratic stories of management structures and
Speaker 3: business models that have become less relevant or is this
Speaker 3: something broader about consumer spending? From your view, not to
Speaker 3: go into the company themselves, but what do you think
Speaker 3: it is.
Speaker 2: No, there's a lot of videosyncratic risk. I mean, keep
Speaker 2: in mind how long the expansion was prior to the
Speaker 2: COVID meltdown, and then the nature of the COVID restructuring
Speaker 2: and the rebalancing or the reacceleration really is papered over
Speaker 2: a lot of problems for a very long period of time,
Speaker 2: and they all have to come home to roost. And
Speaker 2: this is the idea that a recession is somewhat therapeutic
Speaker 2: if it's not a credit crunch, and we kind of
Speaker 2: need that in this environment.
Speaker 1: You are acclaimed and I'm gonna go to Olivia Blanchard's
Speaker 1: study of our start and where we are in the
Speaker 1: one phrase, it permeates. And this is the humility of
Speaker 1: Blanchard's work is other factors. He says, there's things out
Speaker 1: there we don't know. You own the high ground on this.
Speaker 1: What are the other factors? Make this our starred certitude
Speaker 1: a mystery?
Speaker 2: The real issue is when you look at balance sheets,
Speaker 2: which we don't do a lot of. We don't look
Speaker 2: at balance sheets and try to assess where we are.
Speaker 2: We look at things like financial stress measures, which, to
Speaker 2: be honest with you, we play games with because there's
Speaker 2: just tistically created out of indices that we see published
Speaker 2: in markets. The reality is when you get to look
Speaker 2: at the underlying balance sheets of companies and you look
Speaker 2: at them at a macro level, balance sheets are extraordinarily healthy.
Speaker 2: And this is why when you look at Silicon Valley
Speaker 2: and so far, you could actually back away from that
Speaker 2: having bit of credit crunch because the underlying balance sheet
Speaker 2: of the banking industry is very healthy.
Speaker 3: Just to scrippulse all together. What is an inflationary recession?
Speaker 3: What is an inflation recession?
Speaker 2: Well, the difference between an inflation recession is a credit
Speaker 2: recession is basically, the interest rate increases in the inversion
Speaker 2: of the curve slow the economy to bring down inflation
Speaker 2: in a credit crunch. What happens is the inverted curve
Speaker 2: causes a credit crunch that then causes a recession. So
Speaker 2: the Federal Reserve has to slow the economy. You can't
Speaker 2: get the economy to slow and get inflation to come
Speaker 2: down to target unless you're going to create an access
Speaker 2: in the labor market or some access in the labor market.
Speaker 2: That's what they have to accomplish. You can only do
Speaker 2: that by having GDP contract. That's a recession. The reality
Speaker 2: from a credit crunch standpoint, is the credit crunch causes
Speaker 2: the recession, and that's what nineteen ninety was, that was
Speaker 2: what two thousand was, that was two thousand and seven was.
Speaker 2: And the reality is that's what COVID was, because COVID
Speaker 2: was a massive corporate balance sheet problem and household balance
Speaker 2: sheet problem, and that's why they required subsidy levels of
Speaker 2: interest rate.
Speaker 1: The sever short of thank you so much with Missoul
Speaker 1: Lizzayne Saunders right now to save the show Chief Investment
Speaker 1: Stratus to Charles Schwab, this is an important conversation given
Speaker 1: the gloom out there. What's the Saunder's gloom measurement right now,
Speaker 1: liz In how gloomy is it in the land of equities?
Speaker 4: So we really started to face problems at the beginning
Speaker 4: of June. Lots of conversation, obviously about the concentration problem,
Speaker 4: the Magnificent seven dominating pretty much all performance. At the
Speaker 4: same time, he only had fifteen percent of the S
Speaker 4: and P constituents outperforming the index over the prior sixty days,
Speaker 4: So it was sort of this double whammy of concentration
Speaker 4: which often happens and cap waited indexes, but such significant underperformance. Initially,
Speaker 4: we started to see some breath improvement at the beginning
Speaker 4: of the pullback that we saw up the cap spectrum
Speaker 4: into those megacap names. Now, unfortunately, we've seen this deterioration
Speaker 4: in breadth and it's sort of across the board, and
Speaker 4: I think more has to be worked out there. Even
Speaker 4: on a day like yesterday, under the surface, it didn't
Speaker 4: look great. And these pullbacks tend to have three steps,
Speaker 4: you know. The first step is you start the down
Speaker 4: moving a little bit of a relief rally, and then
Speaker 4: you continue. I don't know if it's going to be
Speaker 4: in correction territory, but I think there's probably a bit
Speaker 4: more that has to to come out.
