Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: Sometimes people have asked me, how did you end up
Speaker 2: supporting President Trump? In many ways, I think the campaign
Speaker 2: I'm running is not particularly partisan. However, there are realities
Speaker 2: about running for office in the US. But look, he's
Speaker 2: not on the ballot and this is a point of
Speaker 2: choice for California.
Speaker 1: Steve Hilton, once a British political strategist, now the Trump
Speaker 1: backed Republican running for governor of California. Do you agree
Speaker 1: with his decision to go to Warneran?
Speaker 2: Well, look, I'm just focused on this race.
Speaker 1: You really don't think you need to or the voters
Speaker 1: of California deserve to hear you express a view on that.
Speaker 1: You're trying to be a leader of the state.
Speaker 2: No, I understand, But there's plenty to fix and focus
Speaker 2: on in California.
Speaker 1: From Bloomberg Weekend, this is the Mishal Husain Show. I'm
Speaker 1: Mishal Husain. Over the next few months, the US political
Speaker 1: climate is going to get even more intense as we
Speaker 1: get closer to the midterms. This November's set of elections
Speaker 1: will mark the halfway point between one presidential vote and
Speaker 1: the next, and while most of the attention will be
Speaker 1: on Congress whether the Democrats can seize control of one
Speaker 1: or both houses. There are some fascinating contests elsewhere, and
Speaker 1: one of them is the race to be the next
Speaker 1: governor of California. Now, California is a notable Democratic leaning state,
Speaker 1: but it has had Republican governors Ronald Reagan, more recently
Speaker 1: Arnold Schwarzenegger, and this time a Republican is through to
Speaker 1: the final stage. One of two candidates on the ballot
Speaker 1: in November is Steve Hilton, and he is unusual, not
Speaker 1: least because he only became a US citizen five years ago.
Speaker 1: He's someone whose name I've known for about twenty years
Speaker 1: because he used to be embedded in UK politics. He
Speaker 1: worked for the Conservative leader David Cameron before and after
Speaker 1: he became Prime Minister. So when I saw Steve Hilton's
Speaker 1: advance through the California governor primary, I knew I wanted
Speaker 1: to understand it, and I reached out to him. His
Speaker 1: rival in November is Democrat Javier Bessera, someone who used
Speaker 1: to work for Joe Biden. And California is such an
Speaker 1: important place economically in global as well as US terms,
Speaker 1: that this conversation does go beyond state matters above all.
Speaker 1: I hope that through it you get a much better
Speaker 1: sense of a man who wants to be California's next leader.
Speaker 2: How are you doing great?
Speaker 1: Thank you for saying yes to my email out of
Speaker 1: the blue. How are you most importantly good?
Speaker 2: Thanks? Onto the next round?
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, I know, absolutely, Well stop next round of interviews,
Speaker 1: or next round of the campaign, the.
Speaker 2: Campaign, the next fight, you know, like there's no break.
Speaker 2: We got to keep going. There's not much time now.
Speaker 1: Well, look, we'll talk about all of that. And it's
Speaker 1: clearly it's been a remarkable few weeks for you. And
Speaker 1: you've obviously been involved in politics for a long time.
Speaker 1: You've been a strategist, you've been a political aid, you've
Speaker 1: been a commentator on Fox News. I'm still curious about
Speaker 1: the moment when you decided to run for office yourself,
Speaker 1: because that's a very big decision to make.
Speaker 2: I don't think there was one one specific moment, but
Speaker 2: there was a period of time that I can recall.
Speaker 2: As you mentioned, i'd been a host on television, a
Speaker 2: most unexpected turn in my career in media. I greatly
Speaker 2: enjoyed that, but as the years went on, I felt
Speaker 2: that I wanted to get back into actually doing things
Speaker 2: rather than just talking about things. I love California, been
Speaker 2: living here since twenty twelve, raised my family here, started
Speaker 2: a business here. I could see that things were going
Speaker 2: off the rails pretty badly from a policy point of view,
Speaker 2: so I started a policy organization, Golden Together, started working
Speaker 2: on some of our big problems in California. I then
Speaker 2: started engaging with Sacramento trying to advance those policy ideas
Speaker 2: through the legislature. And that was the point where I
Speaker 2: realized just how dysfunctional and broken California's system of government is,
Speaker 2: because every single meeting I had with legislators, Democrats, Republicans,
Speaker 2: it was the same story. Yes, you're right, these policies
Speaker 2: you're advocating would make a huge difference. We'd get more
Speaker 2: housing built, we'd lower the cost. All those things are true. However,
Speaker 2: it can never happen because the unions won't allow it,
Speaker 2: the climate activists won't allow it. The system just can't
Speaker 2: make it happen. And I just realized then that something
Speaker 2: has to change otherwise I love it is just going
Speaker 2: to continue to decline.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's the state you've made your home in the
Speaker 1: country that you've made your home having left the UK.
