Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane Jay Lee.
Speaker 1: We bring you insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot Com, and of course, on the Bloomberg Chris Ruskin,
Speaker 1: let's bring in right now. The politeness is, you don't
Speaker 1: eat your lunch until the speaker's done speaking strange and
Speaker 1: everyone else lunch. Everyone is starving, everyone wants to leave
Speaker 1: at that point. Iple I've never understood that. I've got
Speaker 1: to admit I don't enjoy it because everybody else does
Speaker 1: start eating lunch. And whilst whoever it is, whether it's
Speaker 1: the chairman or the vice chat does speak to the
Speaker 1: Economic club in New York or you. Here is the cutlery,
Speaker 1: the folks and knives hitting the plates for you because
Speaker 1: we're are your polite above the organist. Can you get
Speaker 1: to Mr Ruby, How are you doing? I'm trying. I'm
Speaker 1: doing okay, Chris. What are you looking for from the
Speaker 1: vice chairman likes it today? Well, he's you know, it's
Speaker 1: kind of the Fed versus the markets. At this point,
Speaker 1: FED funds futures pretty much are discounting one and a
Speaker 1: half rate cuts by the December meeting. Eurodollar futures are
Speaker 1: looking for like three rate cuts by the end of
Speaker 1: next year. Come on the markets, twelve. The market totally disagrees,
Speaker 1: the market. The market knows all. Yeah, I think clad Chris,
Speaker 1: I think the problem. Well, the FED messaging on this
Speaker 1: has been kind of messy, right, And they're gonna ask
Speaker 1: Clarada about this, because don't forget he's the guy who
Speaker 1: came out earlier this year and said, uh, talked about
Speaker 1: the risk risk management style rate cuts in the nineties.
Speaker 1: Where to me, those weren't risk risk management style just
Speaker 1: in case rate cuts. They were done because we had
Speaker 1: a near miss with a recession in Claire is going
Speaker 1: to talk as he talked in his conversation with me,
Speaker 1: and as he spoke in his conversation to Michael McKee.
Speaker 1: Full disclosure, folks, McKee had a smarter interview. He talks
Speaker 1: about solid economy defined solid well at the moment, what
Speaker 1: we're creating upwards of two thousand jobs per month. We
Speaker 1: got a three point six percent low unemployment rate. We
Speaker 1: had three point two percent g d P. You know,
Speaker 1: that's kind of rear view mirror stuff. But everything looks okay.
Speaker 1: I mean, look at consumer confidence. We used to think
Speaker 1: in the old days of FED would just open the
Speaker 1: newspaper and say what is a consumer think? And then
Speaker 1: vote accordingly the FED and consumer the consumers reckoning of
Speaker 1: where current conditions are. It's the best sense to thousand
Speaker 1: pimp Cooke column for rate cuts. Did that come up
Speaker 1: in there? You know? Annuals Swarry, You're not something they're
Speaker 1: looking for immediately, not something that came up yesterday, not
Speaker 1: something they're looking for right now in the nit Chris,
Speaker 1: What I think is interesting about consumer confidences, I don't
Speaker 1: see it in the hard data. It's not translating into
Speaker 1: improved economic activity at the consumer level. No, not not yet.
Speaker 1: But we gotta wait and see retails sales. One of
Speaker 1: the problems I guess is h car and light truck sales.