Speaker 1: You right right where I want to go to review, folks.
Speaker 1: From twenty twenty one, the peak of the markets SPX
Speaker 1: is down nine percent, eight percent whatever, and late the
Speaker 1: recent pullback has just been a crater down four percent. Listen,
Speaker 1: and you got to be kidding me. You and I
Speaker 1: remember when a correction was a correction? Is the mathematics
Speaker 1: of correction? Bear market or dare I say, down thirty
Speaker 1: five percent? Still in play? Are we in a new world?
Speaker 4: Well, so we've gone now almost six hundred days without
Speaker 4: hitting a new cycle high. That's a pretty extended period
Speaker 4: of time, and that suggests that this is more likely
Speaker 4: a rally, you know, in a in a bear market.
Speaker 4: But we've all been surprised so many times with the
Speaker 4: unique nature of this cycle, and we still have the
Speaker 4: dip buyers that come in. And what's interesting is those
Speaker 4: mini phases that happen of the dip buyers stepping in.
Speaker 4: It's also when you see a lot of attention go
Speaker 4: down the quality spectrum. You know, you get lips in
Speaker 4: the meme stocks and the nonprofitable areas. That's the segment
Speaker 4: of the market that I think you wanted to use
Speaker 4: trade or lingu fade. I think you want to continue
Speaker 4: to lean into called the quality trade and just be
Speaker 4: mindful of fomo down the quality spectrum, especially in nonprofitable areas.
Speaker 3: One area that has seen a large amount of interest,
Speaker 3: especially in light of this question around where we are
Speaker 3: in the cycle as being consumer discretionary, and I'm wondering
Speaker 3: if you think people have gotten over their skis and
Speaker 3: the optimism that the savings won't run out for individuals,
Speaker 3: and I'm among those people that question, maybe it's never
Speaker 3: going to run out. But then the Macy's CEO got
Speaker 3: on the call and said that credit card delinquency is
Speaker 3: taking up pretty significantly and really seeing consumers much more
Speaker 3: restrained with how much they're spending. Do you buy that story?
Speaker 3: Do you think that's going to come to the fore more?
Speaker 5: I do?
Speaker 4: And if you have to peel a layer to back
Speaker 4: from the onion when looking at things like broader retail
Speaker 4: sales or even individual retailers reports, to look at unit sales,
Speaker 4: the biases in terms of consumers moving more toward you know,
Speaker 4: generic type brands as opposed to higher end brands. We
Speaker 4: also have to be really mindful of differentiating between nominal data,
Speaker 4: and a lot of retail data is expressed in nominal
Speaker 4: terms and in real terms. And you're right, I think
Speaker 4: pointing out delinquency is important. It's mostly been concentrated down
Speaker 4: in the higher risk segments, lower income, subprime, but you're
Speaker 4: starting to creep into more of the quality segments on
Speaker 4: the delinquency side. I still think though, that it's the
Speaker 4: labor market that is most important to ongoing consumption remaining
Speaker 4: somewhat healthy, even more so probably than the saving story,
Speaker 4: the excess savings. I think it's the labor market. If
Speaker 4: we start to see more cracks in the labor market,
Speaker 4: I think the consumer could maybe shut down the spigots
Speaker 4: fairly quickly.
Speaker 5: Liz, And what kind of cracks do we see now
Speaker 5: in the labor market.
Speaker 4: Yeah, ours works have come down quite a bit in
Speaker 4: this environment where there might still be labor hoarding. You're
Speaker 4: certainly seeing that. You've seen weakness in temporary employment, multiple
Speaker 4: job holders having gone up. You've had some bouts of
Speaker 4: an in unemployment claims. We've seen some of the commentary
Speaker 4: from some of the recruiting companies that are withdrawing guidance.
Speaker 4: So I think you're going to start to see it
Speaker 4: on the job openings, layoff announcement side of things. So
Speaker 4: they're still cracks, but they're wider than they were a
Speaker 4: few months ago.
Speaker 5: It just happened him really really slowly. Isn't it just
Speaker 5: much slower than we thought it would? Listen, thank you
Speaker 5: for the update as Alwise, listener sunders at Shashchuap.
Speaker 1: What is important here at the surveillance is we like
Speaker 1: to focus for thirty minutes on a theme. Damien Sassawur
Speaker 1: scheduled to darken the door on em and the market
Speaker 1: dynamics and far more. John is to speak to someone
Speaker 1: including the frontier economy Europe, and that would be doctor Weisman.