Speaker 1: And we're going to dig into all of this and
Speaker 1: the nuts and bolts of your campaign in a moment,
Speaker 1: but I just want to understand you more broadly. To
Speaker 1: start with, would you say that being on Fox, having
Speaker 1: that kind of prominence on TV, that's got to have
Speaker 1: played an important role in rising in the Republican Party?
Speaker 2: Right it?
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, it helped his rise because he was known
Speaker 1: from television and he was a fan of your show
Speaker 1: on Fox.
Speaker 2: I think that's right that it gives you a platform.
Speaker 2: But I think it's that combination actually of media experience,
Speaker 2: policy and government experience and business experience that actually is
Speaker 2: a good fit for this role, not only running for governor,
Speaker 2: but as I planned to be being the next governor.
Speaker 1: But when did you actually become a Republican because twenty
Speaker 1: seventeen you were very clearly saying you weren't partisan, and
Speaker 1: you were you were neither Democrat or Republican.
Speaker 2: Well, it's interesting in many ways. I think the campaign
Speaker 2: I'm running is not particularly partisan. It's based on some broad,
Speaker 2: common sense principles that I think most people can get behind.
Speaker 2: So I've never thought of myself as a particularly partisan person. However,
Speaker 2: there are realities about running for office. In the US,
Speaker 2: it's basically a two party system, and of course I
Speaker 2: identify very much with the principles that underlie the Republican Party,
Speaker 2: just as I do the Conservative Party, where I work
Speaker 2: for some years and was part of a coalition government
Speaker 2: led by Conservative Prime Minister. The basic ideas that you
Speaker 2: would associate with the center right are ideas that I
Speaker 2: share in terms of limiting the role of government, enhancing
Speaker 2: individual freedom. Those sorts of things have always been part
Speaker 2: of my political philosophy and therefore connect very much with
Speaker 2: the Republican Party here in America.
Speaker 1: I of course remember you from your time in the
Speaker 1: UK working for David Cameron before he got elected. After
Speaker 1: he became Prime minister. You were part of that effort
Speaker 1: to detoxify the Conservative Party, to make it more electable,
Speaker 1: bring it into more of the center ground, more socially liberal,
Speaker 1: more climate conscious. Are you still the same guy who
Speaker 1: did that?
Speaker 2: Oh, very much, very much. I understand that some people
Speaker 2: who haven't been following the intervening years may look at
Speaker 2: that and say, well, it's very different. David Cameron's a
Speaker 2: very different personality to the president, who's the leader of
Speaker 2: the Republican Party in America today. I can see that
Speaker 2: very clearly. But everyone has their own personal style. But
Speaker 2: the ideas that really drove that process of change for
Speaker 2: the Conservative Party, in particular, focusing on people who've been
Speaker 2: left behind, on dealing with poverty and inequality, on helping
Speaker 2: working people, that was a really big part of the
Speaker 2: work that we did twenty years or so ago with
Speaker 2: the Conservative Party. And that's a big driver of what
Speaker 2: I'm really arguing for here. And there's many other similarities
Speaker 2: as well. I think perhaps the broadest one is a
Speaker 2: sense that I've always had, which is a sense that
Speaker 2: we need to put power in people's hands and enable
Speaker 2: them to fight back against establishments or systems or centralized
Speaker 2: power that benefits a small group rather than the majority
Speaker 2: of people. That's always been a really dry and important
Speaker 2: driving force.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but what you did for David Cameron, the person
Speaker 1: who you still say you are, that is very, very
Speaker 1: far from not only Donald Trump himself, but MAGA And
Speaker 1: I just wonder how you reconcile that, because you are
Speaker 1: endorsed by President Trump himself, what you're representing yourself as
Speaker 1: is I think more than Arnold Schwarzenegger wing of the
Speaker 1: Republican Party in California, and he's someone who endors Kamla
Speaker 1: Harris in the last presidential election.
Speaker 2: I don't think that the box is a quite as
Speaker 2: neat and defined as that. I'm endorsed by many different
Speaker 2: kinds of Republicans. Of course, political parties are coalitions, and
Speaker 2: as I say, I think this campaign everything I'm arguing
Speaker 2: for it's not particularly partisan. The fact that we've got
Speaker 2: Democrats supporting the campaign is an example of that. And
Speaker 2: I think that what I've always tried to focus on
Speaker 2: is really the substance the ideas specific things. I'm a
Speaker 2: pragmatic candidate in this race, not an ideologue that the
Speaker 2: arguments I'm making about how we need to turn California around.
Speaker 2: We've got the highest cost of living by far. I'm
Speaker 2: not sure it's appreciated around the world because you look
Speaker 2: at the headline for California with the fourth biggest economy,
Speaker 2: and there's a sense of complacency there on the part
Speaker 2: of the current leadership. They keep saying that as if
Speaker 2: that answers all questions underneath that this is a state
Speaker 2: that's in real trouble, especially from an economic point of view,
Speaker 2: and the solutions there actually go across party lines. They're
Speaker 2: just practical things to make life easier for families and businesses.