Speaker 1: I keep going back and forth or like seventeen point
Speaker 1: four than they're sixteen and a half. We pretty much
Speaker 1: know for this cycle the consumer is not going to
Speaker 1: go out and buy a lot more cars. Uh, it's
Speaker 1: gonna stick somewhere around seventeen million annual rate. But no,
Speaker 1: I think you could look forward to retail sales picking
Speaker 1: up in the next couple of reports. Retail sounds can
Speaker 1: pick up in the next couple of reports. It might
Speaker 1: have been it was a right. There's a lot of
Speaker 1: seasonal summertime purchases. Maybe those were delayed, but you know,
Speaker 1: over the course of the summer, I think that consumer
Speaker 1: has money. One more question, if we could you do
Speaker 1: you are the best? It fed chat linked into full
Speaker 1: faith and credit charts. What is this three month ten
Speaker 1: year difference in yield that spread everybody's talking about it
Speaker 1: is inversion? Like it wasn't the last twelve out of
Speaker 1: the fourteen recessions or whatever? What does three months tend
Speaker 1: mean to Chris Ruky? Yeah, I mean the crazy thing
Speaker 1: about the curve is that the two year tenure is
Speaker 1: not inverted, and most cycles two year ten years inverts
Speaker 1: then at the last minute the three month so it's
Speaker 1: flips that I don't know the markets are miss priced,
Speaker 1: but that the three month tenure year. Listen to you,
Speaker 1: you see like such an economist inverted. It inverted last
Speaker 1: Thursday on the market a m. I thanks market for
Speaker 1: the plug there, thank you, Mr Rupkey. Anyway, the curve
Speaker 1: inverted last Thursday, and and that means it means recessions.
Speaker 1: So that's what we're working off. It's gonna take ten
Speaker 1: ye year olds have to come up to like three
Speaker 1: point three seven. The curve's not got Chris gonna stay
Speaker 1: in verdicts. Thank you so much, greatly, I'm kidding, thank
Speaker 1: you so much. A really good briefing before Vice Chairman
Speaker 1: clearitis speak. Take a listen to what Scott Marther of
Speaker 1: PIMCO had to say about credit risk and probably the
Speaker 1: riskiest credit market that we've ever had. And you know
Speaker 1: it's true when you look at both the size of it,
Speaker 1: the duration of it, and the quality aspects of it.
Speaker 1: So there's a big vulnerability there as well as probably
Speaker 1: the least liquid uh you know, bond market in terms
Speaker 1: of credit markets that we've had in a long period
Speaker 1: of time. Joe Lemington joining us now Limberg Intelligence, Director
Speaker 1: of Credit Research, Joe, probably the riskiest corporate credit market
Speaker 1: we've ever had. This was a catalyst for so much
Speaker 1: conversation yesterday after Scott said this, let's get your thoughts
Speaker 1: and then we'll start to explore a little bit further.
Speaker 1: Your reaction, well, I think you did a great job.
Speaker 1: John is is always the first place to start. But
Speaker 1: I think, but I think beyond that, you know, you
Speaker 1: are at a very interesting point in time because you
Speaker 1: have spreads that are still quite tight. Uh. You have
Speaker 1: a very mixed data that's out there and very bifurcated feelings.
Speaker 1: For example, if you look internally at b I, you
Speaker 1: have people like Ira Jersey and Carl Rickadana saying the
Speaker 1: second half is gonna be very strong, uh, and that
Speaker 1: yields should be going up, which if you're a PM
Speaker 1: you'd be playing that on the short end or maybe
Speaker 1: through high yield, but that there are other people that
Speaker 1: think that you're headed into a recession, and if that's
Speaker 1: the case, then you have quite a different place to
Speaker 1: be putting your money. What I thought was really interesting,
Speaker 1: speaking of Scott in a little bit more detail, was
Speaker 1: this comparison between now and potentially going into the mid
Speaker 1: two thousands, that kind of historic parallel, not because we're
Speaker 1: about to go into recession in the here and now,
Speaker 1: but because maybe we're about to go through that period
Speaker 1: where the excess is build, the mistakes are made. Joe,
Speaker 1: what do you think about that? Does that idea resonate
Speaker 1: with you at all? Yeah? Well, as a guy that
Speaker 1: follows Tesla and I know we often talk about the
Speaker 1: five three percent bond that's now around nine. Um. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: I mean I do think mistakes are being me. I
Speaker 1: guess you're looking at we Works as another example of
Speaker 1: that coming to the market yesterday, and you kind of
Speaker 1: scratch your head with these pre cash flow pre even businesses.