Speaker 1: All of his work at bear Stearns and now.
Speaker 5: At Macquarie, Harry got to say you fantastic has always
Speaker 5: to change over in Europey. We thought this year would
Speaker 5: be good, driven by China reopening. How important do you
Speaker 5: think the global slowdown is going to be in Jackson
Speaker 5: holl this Friday?
Speaker 6: Not too important because I think that the theme of
Speaker 6: the symposium or the conference, if you will, is not
Speaker 6: the short term. It's not the cyclical themes. The theme
Speaker 6: they've laid out is the structural changes in the global economy.
Speaker 6: And when you hear something like that, you think that
Speaker 6: the speakers are going to be directed towards talking about
Speaker 6: things that happen a year from now, two years from now,
Speaker 6: three years from now. As far as Powell's speech goes, look,
Speaker 6: the FED could if it wanted to pat itself on
Speaker 6: the back. Inflation is low in the US, the economy
Speaker 6: looks a bit robust at in certain quarters. But I
Speaker 6: don't think it's time for him to do that. There
Speaker 6: are still too many hawks on the FOROMC panel that
Speaker 6: are nudging him towards at least sounding as if he
Speaker 6: should be hawkish from a medium term and long term perspective.
Speaker 6: When you think about those narratives about the global economy
Speaker 6: that are structural and longer term in perspective, they are
Speaker 6: things like climate change, deglobalization, demographic change, high debt in
Speaker 6: the emerging markets. Those are all things that sound inflationary.
Speaker 6: At least two of them feel like negative supply shocks.
Speaker 6: So I don't think he'll be inclined to say much
Speaker 6: about the short term and the outlook for the FED
Speaker 6: funds rate. I think he will focus, if he sticks
Speaker 6: to the narrative of the symposium, on those longer term considerations,
Speaker 6: and that will mean that he's going to stress that
Speaker 6: it's going to be difficult to get to that last
Speaker 6: mile of inflation decline from three percent to two percent,
Speaker 6: and therefore don't expect rates to be cut.
Speaker 1: I look at Europe and what we're going to hear
Speaker 1: from Powell and from the Guard and other worthies are
Speaker 1: going to be there is well. And I look at
Speaker 1: our start as a debate here. It's an academic debate
Speaker 1: of a full and running economy in Europe, whether it's
Speaker 1: Eurosclerosis or something new. Can there be a European our start.
Speaker 1: Can you do legit economic analysis of the European experiment?
Speaker 6: You can, and I think you can do a legitimate
Speaker 6: analysis of the current cycle in Europe. This weakness that
Speaker 6: we're seeing both in manufacturing and now in the services,
Speaker 6: I think to a large extent, the manufacturing slowed down
Speaker 6: in Europe is coincident with the Chinese manufacturing slowed down.
Speaker 6: I don't think you can separate the two. Look China
Speaker 6: had this massive slow down in manufacturing in the second quarter,
Speaker 6: Well look at that. Europe had a massive slow down
Speaker 6: in manufacturing in the second quarter too. We know those
Speaker 6: economies are connected through the German industrial complex and the
Speaker 6: export economy in Europe, so I don't think that's too
Speaker 6: much of a mystery. China and Europe are coincident. I
Speaker 6: do think, however, that this service is slowed down we're
Speaker 6: seeing is also analyzable. But I think the focus has
Speaker 6: been too much on what the ECB has done with rates.
Speaker 6: It hasn't been enough on what the ECP has done
Speaker 6: with liquidity that it issues to the banks. The Teltrope
Speaker 6: program has been winding down out of the ECB for
Speaker 6: a few months now, and if you look at credit
Speaker 6: creation coming out of Europe, the extent to which banks
Speaker 6: have issued credit to the private economy, it has flatlined.
Speaker 6: And that's the reason why Europe is now seeing this
Speaker 6: slump in service.
Speaker 3: Just to underscore this, in other words, the slow down
Speaker 3: in services is directly related to the transmission mechanism of
Speaker 3: ECB policy, not necessarily what's going on with China. Correct,
Speaker 3: is that basically what you're saying.
Speaker 6: That's right, But what I'm also saying is don't look
Speaker 6: at rates. Don't look at the deposit rate being at
Speaker 6: three and three quarters percent. That doesn't really tell you
Speaker 6: much about what's going to happen to the European economy.