Speaker 2: So I think this whole conversation around you know, labels
Speaker 2: and whatever doesn't really get to the point about what
Speaker 2: is needed in order to help California get back on track.
Speaker 1: Okay, but I don't think you can bat away being
Speaker 1: the fourth largest economy in the world quite so likely.
Speaker 1: This happened last year it was the fifth largest. Then
Speaker 1: California overtook Japan under Gavin Newsom. It doesn't feel like
Speaker 1: a failure to many people in the state, I would suspect,
Speaker 1: and certainly to people outside.
Speaker 2: Well, I think it does to many people inside, because
Speaker 2: they're struggling to even live. That's why during Gavin Newsom's
Speaker 2: tenure as governor, nearly two million Californians have actually moved
Speaker 2: out because they can't live here anymore because it's so expensive.
Speaker 2: Let's just look at that number. The fourth biggest economy
Speaker 2: in the world that's driven by two things that don't
Speaker 2: actually tell a story of health in terms of our economy. Partly,
Speaker 2: it's driven by very small number of tech companies fantastic
Speaker 2: success stories, which I strongly support. I'm very proud of
Speaker 2: the fact that we're leading the AI revolution in California.
Speaker 2: They generate enormous amounts of revenue, but not very many jobs.
Speaker 2: The second part of the story in terms of the
Speaker 2: size of our economy is that it includes the size
Speaker 2: of government. They've doubled the budget of the state of
Speaker 2: California in the last ten years or so. Meanwhile, the
Speaker 2: results on every measure education standards, the quality of our infrastructure,
Speaker 2: the highest unemployment rate of all fifty states, the highest
Speaker 2: poverty rate of all fifty states, tied with Louisiana. I
Speaker 2: think if we don't change direction this year, California really
Speaker 2: is heading for economic disaster. I've heard from so many
Speaker 2: business leaders that they're waiting to see what happens in November,
Speaker 2: and if we don't vote for change in California, they're
Speaker 2: out And the exodus of businesses in California that you've
Speaker 2: seen in the last few years could turn into a stampede.
Speaker 1: So if California is doing that badly, I want to
Speaker 1: put two other points too. One is whether you think
Speaker 1: there is something longer term going on that is affecting
Speaker 1: the poorest in California and elsewhere, and that is a
Speaker 1: long term decline in living standards that's happened over the
Speaker 1: course of the last fifty years. So it's not about
Speaker 1: the Democrats ruling California now. It is about something more
Speaker 1: systemic that reflects poorly on American leadership for decades.
Speaker 2: Well, I agree with you. Actually, sometimes people have asked me,
Speaker 2: how are you going back to your earlier conversation, how
Speaker 2: did you end up supporting President Trump? I do remember
Speaker 2: back in twenty fifteen, I for the first time saw
Speaker 2: this chart based on US data. This is going back
Speaker 2: ten years now, eleven years, showing the earnings of the
Speaker 2: majority of workers in California. I think the technical term
Speaker 2: was non managerial, non supervisory workers roughly eighty percent of
Speaker 2: the workforce after inflation, and it's basically a straight line,
Speaker 2: just flat so through a Republican and Democrat governance in
Speaker 2: fifty years since nineteen seventy four. I think it was
Speaker 2: basically the economic.
Speaker 1: Position of the most stated Nobel Prize winning economist has
Speaker 1: done the seminal work on that, and I don't know
Speaker 1: if those are the figures you're referring to, but he's
Speaker 1: absolutely laid this out for the last fifty years. But
Speaker 1: that's exactly why I think the challenge is much broader
Speaker 1: than the political points you're making. It is one about
Speaker 1: choices that America's leaders have made, right.
Speaker 2: I agree with that, and I think that there needs
Speaker 2: to be a much bigger emphasis on the gap between
Speaker 2: the very top and the super rich and so on.
Speaker 2: Of course that's been in the news with the SPACEXIPO
Speaker 2: and so on. I think the real issue is the
Speaker 2: fact that you've got so many people in the lower
Speaker 2: end of the income scales who just feel stuck and
Speaker 2: that social mobility has gone. I think that's absolutely a
Speaker 2: broad point. However, within that, one of the great things
Speaker 2: about America and our system here that you've got this
Speaker 2: experiment in policy making through the federal system, the fact
Speaker 2: you've got fifty states that do things a different way,
Speaker 2: and even within that overall framework, which I agree needs
Speaker 2: serious reform, some states are doing better than others. And
Speaker 2: you can see it in the fact that people and
Speaker 2: businesses are leaving California and moving to states with more
Speaker 2: welcoming policies to business and where the cost of living
Speaker 2: is much lower Texas, Florida, Tennessee. Even our neighboring states Nevada.