Speaker 1: We don't have time in the day. We need a
Speaker 1: long we need a long show for that one day
Speaker 1: I I spent. Folks. It's common belief that John and
Speaker 1: I party the moment that you know, the month of
Speaker 1: music comes up at ten am, But actually we're working
Speaker 1: through the day. And Bloomberg Intelligence written up in zero
Speaker 1: Hedge had a tour de force on community based adjusted
Speaker 1: But uh, help me with the WE Work bond offering
Speaker 1: your interpretation of it led by our real estate people. Sure, yeah, no,
Speaker 1: Jeff Langenbaum. Um, and uh, what I would say is that, uh,
Speaker 1: it's a great job of marketing. Much I think in
Speaker 1: the in the way a lot of these were not marketing.
Speaker 1: Should somebody step in? Should some institutional guys in a
Speaker 1: car and Topeka right now? Should he's stepping in? By
Speaker 1: we Work paper, what's a coupon. I think they're still
Speaker 1: determining what give me, give me, give me a touch
Speaker 1: there six percent maybe maybe. But I think with all
Speaker 1: of these credits, whether it's an Uber or a Tesla
Speaker 1: or we Works, I think you have to look at
Speaker 1: it and say, do companies that don't generate cash flow
Speaker 1: and we know that they're not going to for several years,
Speaker 1: can they support any sort of debt? And I think
Speaker 1: the answer is no. So I can't see why a
Speaker 1: PM wouldn't want to get involved with any of those situations.
Speaker 1: Which is healthier credit market? Now start to jump into
Speaker 1: you bring up Testa, and I think Tesla. The growth
Speaker 1: story of Tesla was captured by the equity a couple
Speaker 1: of years back. It was reflected in the debt, and
Speaker 1: that was a big problem for a lot of people.
Speaker 1: Several years later, now it was two summers ago, it
Speaker 1: was August when Note came to market. A couple of
Speaker 1: years later, can you sit here and say definitively that
Speaker 1: this is a healthier credit market, but we are no
Speaker 1: longer doing those silly things where we reflect the growth
Speaker 1: story that should be captured by equity, but it's also
Speaker 1: captured in the debt. Market. No, I don't. I don't
Speaker 1: think we can join. I mean, in the case of Tesla,
Speaker 1: I think we can say that more clearly today than
Speaker 1: it was two years ago when we were ranting on that.
Speaker 1: But if you look at we work, it's the same
Speaker 1: basic story right where people are looking at at hypothetical
Speaker 1: market valuations of the company and saying, well, it deserves
Speaker 1: to trade at a certain place when we know that
Speaker 1: it's going to be multiple years before it gets anywhere
Speaker 1: close to generating any sort of cash for though Joel levingson,
Speaker 1: Joel thinks you have to come back when you figure
Speaker 1: out the community adjusted even I still don't understand that.
Speaker 1: I still don't understand that. And every time I guess
Speaker 1: mentioned I think people are judging intelligence and what they
Speaker 1: Joel and the others and Mr lang Voon, what he
Speaker 1: did yesterday and we worked was just a tourtive force.
Speaker 1: It was just brilliant in the change. Joel Levinson back
Speaker 1: Intelligence of Credit Research. Meredith Sumter joins us right now,
Speaker 1: and this is important. She writes brilliant notes for your
Speaker 1: age group. And this was some of our guests, not
Speaker 1: all of our guests is not only expert on China,
Speaker 1: but understands not the King's English, but maybe President she's
Speaker 1: uh Mandarin. I was chastised this morning by one of
Speaker 1: our listeners in Mayfair because I said Chinese language instead
Speaker 1: of Mandarin as well. So I've been practicing, Meredith, Joe
Speaker 1: is weak. Neon is year? Did I get that right? Neon?
Speaker 1: Am I doing? Okay? Close? You know what do you want?
Speaker 1: We're sumker, good luck, Meredith. Meredith. The President is scheduled
Speaker 1: to speak here this morning, is on his way to Colorado,
Speaker 1: to the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.