Speaker 6: Look at bank credit, look at broader monetary agrates. They
Speaker 6: have flatlined, and nominal terms they're actually down year on year.
Speaker 6: In real terms, it's the credit economy that people don't
Speaker 6: focus enough on, And if they had been focusing on
Speaker 6: that flatlining, they would have predicted to slow down an
Speaker 6: agurd demand in Europe.
Speaker 3: Is the European economy so different from the US economy
Speaker 3: in terms of the rate structure and the lending structure,
Speaker 3: that there is no analog to be drawn in terms
Speaker 3: of how higher rates in Europe are affecting the economy
Speaker 3: and how they will eventually trickle out in the US
Speaker 3: economy and affect the economy there.
Speaker 6: They should affect the US economy the same way. But
Speaker 6: there is an important difference between the Europepean economy and
Speaker 6: the US economy. And that's as follows. The European economy
Speaker 6: is overly dependent on its banking system for the extension
Speaker 6: of credit. They really don't have non bank lenders, they
Speaker 6: don't really have direct lending. In Europe, everyone who wants
Speaker 6: a loan ultimately has to find his way to his
Speaker 6: or her way to a bank. In the US, it's
Speaker 6: completely different.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 6: If you were just to analyze the banking systems in
Speaker 6: Europe versus the US, you'd find a lot of similarities
Speaker 6: right now. You'd find that credit is contracting. You'd find
Speaker 6: that loan officers in the US just says in Europe
Speaker 6: are much less willing to extend loans. Maybe the reasons
Speaker 6: are mildly different. Maybe in the US has to do
Speaker 6: it regulatory overhanging. Maybe in Europe it has to do
Speaker 6: with what the ECP has done. That's the similarity. The difference though,
Speaker 6: is that the US doesn't have to depend just on
Speaker 6: its banks. There are other sources of lending to support
Speaker 6: the startup economy, the legacy economy. We don't have that
Speaker 6: in Europe, and therefore when banking bank credit contracts in Europe,
Speaker 6: you feel the effect on agurate demand much more than
Speaker 6: you do in the US. And I think that's what
Speaker 6: we're seeing now. The US will catch up.
Speaker 1: Though there is a time for a surveillance audible. We
Speaker 1: will do it right now. It's your weisman as well.
Speaker 1: Years ago you would publish with m David Malpas and
Speaker 1: the rest of the Klan it bears Stearns on Latin America,
Speaker 1: and the world would stop. Argentina. Do we care or
Speaker 1: is it just the problem child of our lifetimes?
Speaker 6: I don't care. I think it's the problem child if
Speaker 6: our lifetimes. You know, it's not that well integrated into
Speaker 6: the global economy. Yes it has, it has some commodity exports.
Speaker 6: But I lose the hysteria, Yeah, lose the hysteria on Argentina.
Speaker 6: It's not terrible by the way that they may have
Speaker 6: a present that's going to adopt some radical market policies.
Speaker 6: In the final analysis, when you have a situation like
Speaker 6: this that hasn't been working for you know, more than
Speaker 6: more than four decades, why why be scared of something new? Exactly?
Speaker 6: I would be much more scared of something old, you know.
Speaker 1: So okay, So what should the IMF too? They've been
Speaker 1: handing them out gazillions gazillion. They're right, they're going to
Speaker 1: write a chuck of Morocco.
Speaker 6: I assume, I am after Just wait, you cannot make
Speaker 6: a decision with regard to the extension of credit until
Speaker 6: you see what the political economy is. Let let things
Speaker 6: let things simmer for a while in Argentina, Let's see
Speaker 6: what the policy agenda would be under a new president
Speaker 6: or a legacy administration, and then make a decision.
Speaker 5: Terry, thank you, it's going to say Terry Weisman at
Speaker 5: Macquarie on the Club of Economy.
Speaker 1: Creig Value joins as chiefs Policy Strategist AGF. Greg I'm
Speaker 1: going to cut to the chase. The stereotype is a
Speaker 1: polarity of the nation and maybe even the polarity of
Speaker 1: the party. Let's cut to the Wisconsin chase. Wisconsin was
Speaker 1: won by Biden, by under one percentage point zero point
Speaker 1: sixty three percent. Trump won it four years earlier by
Speaker 1: zero point seven seven percent. How does this debate fold
Speaker 1: into those x number, those ten key states that make
Speaker 1: the difference in November of next year.
Speaker 7: Well, this is the opening night. Obviously, I'll get my
Speaker 7: espresho machine out. It's going to be a late night.