Speaker 2: You've got a lot of evidence now that the high tax,
Speaker 2: high spending, progressive model of governance that you see in
Speaker 2: the Blue States as they're known, like California, like New York,
Speaker 2: is not working. We've had sixteen years of one party
Speaker 2: rule in California, where one party's controlled everything. There's really
Speaker 2: been no barrier to the democratic philosophy being implemented fully
Speaker 2: in California. The results are among the worst in the country.
Speaker 1: But you know, on people leave. There's an aspect of
Speaker 1: this on which you could agree with Gavin Newsom, which
Speaker 1: is that he is trying to stop the wealth tax
Speaker 1: on billionaires that's been proposed by one of the labor unions.
Speaker 1: He's determined to try and stop it because he thinks
Speaker 1: it will drive more people away. So area of agreement, yes, between.
Speaker 2: Very very although I have to say, given his close
Speaker 2: relationship with the unions, I would have hoped he would
Speaker 2: have acted sooner to stop that even becoming a consideration.
Speaker 2: For example, right now, there's a process going on in Sacramento,
Speaker 2: very typical. It's going to a horse trading process where it's
Speaker 2: possibly one that the union itself will take it off
Speaker 2: the ballot now because they're negotiating some other kind of
Speaker 2: agreements that could have been done a year ago.
Speaker 1: He's working on this, that's the point.
Speaker 2: No, I agree with that, But as often with Gavin Newsom,
Speaker 2: a little bit more attention and focus earlier would have worked. Wonders.
Speaker 1: Okay, The other point I wanted to put to you
Speaker 1: about your econom critique of California is a question really
Speaker 1: about whether the policies of the federal government are playing
Speaker 1: a role in making life more unaffordable for Californians.
Speaker 2: Well, it's certainly true that there which examples you're thinking of?
Speaker 1: Particularly, I'm wondering, Well, let's take tariffs for starters and
Speaker 1: their impact on the cost of some goods.
Speaker 2: Well, I think that if you look at the detail
Speaker 2: on that, it's nothing like as significant. We have the
Speaker 2: highest grocery prices, for example, in the country. The main
Speaker 2: drivers of that of policies made in California. Energy cost
Speaker 2: the highest in the country, The labor and environmental regulations
Speaker 2: that make operating here so expensive.
Speaker 1: Can I give you others? This is Bloomberg analysis from
Speaker 1: earlier in the year that the jumps in the prices
Speaker 1: of children's clothing tools, outdoor equipment, furniture, bedding, motor vehicle parts.
Speaker 1: All of this is linked to tariff policy and trade.
Speaker 1: See that the administration brought in last year.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but if you basically look at where we settled
Speaker 2: on tariffs in terms of the percentage rates, and then
Speaker 2: you and you look at the way that the international
Speaker 2: trading system has worked for a long time before the tariffs,
Speaker 2: it is a leveling of the system. And I think
Speaker 2: that the impulse that drove that policy is absolutely correct,
Speaker 2: which is that there hasn't been fairness most other countries,
Speaker 2: most of America's trading partners, for example, have a value
Speaker 2: added tax, which distorts the picture in terms of imports
Speaker 2: and exports.
Speaker 1: It favors Okay, so you support do you support the
Speaker 1: imposition of tariffs?
Speaker 2: Well, it's not a California state policy. So I try
Speaker 2: and avoid weighing in on policies where there aren't really
Speaker 2: the subject of this campaign. I mean, I can give
Speaker 2: you a general observation that I think it was important
Speaker 2: to try and do something to bring manufacturing back to
Speaker 2: the US, and that's happening. Unfortunately, it's not happening for California.
Speaker 1: Okay, I remember, I remember I mean, I've read you
Speaker 1: talking about global and supporting globalization, So is your view
Speaker 1: completely changed on that because that was something that you
Speaker 1: used to say you believed in. Well, the globalization was
Speaker 1: a force for good and a force that created wealth
Speaker 1: rather than lifted.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Right, but you've got to nothing is all good
Speaker 2: or all bad. I mean, I think that the point
Speaker 2: about policy generally about in all sorts of areas, it's
Speaker 2: about trade offs. And of course it's true that over
Speaker 2: the years that we've seen the globalization of trade and
Speaker 2: so on, it's in tremendous advances in economic opportunity in
Speaker 2: some parts of the world, and that's a good thing, obviously,
Speaker 2: I think anyone would support that. But at the same time,
Speaker 2: partly because of this sometimes the speed of transition, Partly
Speaker 2: sometimes because the concentrated effects of a transition, places have
Speaker 2: really lost out and suffered. And so the policy goal
Speaker 2: is to try and keep as much of the positive
Speaker 2: while alleviating the negative. And I always bring it back
Speaker 2: because I am running now for governor of California. What
Speaker 2: does it mean in California? Going back to the AI companies,
Speaker 2: You look at Nvidia Andthropic, these big companies making major
Speaker 2: investments in the US, none of them in California. The
Speaker 2: job creation that's coming from the AI boom in America
Speaker 2: is happening outside of the home state of those companies.