Speaker 1: And how do they interpret in the Chinese language the
Speaker 1: Trump bluster, the Trump discourse, how does that translate into Mandarin? Well, actually,
Speaker 1: originally before I would say this latest escalation in tariffs,
Speaker 1: and also that the move to place halfway on the
Speaker 1: entity list, which really is a game changer for Beijing,
Speaker 1: I would say that the Trump was actually somewhat popular
Speaker 1: with the Chinese people. Um they see him as ta
Speaker 1: fund is standing up for US interests. But it's also
Speaker 1: safe to say that that the U. S. President has
Speaker 1: now crossed a line with the Chinese. And as we
Speaker 1: are speaking earlier, Tom, we are watching very closely a
Speaker 1: lessening of moderation on the Chinese side and an uptick
Speaker 1: in nationalism that is not just in propaganda, but you're
Speaker 1: also beginning to see a sense from the Chinese people
Speaker 1: on wave wall and other sort of social media channels
Speaker 1: that they're beginning to feel like they're being bullied and
Speaker 1: they're not listening to the viable concerns on the U
Speaker 1: S side that this economic relationship between the two the
Speaker 1: world's too largest economies, needs to be rebalanced and rejiggered
Speaker 1: for the twenty one century. A lot of people trying
Speaker 1: to understand what that means for economic activity within the country. Meredith,
Speaker 1: and whether there could be a boycott of US products
Speaker 1: and services. What's your read of that situation at the moment.
Speaker 1: I think there's certainly an increasing risk of that, and
Speaker 1: and really I think watching what happens with Huawei is
Speaker 1: the key here. It's really that the focal point that
Speaker 1: the Chinese are are using to to gauge US intent
Speaker 1: towards China. So if Huawei is essentially brought to its
Speaker 1: knees in a way that it will no longer be
Speaker 1: a successful global Chinese telecommunications company, you can expect that
Speaker 1: Beijing itself will find ways to reciprocate, but even more interestingly,
Speaker 1: watch what the public does, because the risk here not
Speaker 1: only for the US, but also for Beijing, UH is
Speaker 1: that if sentiment becomes nationalists to the point where Beijing
Speaker 1: can no longer control that, then it goes from Beijing
Speaker 1: being able to finally dial up or dial down escalation
Speaker 1: with the US according to its plan, to Beijing no
Speaker 1: longer being in full control of how its own people,
Speaker 1: how the Chinese people are responding, so that the risks
Speaker 1: to UM high profile US companies in China, I would say,
Speaker 1: is certainly on the rise. How close do you think
Speaker 1: we are? So that's hipping point Meredith, Well, so the
Speaker 1: with Huawei, the US issued a ninety day temporary general license,
Speaker 1: but already we're beginning to see strains on that company
Speaker 1: with um other it's global trading partners, it's global um
Speaker 1: UM business partners are beginning to to step away from
Speaker 1: that company. Uh. So what to watch now between now
Speaker 1: and say the G twenty, crucially is whether or not
Speaker 1: there is any back channel that is opened or even
Speaker 1: a front channel between Trump and She to do something
Speaker 1: about Huawei, to to come to a deal with Huawei,
Speaker 1: and absent that, we're unlikely to see a productive or
Speaker 1: constructive conversation. Happened at the G twenty uh in Osaka
Speaker 1: at the end of June. That's the last best chance
Speaker 1: for both sides to avert and onward escalation from here.
Speaker 1: What is a calculus right now between the leader of
Speaker 1: China and his communist party. I'm going to use the
Speaker 1: word pollet burro as an amateur, but what is the
Speaker 1: dynamic you see among the leadership of China. I know
Speaker 1: there's a huge mystery their meredith, but is there something new? Surprise? Really?
Speaker 1: Huawei was the nuclear option. They expected that there would
Speaker 1: be onward pressure from from President Trump, and I would
Speaker 1: say that that the way that the US government has
Speaker 1: come out against Huawei by placing the company on its
Speaker 1: entity list in addition to the executive order, has really
Speaker 1: caught Beijing unaware, and it took them several days to
Speaker 1: sort of collect their thoughts and first and foremost gauge
Speaker 1: what has to be done to save that company and
Speaker 1: then what is politically feasible for Shijianping to do. So
Speaker 1: what we're hearing is that Chinese are basically telling Washington
Speaker 1: we're not interested in talking at all about trade or
Speaker 1: about economic relations with you until the White issue is resolved.