Speaker 7: I think it's time for some new faces. And I
Speaker 7: think maybe one of the stories tomorrow morning will be
Speaker 7: the emergence of Tim Scott, the African American Senator from
Speaker 7: South Carolina. Maybe this guy Ramaswami. There's a couple of
Speaker 7: other people who might do well. It's the beginnings of
Speaker 7: a sign that the country will look at fresh faces.
Speaker 1: Where is the debris of George Bush Senior? Somebody who
Speaker 1: worked in office for decades and decades Centrist Republican? Is
Speaker 1: that Chris Christy? Or am I confused?
Speaker 7: Well, Chris Christy is a Centrist, but he's also very pugnacious.
Speaker 7: He can brawl, and I think he will be the
Speaker 7: hit man to go after Donald Trump. I don't blame
Speaker 7: Trump for not showing up. I mean, he's ahead by
Speaker 7: forty points in a lot of states, so he'd have
Speaker 7: nothing to gain and everything to lose by showing up,
Speaker 7: but he will be a subject. I would focus Tom
Speaker 7: on other issues that will be interesting tonight. Aid to Ukraine,
Speaker 7: what do we do about the budget deficit? There are
Speaker 7: issues where the party divide.
Speaker 3: And that's one reason why people actually want to hear
Speaker 3: the issues which have gotten drowned out by some of
Speaker 3: the larger concepts that you want to dig into that.
Speaker 3: But before we do, you said you want to see
Speaker 3: fresh faces and a lot of people are looking for
Speaker 3: that at a time or run to Santis is having
Speaker 3: to prove himself in a new way. What does he
Speaker 3: have to do to reclaim his spot is number two
Speaker 3: and get some growth in his campaign?
Speaker 7: Promise well no ghafs Lisa. I think he can't afford
Speaker 7: another misstep. But to a certain extent he has an
Speaker 7: advantage and that his expectations are low. I think people
Speaker 7: aren't expecting him to show much, so we might exceed
Speaker 7: those low expectations.
Speaker 3: I when you talk about some of the divisive issues
Speaker 3: you mentioned ad to Ukraine, where is sort of the
Speaker 3: popular feeling within the Republican Party is their consensus that
Speaker 3: some of these candidates are going to try to reflect
Speaker 3: and is it different from the more general population consensus.
Speaker 7: Good, good question. I think for the base and the
Speaker 7: party and some of these candidates, the feeling is we
Speaker 7: spent enough on Ukraine for a war that hasn't been won.
Speaker 7: I think there's also a real division on social security
Speaker 7: and how you deal with a budget deficit. Chris Christie
Speaker 7: has been very outspoken saying we need social security reform.
Speaker 7: Dessantas said that a few years ago, will you embrace
Speaker 7: that tonight that I'm not so sure of.
Speaker 1: Greg very international audience, and frankly I'm not up to
Speaker 1: speed on this as well. What's the primary process look like?
Speaker 1: Is it radically different than what we grew up with?
Speaker 1: Is there something new this year as we staggered through February?
Speaker 7: No, I don't think so. I mean, the signing deadlines
Speaker 7: come late fall, by Thanksgiving. A lot of states will
Speaker 7: have their deadlines, which will focus, I think on the
Speaker 7: governor of Virginia. I think there's a chance to Glenn
Speaker 7: Youngkin late in the sign up period will decide, you know,
Speaker 7: if it's just Trump and nobody else looking strong. You know,
Speaker 7: Glenn Younkin's worth about half a billion, and I wouldn't
Speaker 7: put it out of the question him running at the
Speaker 7: last minute.
Speaker 1: Who else has money? I mean, obviously President Trump, even
Speaker 1: with illegal challenges, has money. Mister Pence, I believe is struggling.
Speaker 1: Which of the candidates tonight on the on the stage
Speaker 1: has money?
Speaker 7: Not a lot of them have. Glenn Younkin money. Earlier
Speaker 7: in the year, Desantas raised a decent amount of money,
Speaker 7: but the surprise fundraiser in the last few months has
Speaker 7: been Tim Scott. And again I think Tim Scott is
Speaker 7: going to be the surprise of the night.
Speaker 5: Greag five. Thank you, gret As.
Speaker 1: Always subscribe to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast on Apple, Spotify
Speaker 1: and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live every
Speaker 1: weekday starting at seven am Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 1: You can watch us live on Bloomberg Television and always
Speaker 1: on the Bloomberg terminal. Thanks for listening. I'm I'm Keen,
Speaker 1: and this is blumber Hm.