Speaker 2: That's something I want to change so we get the
Speaker 2: full stack as I describe it, of AI jobs in California.
Speaker 1: So I do want to ask you about your attitude
Speaker 1: to big tech, because I remember you being really critical
Speaker 1: of these companies' Facebook as it was then Amazon and Google,
Speaker 1: talking about their dominant position, how you'd like the kind
Speaker 1: of framework where if they became too dominant in the market,
Speaker 1: then you'd want them to be treated as a monopoly,
Speaker 1: that you'd want maximum pay rates for senior execut Have
Speaker 1: you changed your mind? And at that time you were
Speaker 1: talking about regulation of big tech being really important to you,
Speaker 1: And now I'm trying that kind of thing in your
Speaker 1: in your set of policies.
Speaker 2: I've changed my job, which is now running for governor.
Speaker 2: As I plan to be governor, my job, my responsibility.
Speaker 1: And does that mean you can't afford to take on
Speaker 1: big tech?
Speaker 2: If I just finished this at the point, which is
Speaker 2: that it's my responsibility will be to support every business
Speaker 2: in California to help them grow, so we create jobs
Speaker 2: and wealth and opportunity in our state. So, regardless of
Speaker 2: my personal opinions about this or that company, I see
Speaker 2: it as the responsibility of the governor of any state
Speaker 2: to stand up for the people and the businesses, small business,
Speaker 2: medium sized, big global corporations, whatever it is, that is
Speaker 2: my responsibility.
Speaker 1: So what is your personal opinion of big tech.
Speaker 2: Well, I think that, like we were just talking about,
Speaker 2: in other areas, tremendous advances and change people's lives in
Speaker 2: a positive way. I'm usually proud of the tech sector
Speaker 2: and the fact that it's that we're leading and dominating
Speaker 2: once again in this new wave of innovation. That's fantastic
Speaker 2: and I'm proud of that. But as with everything, you know,
Speaker 2: there's positives and downsides, and the goal of policy makers
Speaker 2: should be to be really careful about not kind of
Speaker 2: leaping into trying to fix things. There really is a
Speaker 2: danger of over correcting and having unintended consequences. I think
Speaker 2: that's the skill of governance, and I think that when
Speaker 2: you look at tech, of course it's had positive transformation effects.
Speaker 2: I remember, people are choosing to use this technology. No
Speaker 2: one's forcing it on anyone. People are using it because
Speaker 2: they find it helpful, and businesses are using it because
Speaker 2: they find it helpful. I don't want to stand in
Speaker 2: the way of that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I do understand, of course that you're doing
Speaker 1: a different now, and running for office is different to
Speaker 1: being a commentator and having much more freedom when you
Speaker 1: can say. But there is also a question of belief
Speaker 1: and core principles. And you clearly felt strongly and thought
Speaker 1: a lot about tech, not least because you've spent so
Speaker 1: many years, you know, seeing it up close and living
Speaker 1: in California. So do you not have any concerns today
Speaker 1: about the dominance of these companies in our lives. They're
Speaker 1: a key part of the stock market, a lot of
Speaker 1: American wealth is wrapped up in them. They're at the
Speaker 1: forefront of AI, which will change, if not destroy many jobs.
Speaker 1: Like have those one things gone away? Or you just
Speaker 1: can't talk about them anymore?
Speaker 2: No, No, I think that. Well, first of we'll not
Speaker 2: just observed. I started and ran a tech company. I
Speaker 2: taught at Stanford University. So I absolutely agree with you
Speaker 2: that you've seen you're seeing companies with a huge transformational effect.
Speaker 2: But that's new and it's what innovation is We've got
Speaker 2: to be careful about what happens. That's what that's my
Speaker 2: attitude to the whole question of the impact of technology
Speaker 2: on society is to just be very open about what's
Speaker 2: going on, but not necessarily think that we as speaking
Speaker 2: now as someone who's running for office, has has the
Speaker 2: ability to really drive a change without causing unintended consequences.
Speaker 2: Right now, for example, on AI, you've got major disagreement
Speaker 2: about what's happening, even within the leaders of the sector.
Speaker 2: No one really knows.
Speaker 1: What do you think is going to be your biggest
Speaker 1: hurdle in this race in the next few months.