Speaker 1: And to my knowledge, there is at this point no
Speaker 1: meeting between Trump and She officially scheduled for g twenty,
Speaker 1: and no active communication channel between the two on a
Speaker 1: way forward with either Huawei or with the broadest or
Speaker 1: economic relationship. Is what you're discussing priced in the markets.
Speaker 1: I know that's not your razor group question, but do
Speaker 1: you perceive that the Western zeitgeist is up to speed
Speaker 1: with your razor groups? Caution No, No, And I think
Speaker 1: systematically we've seen markets sort of under bake the risk
Speaker 1: that we see moving forward in this relationship. Meredith has
Speaker 1: been really interested to see how financial markets respond, how
Speaker 1: investors react to commentary and state media. I think to
Speaker 1: a certain degree, and you can define to what extent
Speaker 1: the perception of shin a stounce in this tride dispute
Speaker 1: is being shaped almost exclusively at the moment by commentary
Speaker 1: and state media. Do you think that gives us an
Speaker 1: accurate picture of what is actually happening. That's a fascinating
Speaker 1: question here, um, and I would say that that broadly accurate, probably,
Speaker 1: But key here is that uh in the past, Beijing
Speaker 1: would use its state media to focus this messaging on
Speaker 1: its domestic population, and they used a separate channel to
Speaker 1: message to the global audience. But now that you have
Speaker 1: so many of us, non non Chinese who are paying
Speaker 1: attention to to um state propaganda and state media, we
Speaker 1: are reading messages that Beijing might be intending for domestic audience,
Speaker 1: not a global audience. And there's a key difference there.
Speaker 1: Meredith helped me here. This is really important. I'm taking
Speaker 1: uh introductory Chinese with Anthony from Sparta, and here's my
Speaker 1: first sentence. Meredith, help me with the pronunciation woe en fongloa,
Speaker 1: which is I took a day off yesterday? Like whoa
Speaker 1: is I right? Well? Yeah? Whoa close up? Yes? Whoa
Speaker 1: war Tom? You and I were gonna work on tones together,
Speaker 1: some great dumplings. Well, I did this at a bar
Speaker 1: in Shanghai with cash flow, and I flunked. Every time
Speaker 1: when you reach Chinese, it sounds like a speaking French.
Speaker 1: Really well, I was in the French quarter when we
Speaker 1: did shots. Every time I miss pronounced something, We're gonna
Speaker 1: let you run, whoa shoot eat Angia, I took a
Speaker 1: day off yesterday? What a great first sentence for learning
Speaker 1: Chicks the fund getting slammed down by she is so good.
Speaker 1: I can't say enough on the briefing notes from you
Speaker 1: raise your group on China. They've been just brilliant. This
Speaker 1: is a joy, and this is odd. As you know,
Speaker 1: there are four thousand, seven hundred people running for president
Speaker 1: of the Democratic Party, and it is good to have
Speaker 1: someone dark in the door who's a little bit different
Speaker 1: as all of you know, whatever your political persuasion. Uh,
Speaker 1: there is a small matter that Democrats have to take
Speaker 1: territory and votes where the Republicans live. The Cook Report
Speaker 1: puts Montana at a our plus eleven wal to wald
Speaker 1: Trump Heights from Bozeman to Grizzly Park, whatever it's called
Speaker 1: up there in the northern border. The governor of Montana
Speaker 1: joins us now, Stephen Bullock, who is a really interesting
Speaker 1: guy because it's so out of touch here you are
Speaker 1: in your state of the state a few years ago.
Speaker 1: We need each other if we are going to make progress.
Speaker 1: You don't have a chance. How are you How are
Speaker 1: you gonna run for president? How are you going to
Speaker 1: gain traction within this this vast Democratic party in a
Speaker 1: polarized time? How do you get the message across you know?
Speaker 1: And Tom first, thanks for having me, Tom and Paul.
Speaker 1: But it is a polarized time. Look, I'm the only
Speaker 1: one in this field that actually one in a Trump state.