Speaker 2: Well, I think it's actually a belief that we can
Speaker 2: turn the desire for change. There's no question that California
Speaker 2: wants change. Every single piece of data you look at
Speaker 2: shows that there's a clear majority of people who think
Speaker 2: that we're on the wrong track and that we need
Speaker 2: to change direction. Now, what you've got to do is
Speaker 2: close that gap between the desire of people for change
Speaker 2: and actually voting for it by doing something that they
Speaker 2: haven't done in sufficient numbers in recent years, which is
Speaker 2: actually voting Republican. And so my job is to say, look,
Speaker 2: I'm running a someone with a positive, pragmatic plan which
Speaker 2: for very specific benefits that will help you in your life.
Speaker 2: Three dollar gas, cut your electric bills in half, your
Speaker 2: first one hundred and fifty grand, tax free starter homes
Speaker 2: for young people so they can afford to buy a
Speaker 2: home in California. These are positive, practical and my job
Speaker 2: is to get out there and show people how it
Speaker 2: can be done, and then I think will win. I'm
Speaker 2: very confident of that.
Speaker 1: You're going to need to have Democrats vote for you, essentially.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. I mean, it's a clear requirement that given the
Speaker 2: numbers that you've seen in recent years. Of course, it's
Speaker 2: true that democrats and independents as it's called in California
Speaker 2: no party preference voters need to join our movement for change.
Speaker 2: They already are. I mean, we've been doing events up
Speaker 2: and down the state for a year now. Town holds
Speaker 2: hundreds of events, thousands and thousands of people now have
Speaker 2: come out. Many times, people come along, they're open to everybody,
Speaker 2: and many times someone would stand up and say, I'm
Speaker 2: a Democrat. I've never been to a Republican event before.
Speaker 2: I voted for Kamala Harris. But something's got to change
Speaker 2: in California. You're already seeing that happen.
Speaker 1: I just wonder if that gets more difficult from this
Speaker 1: point on. Because President Trump's popularity has declined. He's endorsed
Speaker 1: your ticket, You've thanked him for that. You are asking
Speaker 1: people who often will not like him at all and
Speaker 1: will feel harmed by some of his economic policies, or
Speaker 1: who are angry at the war in Iran to vote
Speaker 1: for you.
Speaker 2: No, I understand that, but look, he's not on the ballot,
Speaker 2: and this is a point of choice for California. Do
Speaker 2: we keep going in the same direction we've had for
Speaker 2: the last sixteen years, or do we want to make
Speaker 2: a choice to go in a new direction. You mentioned
Speaker 2: the war, the Iran war. Of course, that's lifted up
Speaker 2: gas prices right across the country. But they are two
Speaker 2: dollars a gallon higher in California than anywhere else today.
Speaker 2: Seeing around the country that people are complaining about as
Speaker 2: being incredibly high. We would have welcomed that in California
Speaker 2: before the war, because they're way lower than we had
Speaker 2: imposed here. President Trump is president in all these other
Speaker 2: states that have far lower cost of living. Gas price is,
Speaker 2: electric bills, housing costs, you name it, and so it's
Speaker 2: clearly not his policies, it's California policies that are the
Speaker 2: problem here.
Speaker 1: Do you agree with the Iran war, his decision to
Speaker 1: go to war in Iran?
Speaker 2: Well, look, I'm just focused on this race. I'm really
Speaker 2: not a commentator on every political issue right now. There's
Speaker 2: there's plenty to fix in California. That's my focus.
Speaker 1: You really don't think you need to or the voters
Speaker 1: of California deserve to hear, can impress a view on that,
Speaker 1: That's not the point is just to know where you
Speaker 1: where you stand on it. You're going to be a
Speaker 1: leader of the state.
Speaker 2: No, I understand, I understand. But then there's plenty to
Speaker 2: fix and focus on in California. And as I said,
Speaker 2: I'm not a political commentator. I can give you my
Speaker 2: my very strong view that it's completely dangerous for the
Speaker 2: whole world for Iran to have a nuclear and I
Speaker 2: think the basis for that is something that's broadly shared
Speaker 2: across all political parties. That's why leaders of all kinds
Speaker 2: have been trying to deal with this situation for many,
Speaker 2: many years. I've also expressed a strong belief that you know, remember,
Speaker 2: my parents are Hungarian they fled communism in Hungary. I've
Speaker 2: always believed that the way in which the Iranian people
Speaker 2: have stood up to this brutal authoritarian regime something that
Speaker 2: we should support. So just as you know, see you
Speaker 2: take the side of people trying to overthrow oppression. Generally,
Speaker 2: that's something, of course I believe in that. That doesn't
Speaker 2: mean that I've spent any time looking at the specific
Speaker 2: details of the implementation of this all that policy. I'm
Speaker 2: one hundred percent focused on California.
Speaker 1: You know how President Trump is talking about the regime members. Now,
Speaker 1: who do you US is dealing with rational, smart, strong,
Speaker 1: not radicalized. It's the same regime and that's the way
Speaker 1: he's referring to them.
Speaker 2: Now, Look, I'm as I said, I'm just not I
Speaker 2: actually hadn't even heard those comments. Truly. It's a big state.
Speaker 2: I'm on the road from morning till night, up and
Speaker 2: down the state making our case, and I'm just not
Speaker 2: focused on anything other than California right now.
Speaker 1: Okay, Well, then you mentioned your parents and then fleeing communism,
Speaker 1: and I can imagine that that experience, you know, clearly
Speaker 1: formative for them, formative for you as well. Growing up.
Speaker 1: I guess, is it part of why you became a
Speaker 1: conservative because you were not going to grow up to
Speaker 1: be someone on the left of the political spectrum.
Speaker 2: Ever, I think that's probably part of it. One of
Speaker 2: my earliest political memories is in the Yuka was born
Speaker 2: in the UK. Both my parents are Hungary and also
Speaker 2: my stepfather's hungar and my parents split up when I
Speaker 2: was young. My dad went back to Hungary. My stepfather's
Speaker 2: Hungarian also someone who's actually fled ran across the border
Speaker 2: with Austria and ended up in a refugee camp, and
Speaker 2: like so many working class immigrants, he had a massive
Speaker 2: appreciation for the opportunities of being in a free country.
Speaker 2: I grew up in a regular working class immigrant home.
Speaker 2: He worked construction, he was a builder, as you'd say
Speaker 2: in England. And I'd really remember very strongly around the
Speaker 2: early eighties late, you know, when Mark Margaret Thatcher had
Speaker 2: come been elected, this sense that she was for the workers,
Speaker 2: she was for working people and people who wanted to
Speaker 2: in the word that became very commonly associated with that
Speaker 2: strive and make progress and get on in life, and
Speaker 2: that sense of pursuing opportunity, climbing the ladder of opportunity,
Speaker 2: upward mobility, hard work and effort. That was something that
Speaker 2: I found that was very formative as I was growing up,
Speaker 2: and I think that's part of it.
Speaker 1: Too, And so that family experience in making a different
Speaker 1: lifely in communism. How does it make you view Cubans today, who,
Speaker 1: unlike in the past, are being deported, some of them
Speaker 1: with criminal records, but not always. These are also people
Speaker 1: who fled communism.
Speaker 2: Well, I think that you but I understand deeply as
Speaker 2: you just noted, the desire for freedom. But you can't
Speaker 2: all of these migration patterns. Immigration and migration across borders,
Speaker 2: everything falls apart if it's not done in a way
Speaker 2: that is legal and controlled. You have everyone must accept
Speaker 2: that that. You can't just have an open borders system.
Speaker 2: It just causes chaos. And so support for immigration, for
Speaker 2: welcoming people who of fleeing persecution, all those things I've
Speaker 2: always actually David Cameron used to talk about it the
Speaker 2: same way. Support for all of that depends on the
Speaker 2: government controlling that, and when the government fails to control it,
Speaker 2: support declines. You can actually see that change in public opinion.
Speaker 2: You saw a drop in support for immigration and welcoming
Speaker 2: asylum seekers and so on in the US during the
Speaker 2: open border years of Joe Biden's administration. So I think
Speaker 2: that you've got to combine the desire to offer people
Speaker 2: that opportunity with a sense of orderly management of that process.
Speaker 1: Isn't the example of Cuba a bit different in the
Speaker 1: context of the United States.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure what you're referring to specifically.
Speaker 1: Because of fleeing communism, that thee.
Speaker 2: Who wants to flee communism should be automatically accepted anyway, you.
Speaker 1: Know, there's well the Cuban there are many Cuban Americans
Speaker 1: today who feel very upset with the with the deportation
Speaker 1: of Cubans for precisely that reason. I guess you're telling
Speaker 1: me you think they're wrong.
Speaker 2: Well, I don't. I actually don't know specifically the case
Speaker 2: is you're talking about, are these illegal immigrants? I don't
Speaker 2: know exactly what you're describing.
Speaker 1: I mean they are they are people who've entered the
Speaker 1: United States from Cuba and now they are being deported.
Speaker 2: Well, did they enter legally or illegally?
Speaker 1: They would have entered and now been undocumented. But that
Speaker 1: has been the case, that has been the case for
Speaker 1: a long time, but previous administrations didn't deport them because
Speaker 1: there was a certain protection for Cuban Americans that was
Speaker 1: different for others, and that has changed now because of
Speaker 1: your family history. I'm just wondering what you think of it.
Speaker 2: No, I don't think my family history means that I
Speaker 2: support illegal immigration. I don't see how that follows at all.
Speaker 2: I think it's very important that we try and approach
Speaker 2: it in a calm and reasonable way, lower temperature. I
Speaker 2: think there's been far too much divisive, performative rhetoric on
Speaker 2: the Democrat side demonizing all of this. I think most
Speaker 2: people agree that immigration is a positive thing, but should
Speaker 2: be managed and controlled by the government. That's a common
Speaker 2: sense position that I think the vast majority of people support.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and of course you're an immigrant yourself to the US.