Speaker 1: In two thousand sixteen, Uh, Donald Trump took Montana by
Speaker 1: twenty one points. I won by four of my voters
Speaker 1: voted for Donald Trump. If we don't win back some
Speaker 1: of the places that we lost in two thousand sixteen,
Speaker 1: this guy is gonna be president. But I've also my
Speaker 1: legislature six Republican and we've been able to do everything
Speaker 1: from have a fair tax system to investing in education
Speaker 1: and getting healthcare for a hundred thousand Montana's to Medicaid expansion.
Speaker 1: And if we don't actually, you know, the whole goal
Speaker 1: of this isn't just a win, it's actually a governed
Speaker 1: Montana State University. They're the only place in Montana where
Speaker 1: there are socialists. We know that. I mean it's to
Speaker 1: the left of the they of course, is like COMI
Speaker 1: three oh two. Okay, Well, how do you respond to
Speaker 1: the democratic socialists that won't listen to southwest Pennsylvania or
Speaker 1: from Montana across the entire state, And you respond to it. Yeah. Look, look,
Speaker 1: I am capitalist, but I think the capitalist system doesn't
Speaker 1: always work right now when tax laws are being written,
Speaker 1: when a Senator literally says, we have to do this
Speaker 1: to make our donors happy, or we can't even talk
Speaker 1: about climate change anymore because the outside influence of dollars.
Speaker 1: We have to fix some things, but that doesn't mean
Speaker 1: necessarily abandoning what our country has always been founded on. Well, Governoren,
Speaker 1: what we saw certainly in the congressional elections on the
Speaker 1: Democratic side that we took the House but very much
Speaker 1: moved to the left for the Democrats. Do you think
Speaker 1: a centrist all Bill Clinton ken win a the primary
Speaker 1: and be the general election? Sharon, Look, I'm in many
Speaker 1: ways when comes to healthcare and getting actually things done.
Speaker 1: When it comes to getting dark money out of our elections,
Speaker 1: I'd say I'm more progressive than anybody else, or as
Speaker 1: progressive as anybody else in the field. When it comes
Speaker 1: to actual accomplishments. I'm also you know, as a governor,
Speaker 1: I've had to balance a budget. So there are some
Speaker 1: conservative elements where I'll look at a tax cut and say, well,
Speaker 1: are we really putting this on our kids and grandkids?
Speaker 1: Or I'll look at plants and say, well, how are
Speaker 1: we going to pay for it? I think what most
Speaker 1: folks want, any Democrats want, is somebody that can win
Speaker 1: and then start getting things done. And the values of
Speaker 1: everybody ought to have access to healthcare, education, ought to
Speaker 1: be affordable. Those same values are I think what both
Speaker 1: unites the Democratic Party but is transcends beyond that. How
Speaker 1: did you get Trump votes in Montana? You don't look Republican,
Speaker 1: You don't you don't walk republican, your entourage is not Republican.
Speaker 1: How did you get What did you do in the diner?
Speaker 1: You know, Fox News goes out to the diner and
Speaker 1: doesn't touchy feeling thing. What did you do to the
Speaker 1: diner two hundred miles west of Bozeman to get that
Speaker 1: Trump vote? And first of all, I actually show up
Speaker 1: at the diner and not You know, we're getting to
Speaker 1: the point where I don't have the luxury of just
Speaker 1: going to pockets of blue in Montana expecting folks to win.
Speaker 1: I listen, I try to understand where they are now.
Speaker 1: Folks don't agree with me on every issue, But if
Speaker 1: I can turn around and say healthcare is important for
Speaker 1: a community, because if we lose that rural hospital, that
Speaker 1: town's gone, then they'll get over this issue of Obamacare.
Speaker 1: Does policy work? I mean, I mean uh. Paul Sweeney
Speaker 1: mentions President Clinton the ultimate policy want up all time,
Speaker 1: and yet he'd always go back to the visceral to
Speaker 1: get things done. Our Democratic candidates now over policying versus
Speaker 1: talking to the emotion and the residents that we heard
Speaker 1: from President Obama and President Trump. Well, I think that
Speaker 1: the emotion and the values everyone and that's demo crats
Speaker 1: are Republicans want to save community, They want to roof
Speaker 1: over their head. They don't want to have economic anxiety,
Speaker 1: you know, they want a decent job, the one good
Speaker 1: public schools, clean air, clean water, the belief you can
Speaker 1: do better for your kids and grandkids than yourself. And
Speaker 1: I think that transcends both the Democratic Party, but it
Speaker 1: also transcends a lot of voters that ought to be
Speaker 1: with us along the way. If they're really voting their
Speaker 1: economic or their healthcare or their educational interests. So covernor
Speaker 1: I know this is is the beginning of a long process.