Speaker 1: You became a US citizen a few years ago. You've
Speaker 1: renounced your British citizenship, which you didn't have to. Was
Speaker 1: it just awkward to be running for office being a
Speaker 1: dual national or did you really feel that you just
Speaker 1: didn't want that passport anymore.
Speaker 2: No, I feel very strongly that you're I feel very
Speaker 2: strongly that you're asking for people to put their faith
Speaker 2: in you, their trusting you. They and to make a
Speaker 2: commitment to you, and I think you're obliged to make
Speaker 2: a commitment to them and say I am one hundred
Speaker 2: percent all in for this country and this state, which
Speaker 2: I I am, but I wanted to have absolutely no
Speaker 2: doubt about that in anyone's mind.
Speaker 1: Is there anything you miss about the UK?
Speaker 2: Well, not particularly, I mean obviously friends and family, but
Speaker 2: we get back usually at Christmas time and see people,
Speaker 2: and so I love California deeply. I feel at home
Speaker 2: here in a way that I haven't ever before. And
Speaker 2: I'm so proud to be an American, proud to be
Speaker 2: a Californian, and really honored to be in the position
Speaker 2: I'm in, which is to actually do something, you could say,
Speaker 2: in a way to repay the incredible opportunities that I've
Speaker 2: had here and to restore that idea of the California dream,
Speaker 2: which is a very particular thing about our state that
Speaker 2: other states really don't have, to really try and bring
Speaker 2: that to as many people as possible.
Speaker 1: There's really nothing you miss the pint in the pubty
Speaker 1: in business.
Speaker 2: That's a fair point. I do know that's right. When
Speaker 2: we go back to London. One of my first moves
Speaker 2: is is calling a friend or meeting of the friends,
Speaker 2: said yeah, we've got to go to a pub. That's
Speaker 2: a fair one.
Speaker 1: How do you think the next few months are going
Speaker 1: to be, are you? I mean they're going to be grueling, right,
Speaker 1: You're going to be on the road, yes, But it's.
Speaker 2: An honor to do it, truly, it's an honor to
Speaker 2: do it. It's such a struggle for people in California,
Speaker 2: and I feel this tremendous sense of responsibility to not
Speaker 2: let them down. And that's why on election night when
Speaker 2: we got the first results and it seemed that we
Speaker 2: were going to be okay, my feeling was overwhelming, the
Speaker 2: just relief truly that we okay, this is good. We
Speaker 2: haven't you know, we haven't let people down, the people
Speaker 2: who place their real faith in you being able to
Speaker 2: help lead a change. And now it's a very clear choice,
Speaker 2: actually very helpfully clear, because you've got my plan for
Speaker 2: change and on the other side have Ebase, who's the
Speaker 2: living embodiment of more of the same. And so it's
Speaker 2: a really clear choice for California. And I'm excited about
Speaker 2: being on the road and putting it out there for people.
Speaker 1: Would you like President Trump to come on the road
Speaker 1: with you?
Speaker 2: Look, I think I haven't thought about that. Honestly, He's
Speaker 2: got a lot he's focused on, so I don't suppose
Speaker 2: that's something that he's thought about either.
Speaker 1: I feel he might not be an asset to you.
Speaker 1: On the campaign trail in California, a lot.
Speaker 2: Of people voted for him, More people voted for him
Speaker 2: in California than in any other state in twenty twenty fourth.
Speaker 2: Of course that's a function of being a big state.
Speaker 2: But I would just say that California is actually more
Speaker 2: of a Republican state than people think. And there's I
Speaker 2: get a very strong sense that there's a groundswell of
Speaker 2: people who felt that it's just not possible in these
Speaker 2: years of one party dominance, that actually change isn't possible.
Speaker 2: And part of the reason I'm running a campaign in
Speaker 2: such a high energy way, which people say they haven't
Speaker 2: seen for a long time, is to try and get
Speaker 2: that sense of belief back that we really can do this.
Speaker 1: Steve Hilton, thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Great to be with you. Thank you, And that's.
Speaker 1: Where we left the conversation. Bloomberg subscribers can read my
Speaker 1: notes on this and see pictures of how Steve Hilton
Speaker 1: has evolved since his UK politics days. That's at Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot Com, Forward Slash, Michelle and so to the team.
Speaker 1: That producers are Jessica Beck and Chris Martlew, The video
Speaker 1: producer is Andy Hayward. Social media is by Alex Morgan,
Speaker 1: our music is by Bart Warshaw, and the executive producer
Speaker 1: is Louisa Lewis at Bloomberg Weekend. Our thanks as ever
Speaker 1: to Brendan Francis Newnam and our executive editor Katherine Bell.
Speaker 1: Until next time, goodbye,