Speaker 1: Few and for the other twenty some odd candidates for
Speaker 1: the Democratic primary, how do you get how do you
Speaker 1: stand out and particularly against you know, someone has a
Speaker 1: better name recognition, whether it be at Joe Biden or
Speaker 1: Bernie Sounders, it's Bloomberg Radio. That's what's going to change
Speaker 1: to their all for me, Paul. Now that that and
Speaker 1: look it is still even a feel the thirty seven
Speaker 1: or hundred and twelve or twenty three. You know, the
Speaker 1: early States are going to sort out things. So I
Speaker 1: think that in those early states, me showing up making
Speaker 1: those connections along the way. Let's go back four years ago.
Speaker 1: Scott Walker was polling number one, Jeb Bush was polling
Speaker 1: number two. So there's a lot of time to make
Speaker 1: the case of that we need to not only bring
Speaker 1: out our base, but also bring some of these voters back.
Speaker 1: We need to get to the point where we can
Speaker 1: actually get things done, and we gotta get washing DC
Speaker 1: working for us. Which state matters for you? The early States?
Speaker 1: Which one is really the one you're focused on? Russ?
Speaker 1: Is this I ask a rude question. Not not not
Speaker 1: at all. And I'm only two weeks in because my
Speaker 1: legislature was still going on and had to get my
Speaker 1: job done. But I had like a real job through
Speaker 1: the rest of them. Are you behind myself? That's I
Speaker 1: make a joke about it. But do you feel like
Speaker 1: you're behind in the campaigning? That's sick? Where are Yeah? Yeah,
Speaker 1: in some respects because people are already saying all the
Speaker 1: pollings here and the numbers are here. But I did
Speaker 1: have you know, if I had jumped in two months ago,
Speaker 1: when my legislature was still going on, I wouldn't been
Speaker 1: able to freeze college tuition. I wouldn't have been able
Speaker 1: to get foreign money out of our elections. Well be
Speaker 1: frozen college tuition. I've frozen college tuition six of my years.
Speaker 1: We have the fourth lowest tuition fees in the nation.
Speaker 1: That's not by starving our universities. That's by putting additional
Speaker 1: state dollars into the system. And the way can you
Speaker 1: like talk to the other four institutions. Paul and I
Speaker 1: are dealing with your get what's the pixie does he has?
Speaker 1: State of Colorado just wrote a big check to the university. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and and part of that when I was pitching in
Speaker 1: that legislature, I said, you increase college tuition. That's a
Speaker 1: tax on about forty Montana's right, folks that actually need that.
Speaker 1: So but I don't think it's too late a couple
Speaker 1: of weeks in I've made number of trips to Iowa.
Speaker 1: I was in New Hampshire before announced, long before us
Speaker 1: in South Carolina. So that's where I'll start. Who's your
Speaker 1: running mate? I mean, let's cut to the chase, un mate,
Speaker 1: you get out front of it a little early for that, Tom,
Speaker 1: but look, I want somebody Tuesday compliment my skills and values,
Speaker 1: have a different life experience, and step in if anything
Speaker 1: ever happened. I mean, there's a lot of good folks
Speaker 1: in the field, but I think it's a little early
Speaker 1: to figure out one. So I like to wrap up
Speaker 1: her interviews well, like, what did we learn in this interview?
Speaker 1: Steve Bullock frozen tuition? Okay, thank you, Governor of the
Speaker 1: state of Montana. We'll be hearing much more, I'm sure
Speaker 1: about Governor Bullock here in the coming days. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to
Speaker 1: interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer.
Speaker 1: I'm on Twitter at Tom Keane before the podcast, you
Speaker 1: can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio