Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound On podcast. Catch us
Speaker 1: live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business app, or listen on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2: Welcome to the Tuesday edition of Bloomberg Sound On. How
Speaker 2: is possibly only Tuesday? I'm Joe Matthew in Washington with
Speaker 2: a lot to talk about. We're going to start with
Speaker 2: the situation in Ukraine and actually what's happening here in
Speaker 2: the capital today. It's pretty important as Ukraine makes this
Speaker 2: last ditch effort to pull something here out of the
Speaker 2: fire in terms of funding, dispatching top leaders from Kiev
Speaker 2: to the capital. They're here now, including President Zelenski's chief
Speaker 2: of staff, the Defense Ministry, the speaker of the Ukrainian Parliament,
Speaker 2: and President Zelenski himself not in person, but will zoom
Speaker 2: in to a meeting with senators later on today to
Speaker 2: make the case here. This is apparently something that the
Speaker 2: Biden administration helped to arrange and with us at the
Speaker 2: table to talk about this, among other issues, is Kurt Vulker.
Speaker 2: You've heard him on the program before, the former US
Speaker 2: ambassador to NATO former Special Representative for Ukraine negotiations with
Speaker 2: US at the table. Mister ambassador, it's great to see
Speaker 2: you and I appreciate your coming here today. And what's
Speaker 2: a pretty important moment for the cause in Ukraine. Will
Speaker 2: this in person cajoling help.
Speaker 3: You know, it's always good for the Ukrainians to make
Speaker 3: the case and to be communicating and to get some
Speaker 3: reassurance that any assistance they get is being used well.
Speaker 3: But this is caught up on something completely different. You
Speaker 3: have the Republicans, basically a majority of the Republicans and
Speaker 3: a majority of Democrats as well, supporting a to Ukraine.
Speaker 3: If you took this to a floor vote in the House,
Speaker 3: you'd get three hundred and fifty votes. What they are
Speaker 3: concerned about is doing that without something on this, you know,
Speaker 3: funding for the southern border, yes, because they want to
Speaker 3: show that we are taking care of American security in
Speaker 3: addition to helping Ukraine with its security, and this is
Speaker 3: something the White House doesn't want to do. So they're
Speaker 3: trying to turn up the heat on the letter that
Speaker 3: you saw from omb Yes yesterday. It's such sharp language,
Speaker 3: it's making it so dire. We're going to run out
Speaker 3: of money. Ukraine's gonna fall, It's gonna be a disaster, yes,
Speaker 3: which is partially true. But the reason it's being emphasized
Speaker 3: that way is to try to avoid getting that funding
Speaker 3: for the southern border that they don't want.
Speaker 2: So let's unpack a couple of things that you just
Speaker 2: said there and we'll start with the letter. How is
Speaker 2: it partially true then? Because Shlanda Jung says Ukraine is
Speaker 2: out of money and running out of its time, right.
Speaker 4: Is that's the part that's true. That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 3: It is true that the money that was approved back
Speaker 3: in December last year was good for a supplemental to
Speaker 3: carry us till about September. Then we had a small
Speaker 3: increment on top of that that got us through December.
Speaker 3: What's in front of the Congress now is enough money
Speaker 3: to cover us for next year and then we're not
Speaker 3: gonna have to vote on this again during the election.
Speaker 4: That's what everybody wants.
Speaker 3: So that is true that that's when that money scheduled
Speaker 3: to run out. What I'm saying is that the emphasis
Speaker 3: on this now raising the political temperature has all to
Speaker 3: do with this package that is trying to get put
Speaker 3: together in the Senate.
Speaker 2: So let's talk more about that for a moment then,
Speaker 2: because you know, here we are hashing out details on
Speaker 2: asylum law, talking about the parole system here in Washington.
Speaker 2: What does Kiev make of this debate and being somehow
Speaker 2: drawn into the debate about our work.
Speaker 3: This is the curse of Ukraine. They are always sucked
Speaker 3: into our domestic politics in one way or yeah, and
Speaker 3: they don't like it.
Speaker 4: They don't want it.
Speaker 3: They were the subject of the impeachment against President Trump,
Speaker 3: They're the subject of all the Hunter Biden stuff.
Speaker 4: They're now the subject.
Speaker 3: They're the roadkill or the football that gets passed around
Speaker 3: when we're talking about immigration policy.
Speaker 2: And the argument here is we can't help someone else
Speaker 2: and their security until we help ourselves.
Speaker 3: That is the argument that the Republicans are making, and
Speaker 3: it's it seems to me, you know, you want We've
Speaker 3: been in Washington a long time.
Speaker 4: We see this almost every year.
Speaker 3: People raise the temperature on both sides, They go down
Speaker 3: to the last minute, and then they finally just stitch
Speaker 3: it together, pass a package and is done and then
Speaker 3: forget about it.
Speaker 2: Well, so what's the argument from Vladimir Zelenski today that
Speaker 2: maybe hasn't been heard already, is it that Putin will
Speaker 2: win if you don't pay, and then that's what lawmakers
Speaker 2: keep hearing. But it's not moving the.
Speaker 4: Needle here, No, it's not. It's not a new argument.
Speaker 3: It is a moral clarity argument that they are actually
Speaker 3: fighting for democracy, of fighting for freedom, against barbarianism, against
Speaker 3: war crimes, horrific things that the Russians have done and
Speaker 3: continue to do. And I guess one of the things
Speaker 3: that he'll be saying now is what we are seeing
Speaker 3: with hamas terrorism against Israel, it's very similar to what
Speaker 3: we saw with Russia against Ukraine, just on a larger scale.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about what's actually happening on the ground there
Speaker 2: By the way, we've been so focused on a debate overfunding,
Speaker 2: we've heard as well that the window could be closing
Speaker 2: in terms of military opportunity. But we're going into winter.
Speaker 2: And I believe it was General Mark Kimmitt who said
Speaker 2: on the program that that's actually a good thing for Ukraine,
Speaker 2: that it will slow things down, that it might actually
Speaker 2: be an opportunity if Ukraine should have a gap in funding.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 3: I think Mark is right on that the Ukrainians have
Speaker 3: tried to launch a substantial counter offensive. They got a
Speaker 3: little bit, but not very much. The Russian defenses have
Speaker 3: held pretty well. The Ukrainians have then turned toward longer range,
Speaker 3: precision guided attacks against logistics and infrastructure that are sustaining
Speaker 3: the Russian forces. If the weather then slows the Russians
Speaker 3: down in their attacks against Ukraine, they can get a
Speaker 3: little bit of a breather, and yet they keep the
Speaker 3: pressure on the Russian logistics through those precision guided attacks
Speaker 3: that actually could work the Ukraine's advantage and help them
Speaker 3: emerge from the winter a little bit better shape than
Speaker 3: the end.
Speaker 2: Now, if you went back twenty or thirty years, I
Speaker 2: know these questions are fun, and you went up on
Speaker 2: Capitol Hill and got all the Republicans in our ruin
Speaker 2: and said, hey, we've got we've decimated half the Russian military.
Speaker 2: A little bit more money, we could actually finish this job,
Speaker 2: and no Americans got involved. Would that not be sold?
Speaker 4: That would be in a heartbeat.
Speaker 3: I mean literally, less than five percent of the annual
Speaker 3: US defense budget has eliminated half of the Russian conventional
Speaker 3: military capability.
Speaker 2: Incredible.
Speaker 3: Ukrainian has done the best job of threat reduction of
Speaker 3: anyone from a US perspective.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So what does that leave Ukraine, however, still badly outnumbered.
Speaker 3: Well, if you think about the numbers here, Russia has
Speaker 3: poured about one hundred, one hundred and fifty billion into
Speaker 3: their war effort against Ukraine, the US and.
Speaker 4: The EU twenty.
Speaker 3: Two times the size of the Russian economy, and we've
Speaker 3: put in about the same amount.
Speaker 4: So that's why it's stuck.
Speaker 3: If we actually leaned into this, Russia would be on
Speaker 3: its back feet.
Speaker 2: It's an interesting oar that doesn't seem to be landing terribly.
Speaker 3: Well, it's not right now, it's not And I think
Speaker 3: one of the things, and again I point back to
Speaker 3: the Republican members in the House, people like Speaker Johnson
Speaker 3: have indicated that they want to bring it to the floor,
Speaker 3: they want to vote in favor, but they just want
Speaker 3: to hear clear answers. What is the goal, what's the
Speaker 3: strategy for achieving the goal, and what are the resources
Speaker 3: needed to do it so that we actually do it,
Speaker 3: And instead we get a lot of very vague statements
Speaker 3: like as long as it takes or what's it?
Speaker 4: What are we trying to do?
Speaker 2: Well, that's the call that we've been hearing from a
Speaker 2: number of senators here. There was a particular quote that
Speaker 2: I was looking for, and I'm not going to find it.
Speaker 2: But Speaker Johnson wants an endgame. Yeah, he wants to
Speaker 2: know what the strategy is that'll be different in twenty
Speaker 2: four than it wasn't twenty three. Is the administration capable
Speaker 2: of answering that or is that just the wrong question if.
Speaker 3: You asked, No, I think it's the right question, And
Speaker 3: I think what we see is the administration don't want
Speaker 3: to answer that because they don't want to talk about
Speaker 3: defeating Russia because of the risks of escalation, the risk
Speaker 3: of possible nuclear use. They don't want to get sucked
Speaker 3: into saying something that will then be used against them
Speaker 3: as saying, oh, you're getting as into World War III.
Speaker 4: So they just don't want to answer that.
Speaker 3: But I honestly believe that we do have to answer
Speaker 3: that we can help the Ukrainians defeat the Russian forces
Speaker 3: so that the war would end that way on better terms,
Speaker 3: and bring Ukraine into NATO as quickly as possible and
Speaker 3: stop the war, shut it down. I don't think that
Speaker 3: anyone really wants to see any nuclear use I don't
Speaker 3: think the Russian military wants that. I don't think Putin
Speaker 3: wants that. But as long as he thinks that they
Speaker 3: can win, and as long as we keep signaling that
Speaker 3: we'll never bring him into NATO, as long as the
Speaker 3: war's going on, that's an incentive for Putin to keep fighting.
Speaker 2: Could Ukraine win this war in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 4: It could, It could.
Speaker 3: I think it all depends on what happens inside Russia.
Speaker 3: They've lost over a hundred thousand lives fighting this war.
Speaker 3: That's an awful lot. And you think about the number
Speaker 3: of wounded. You think about the impact in Russian society.
Speaker 3: You think about the impact that sanctions have had on travel,
Speaker 3: on air travel, on Russians not able to use their
Speaker 3: credit cards when they travel abroad. I mean, this is
Speaker 3: a significant impact on the Russian society, and you just
Speaker 3: wonder how long they can sustain that.
Speaker 2: Well, we are wondering that, and of course a little
Speaker 2: lawmakers want to bet on a winner, right, They want
Speaker 2: someone to say we'll have this thing done by July.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I would flip that around.
Speaker 3: If I was talking to the lawmakers, I'd say, imagine
Speaker 3: a situation where Putin wins where Ukraine has defeated, the
Speaker 3: US and the West appear not to have had the
Speaker 3: will and the resolve to defend Ukraine and stop Putin
Speaker 3: from taking over another country. How is that going to
Speaker 3: go over anywhere in the world. What are the Iranians
Speaker 3: going to make of that? What are the Chinese going
Speaker 3: to make of that? What are the North Koreans going
Speaker 3: to make of that? You open the door to a
Speaker 3: lot more risk if you don't help Ukraine win.
Speaker 2: A great conversation. I'm so glad you could come in,
Speaker 2: former ambassador, great to see you, sir. You're always welcome
Speaker 2: here at the table at Bloomberg.
Speaker 4: And now we get to hear from the great Rick Davis.
Speaker 2: That's right, Former colleagues, that's right. Rick is here every
Speaker 2: day and he's joined by Jim Kessler. Today is we
Speaker 2: assemble our political panel for their take on all of this,
Speaker 2: Rick Davis, your thoughts today on the conversation that we're
Speaker 2: having and the impact that it might have. Remember, President
Speaker 2: Zelenski was here in person in September. He's going to
Speaker 2: be zooming into this meeting today. But a lot of folks,
Speaker 2: very high officials, ranking officials from Kiev are actually pressing
Speaker 2: flesh today on Capitol Hill in the Senate. Will it matter, Yeah,
Speaker 2: I think it matters.
Speaker 5: It mattered then when President Zelenski came a very well
Speaker 5: orchestrated trip. He's done this repeatedly at global confabs around
Speaker 5: the world, in other capitals in NATO, and so I
Speaker 5: give him immense credit for knowing who his friends are
Speaker 5: right making sure he spends the time and is senior
Speaker 5: leadership spend the time talking with answering questions for and
Speaker 5: representing how much value our money and weapons, systems and
Speaker 5: support mean to the Ukrainian people and to the war effort.
Speaker 5: That being said, I think, you know, bast Volker great
Speaker 5: shout out, thank you, Kurt. You know, he makes it
Speaker 5: a very critical point, which is that this is a
Speaker 5: very nuanced and managed message at this point right nobody
Speaker 5: is talking about how they get to an ultimate victory
Speaker 5: over Russia. They you know, it's it's one of these
Speaker 5: things where it's like, how do you sustain the battle
Speaker 5: without being too specific on what the ultimate endgame is.
Speaker 5: In other words, will you win in six months? Will
Speaker 5: this surge result in you know, regaining x amount of
Speaker 5: territory and and so we're in this period of time
Speaker 5: where uh, it's harder to pinpoint what the positive effects
Speaker 5: of our support are than it is to be able
Speaker 5: to talk about what the negative impact would be if
Speaker 5: we don't support Ukraine. And of course that's what we
Speaker 5: saw in that O m B language. It focused on
Speaker 5: here's the negative impact Congress that you're gonna have. You're
Speaker 5: going to reward Vladimir Putin if you don't get that
Speaker 5: money in the pipeline. So, uh, I think this is
Speaker 5: really a critical period of time. And I'm and I'm
Speaker 5: and I'm not surprised that that they are the Ukrainian
Speaker 5: officials are drawing parallels to the attacks uh from Hamas
Speaker 5: on Israel, because that is what's first of mine right now,
Speaker 5: it's still a fresh concept.
Speaker 2: And and and and.
Speaker 5: As as Ambassador Bolker said, it's just a it's a
Speaker 5: matter of scale. I mean, that same thing's happened uh
Speaker 5: in Ukraine, and it just happened uh longer and and
Speaker 5: and and impacted even more people.
Speaker 2: Jim Kessler, welcome back. It's good to see you, speaker.
Speaker 2: Mike Johnson tweets Republicans quote have legitimate concers yarns about
Speaker 2: the lack of a clear strategy in Ukraine, a path
Speaker 2: to resolving the conflict, or a plan for adequately ensuring
Speaker 2: accountability for aid unquote. What should be the answer to that?
Speaker 6: That's an unhelpful tweet. Let's just start with that. I
Speaker 6: thought what Ambassador Volker said was you know, very important
Speaker 6: and worth listening to. And the most important thing was
Speaker 6: imagine that Vladimir Putin wins. I mean, that is the
Speaker 6: case that you, you know, the Republicans need to hear. Look,
Speaker 6: I'm shocked and disappointed where a lot of elected Republicans are.
Speaker 6: There is a growing isolationist wing within the Republican Party
Speaker 6: that says that America is not an essential force for good,
Speaker 6: a military force for good out in the world. And
Speaker 6: we're seeing that in Ukraine. And you know, look, I
Speaker 6: think we all had greater hopes that the last six
Speaker 6: months would bring more gains.
Speaker 2: Take a quick breath on that, Jim, We're going to
Speaker 2: have much more time straight ahead with Jim Kesler and
Speaker 2: Rick Davis.
Speaker 1: You're listening to The Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch the
Speaker 1: program live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the
Speaker 1: tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com. And the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station, Just say Alexa, play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: And all Senators classified briefing is set for a bit
Speaker 2: later today, a briefing on Ukraine that will feature President
Speaker 2: Zelenski himself via zoom to make a last ditch pitch
Speaker 2: for funding. But Senators just got a whole bunch more
Speaker 2: news here. We're going to talk about this. We'll talk
Speaker 2: through all of it in fact with our panel, Jim
Speaker 2: Kesler from Third Way, Democratic analyst and Republican strategist, Rick Davis,
Speaker 2: BLOOMBERGOL contributors or with us here with breaking news now
Speaker 2: NBC and Politico both reporting that the coach relents, Senator
Speaker 2: Tommy Tuberville is releasing his holds. He's lifting his holds
Speaker 2: on a number of military promotions that of course have
Speaker 2: been held up for months here in his lone man
Speaker 2: protest against the abortion travel policy at the Pentagon details Now,
Speaker 2: this happened behind closed doors at a GOP lunch in
Speaker 2: a short time ago. Tubberville will release holds except for
Speaker 2: four stars. We actually told you about this in reporting
Speaker 2: a couple of weeks ago that this might be the
Speaker 2: off ramp, the form that this takes. Let them all go,
Speaker 2: but the four stars. Let these families who have been
Speaker 2: holding personal decisions, keeping kids out of school, not being
Speaker 2: able to move and so forth, let them go and
Speaker 2: get some movement here. This of course following a rule
Speaker 2: change that Senator Chuck Schumer brought forth. And that's where
Speaker 2: we'll start with our panel here, Jim Kessler. They said
Speaker 2: it would take Republicans to end this. Was it in
Speaker 2: fact Chuck Schumer that paved the road?
Speaker 4: Well he did.
Speaker 6: And you know, let's give credit to Mitch McConnell on
Speaker 6: this too, because you know he wanted this to end
Speaker 6: as well. Trooperville caved. Let's be clear, he should have
Speaker 6: caved six months ago. We have too many performance artists
Speaker 6: in the US Congress and in the US Senate right now.
Speaker 6: This was an absolute pointless waste of time for the
Speaker 6: United States Senate. Our military leaders did not need this.
Speaker 6: Congratulations to Chuck Schumer for you know, twisting his arms,
Speaker 6: and congratulations from Mitch McConnell for showing his impatience on this.
Speaker 2: What do you think, Rick Davis, We've talked about this
Speaker 2: a lot. We've even had Tommy Tuberville come on to
Speaker 2: defend his position. Here. Was it that rule change? Was
Speaker 2: it the threat of finally have Republicans point him in
Speaker 2: a different direction that changed his view? Yeah?
Speaker 5: Absolutely, I mean nothing else actually happened. In fact, as
Speaker 5: I understand from the reporting, he even said that the
Speaker 5: deal he would like to do is he'll lift the
Speaker 5: hold on four hundred nominations for confirmation. If Republicans chose
Speaker 5: to vote against the standing rule, that would have undermined
Speaker 5: his ability to block any of them. So look, I mean,
Speaker 5: nobody wanted to change the Senate rule. They shouldn't have
Speaker 5: had to. As Jim Kessler said that none of this
Speaker 5: should have been happening. Along the way, Tommy Tubberville, the coach,
Speaker 5: did a lot to diminish our military and his sort
Speaker 5: of performance art around abortion. And at the end of
Speaker 5: the day, he's not going to get anything other than
Speaker 5: now a group of four stars who have to cowtow
Speaker 5: to him in order to get their confirmations passed. I mean,
Speaker 5: why you would let four hundred nominations go forward and
Speaker 5: hold up the people who are most responsible for making
Speaker 5: the decisions about our country's security abroad and keep them
Speaker 5: locked up. It makes no sense. But nothing he has
Speaker 5: done on this issue has made much sense today.
Speaker 2: What is the point of that, Jim, Is that sort
Speaker 2: of the equivalent of the you know, the the top
Speaker 2: one percent, they're elitists or something. He's disparaged high ranking
Speaker 2: generals before saying they're staff does all the work is
Speaker 2: at the point of that delineation with the four stars.
Speaker 6: So you're asking me to get into the head of
Speaker 6: these senators Alabama here. It's not a place I generally
Speaker 6: try and tread. Look, I think he's trying to get
Speaker 6: some big leaf from showing that he's still standing on
Speaker 6: some sort of principle while he beats a belated but
Speaker 6: at this point haste to retreat. You know, there is
Speaker 6: this myth that there's wokeness in the arts and in
Speaker 6: the military that I think is that again, I think
Speaker 6: it plays on social media and on some cable channels,
Speaker 6: and you know, we just have too much, too many
Speaker 6: people playing to the bleachers on this in the United
Speaker 6: States Senate. And he backed down ninety five percent of
Speaker 6: the way, you know, hopefully back down the other five
Speaker 6: percent when you know there's there's no victory for him
Speaker 6: to find here.
Speaker 2: Well, I wonder what plane of the bleachers means for
Speaker 2: border reform here, Rick, because that's what we were getting
Speaker 2: to at the top of the hour. Here this pitch
Speaker 2: from top brass in Ukraine trying to unlock funding here
Speaker 2: in the US, having heard from the White House that
Speaker 2: they're out of money. We're all out of money in
Speaker 2: funding this war effort by the end of the year.
Speaker 2: It all hinges on a border deal, though we know that,
Speaker 2: and the language from those who are directly involved is remarkable.
Speaker 2: Senator corn And to NBC News, this is not a
Speaker 2: traditional negotiation. This is a price that has to be
Speaker 2: paid in order to get the supplemental. They're not interested
Speaker 2: in dancing with Democrats here. They want a certain measure
Speaker 2: of reform here that's going to have to unlock the
Speaker 2: Ukraine money. Speaker Johnson says, it's HR two or nothing. Now,
Speaker 2: look at Jim Langford, Republican, who's leading the negotiations. He says,
Speaker 2: we're going to get it resolved. But I'm got to
Speaker 2: pick up twenty senators, twenty Democrats rather in the Senate
Speaker 2: to get to sixty. Chris Murphy says, I understand the
Speaker 2: consequences of the tactic Republicans have decided to use, and
Speaker 2: it's Vladimir Putin marching into Europe. Does this sound like
Speaker 2: we're close to a deal? Rick, Yeah, it actually does.
Speaker 4: That means there's press rise.
Speaker 5: Just a couple of days ago we were talking about
Speaker 5: they killed the negotiation. On Friday, everybody went home. We
Speaker 5: thought there'd be progress.
Speaker 2: There wasn't.
Speaker 5: Now after twenty four hours in town, we've got all
Speaker 5: these different scenarios and ironically, none of them have anything
Speaker 5: to do with the policy that Republicans are trying to
Speaker 5: get embedded. It's like, how do you count votes? And look,
Speaker 5: this is how Washington works. It used to be called
Speaker 5: a trade.
Speaker 2: I'll give you.
Speaker 5: What you want if you give me what I want,
Speaker 5: and we'll call that a deal.
Speaker 2: Now it's called extortion.
Speaker 5: If you want funding for Ukraine and for Israel and
Speaker 5: for Taiwan, then you have to give me my southern
Speaker 5: border funding the way I want it and the rules
Speaker 5: that go along with it. I actually think this is
Speaker 5: a positive. It's a crappy way to do business. Welcome
Speaker 5: to Washington. But if we could get border security or
Speaker 5: some you know, sort of manifestation of that along with
Speaker 5: funding these important fights that the West is endorsed. You know,
Speaker 5: I'll take it as I can get it, As ambassad
Speaker 5: Volker said, if you got that bill in front of
Speaker 5: the House, it doesn't matter what the speaker says. They're
Speaker 5: three hundred and fifty votes. They're going to say, let's
Speaker 5: go forward.
Speaker 2: Isn't that something Jim Kesseler, you worked for Chuck Schumer,
Speaker 2: maybe you can get into his bran a little bit here,
Speaker 2: because Jim Langford, who's actually touching Democrats, he's he's actually
Speaker 2: dealing with this in a real way and leading negotiations,
Speaker 2: says HR two did not get a single Democrat vote
Speaker 2: in the House. So what does Chuck Schumer think he
Speaker 2: can sell Democrats in the Senate.
Speaker 6: Well, let me just say first, I think Rick Davis
Speaker 6: is right. I looked at this blow up and by
Speaker 6: first thought was I think they're getting close to a deal.
Speaker 6: I mean, it's always darkest before the dawn. And you
Speaker 6: know the truth is is that the right people are
Speaker 6: in the room on this. And you know Chris Murphy
Speaker 6: is the right Democrat. Pearston cinema former Democrat now and independent.
Speaker 6: She's the right person in the room. The Republicans there,
Speaker 6: Langford and others like they're the right people, and this
Speaker 6: feels like something is going to get done, and you know,
Speaker 6: I think Schumer probably feels this way as well. I
Speaker 6: just want to say though, on the border, that look,
Speaker 6: Republicans have always had an advantage on this issue because
Speaker 6: if nothing gets done, if there's chaos at the border,
Speaker 6: it benefits Republicans politically, and that's been the way it's
Speaker 6: been for over twenty years now. So they get to
Speaker 6: play a stronger hand on this and force Democratic concessions
Speaker 6: because walking away bears very little price for them. But
Speaker 6: I'm fairly optimistic that we're going to get something done,
Speaker 6: more so than I was forty eight hours ago.
Speaker 2: Does it include actual asylum law changed?
Speaker 6: Jim My guess is though will be some asylum law changes.
Speaker 6: I mean, there's plenty of Democrats who agree that there
Speaker 6: needs to be some changes to asylum. And you need
Speaker 6: to create a system that is you know, fair, fast
Speaker 6: and final with asylum. But it has to be fair
Speaker 6: and it has to be you know, a coherent, fast system.
Speaker 6: It can't be a complete closed door, which some Republicans want.
Speaker 6: Their asylum is legit, but it does need reforms.
Speaker 2: I hope people appreciate what we have going here on
Speaker 2: this program. These are two individuals in Jim and Rick,
Speaker 2: who have actually been in the room for these kind
Speaker 2: of negotiations. You can find a lot of places where
Speaker 2: we'll have a panel scream at each other and get nowhere,
Speaker 2: but these are the real insights.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound On podcast. Catch us
Speaker 1: live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app, and the Bloomberg Business app, or listen on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2: Senator Tommy Tuberville and his single man blockade against military
Speaker 2: promotions and protest of the panic on abortion travel policy,
Speaker 2: which we've talked about endlessly here on this program. He
Speaker 2: appears to be buckling the pressure from within his own party,
Speaker 2: knowing that there was a rule change that would allow
Speaker 2: them to move these promotions on block and Chuck Schumer
Speaker 2: now says that he does plan to move military promotions
Speaker 2: as soon as possible. It's not all of them, though,
Speaker 2: Tuberville says he's lifting the hold on all promotions shy
Speaker 2: of four star generals, and we're trying to get our
Speaker 2: heads around the logic there, but this is moving as
Speaker 2: we have a grand debate over border security underway here,
Speaker 2: a big ask on Ukraine, as we talked about earlier.
Speaker 2: President Zelenski speaking remotely with senators and classified all senators
Speaker 2: briefing today, and we have a lot to talk about
Speaker 2: with Stephanie Murphy, the former congresswoman from Florida, is with us,
Speaker 2: who of course served on the January sixth committee. Back
Speaker 2: with us at the table today in Washington. Welcome back
Speaker 2: to the capital. It's lovely to have you, and it's
Speaker 2: good to see you. I didn't think i'd be talking
Speaker 2: about Tommy Talk reveal today. And I know that you
Speaker 2: have a background at the Defense Department, and it's something
Speaker 2: we discussed before in a state of course that you
Speaker 2: represented teaming with veterans and active members of the military.
Speaker 2: Why would you stop at four stars? Do you get that?
Speaker 7: I don't actually get it, and I think it's incredibly
Speaker 7: damaging to our Defense Department, but also to our national security.
Speaker 7: We are in a situation where we have a ground
Speaker 7: war in Europe, we have war in the Middle East.
Speaker 7: We need leadership in those post like yesterday, and so
Speaker 7: I've never really understood why he wanted to hold those
Speaker 7: things up, putting our national security at jeopardy for his
Speaker 7: own personal political motives.
Speaker 2: Well, you know, even when we asked him here at Bloomberg,
Speaker 2: he seemed to kind of resent the upper ranks of
Speaker 2: the military as being elitist, is relying on staff. They
Speaker 2: don't do a lot, They didn't get a lot done. Anyway,
Speaker 2: he was quoted as saying, never mind the whole wokeism
Speaker 2: and all of that, is that what this is some
Speaker 2: kind of poke at elitism in the military.
Speaker 7: You know, if you work at the Department of Defense,
Speaker 7: you know that the general officers and the flag officers
Speaker 7: provide incredible leadership. And our system of leadership in our
Speaker 7: military is the advantage that we have over a lot
Speaker 7: of our adversaries. You know, when you look at the
Speaker 7: Russian War, like they talk about how Russia's army is
Speaker 7: basically failing because they don't have good military leadership. So
Speaker 7: I don't think that he's right in criticizing our flag
Speaker 7: and general officer ranks. They provide important role in both
Speaker 7: the Department and as well as out in the field.
Speaker 2: Well, I felt like it's worth asking someone who's actually
Speaker 2: done this before, because you hear a lot from folks
Speaker 2: who have never served, never worked for DoD and it's
Speaker 2: an easy target. Sometimes. In the case of Tommy Teberville,
Speaker 2: you wonder if this chink in the armor, it's more
Speaker 2: than that. Obviously more than half of the promotions he's
Speaker 2: been holding up or being lifted. But maybe this leads
Speaker 2: to him to stand down altogether. Republicans be the ones
Speaker 2: to make that happen.
Speaker 7: I certainly hope so. Republicans for so long have wrapped
Speaker 7: themselves in the American flag. Supposedly, the people who support
Speaker 7: the military, support law enforcement, are supposed to be strong
Speaker 7: on national security. For them to have somebody who's never
Speaker 7: served in uniform, might I stand in the way of
Speaker 7: these confirmations, is really kind of shameful. I'm glad that
Speaker 7: they've finally approved enough pressure on him that he's standing down,
Speaker 7: but he needs to stand all the way down and
Speaker 7: allow the four stars to get confirmed as well.
Speaker 2: It's pretty remarkable how long this has been going on for.
Speaker 2: There's a lot more to talk about, as I mentioned here,
Speaker 2: and boy, it must be days like these you missed
Speaker 2: the job. I say that sarcastically, because we've got a
Speaker 2: lot on the line, and it's riding on a deal
Speaker 2: on border security. We spent the last hour with Jim
Speaker 2: Kessler and Rick Davis, who both were encouraged by some
Speaker 2: of the rhetoric, the frustration, the exasperation that we're hearing
Speaker 2: from members on both sides, suggesting that that is used
Speaker 2: the darkest before dawn kind of moment here. What are
Speaker 2: you hearing from your former colleagues and having been in
Speaker 2: the middle of this yourself, are we capable of doing
Speaker 2: this right now?
Speaker 7: Well, the Congress is so narrowly held, both in the
Speaker 7: Senate and in the House, and the House has demonstrated
Speaker 7: that it is quite chaotic, this Congress, So is it
Speaker 7: capable of anything.
Speaker 2: It's kind of figure outw to fund the government, that's.
Speaker 7: Right, and they've kicked that can down the road into
Speaker 7: next year. But they're really trying to focus on this
Speaker 7: supplemental that addresses Israel and Indo Pacific as well as
Speaker 7: Ukraine and border security. But you have to have people
Speaker 7: who are willing to negotiate and to get to yes.
Speaker 7: And my understanding is over the weekend, the Republicans doubled
Speaker 7: down on positions that just aren't going to be palatable
Speaker 7: and aren't in a place of moving off of those
Speaker 7: or even trying to find common ground. Hopefully, as we
Speaker 7: get closer to the day that they get to leave
Speaker 7: for the holiday, that will create some pressure and get
Speaker 7: people in a more positive mood maybe willing to negotiate.
Speaker 2: So what's the fault line for Democrats? Because we're hearing
Speaker 2: from members, particularly those who might be up for reelection,
Speaker 2: that they might be open to changes to asylum law
Speaker 2: in principle, changes to parole that allow the president to
Speaker 2: make humanitarian exceptions might be a bridge too far. Where
Speaker 2: are the fault lines in this?
Speaker 7: You know, I think any changes in the policy has
Speaker 7: to also begin with bolstering our actual border security. So
Speaker 7: none of the programs that we have in place for
Speaker 7: people to seek asylum or legal status in the United
Speaker 7: States really work unless we actually know who's coming in
Speaker 7: and out. And so that's really the first line that
Speaker 7: they have to be able to agree on, is that
Speaker 7: some amount of resources for border security, and then we
Speaker 7: can look at changing our programs and creating legal pathways,
Speaker 7: whether that's asylum or an expanded visa program. And you know,
Speaker 7: we're really starting to talk about maybe a little more
Speaker 7: comprehensive immigration reform that has all of those free elements,
Speaker 7: which would be you don't have enough time for that.
Speaker 2: We've been waiting a generation for that to happen. There
Speaker 2: was a quote from John Cornyn that jumped off the
Speaker 2: page to me in a conversation with NBC News. This
Speaker 2: is not a traditional negotiation. This is a price that
Speaker 2: has to be paid in order to get the supplemental
Speaker 2: which sounds like extortion.
Speaker 7: You know, this is something that happens in Washington all
Speaker 7: the time. When there is broad five partisan support, as
Speaker 7: there is for Ukraine funding or Israel funding, it becomes
Speaker 7: a leverage point for something that has a little less
Speaker 7: support and is a little more difficult. And I think
Speaker 7: that's why you see the supplemental funding lumped together with
Speaker 7: border security.
Speaker 2: Well, so maybe this is an opportunity, though maybe I
Speaker 2: don't know if you're optimistic about this or not. Do
Speaker 2: we flip this around and say that this is in
Speaker 2: fact an opportunity to finally unlock an agreement on border
Speaker 2: funding because of the urgency behind Ukraine and Israel.
Speaker 7: I certainly hope. So I'm an optimist, and I think that,
Speaker 7: you know, maybe one of the interesting outcome of having
Speaker 7: such narrowly held congresses and divided government is a push
Speaker 7: to more bipartisanship because you can't get it done with
Speaker 7: just one party anymore.
Speaker 2: Sure right, Wouldn't Democrats love to go on the trail
Speaker 2: this year though, and say, hey, we helped to solve
Speaker 2: the border crisis.
Speaker 7: I think they need toy. The president needs this. He
Speaker 7: needs to not only be able to have a win
Speaker 7: as it relates to foreign policy and national security, but
Speaker 7: also domestic border security.
Speaker 2: Your governor in Florida certainly talks about it a lot.
Speaker 2: Sure would would that take the teeth out of that
Speaker 2: argument for Joe Biden even in the presidential campaign trail,
Speaker 2: because he'll have to face this one way or the other.
Speaker 7: I think it would defang at least one of the
Speaker 7: attack lines against him. I think the American people feel
Speaker 7: both some economic insecurity as well as some physical insecurity,
Speaker 7: and this would at least address the physical security part
Speaker 7: in some measure if they felt like we were addressing
Speaker 7: the border security issues.
Speaker 2: Do you believe the administration that Ukraine is out of money?
Speaker 2: Who were out of time?
Speaker 8: You know?
Speaker 7: I believe that Congress likes to test those deadlines.
Speaker 2: You know when they test.
Speaker 9: I'm not sure I.
Speaker 7: Would, but I'm somebody who believes in supporting our allies
Speaker 7: and fighting against authoritarians. But that's what you know. Congress
Speaker 7: works best when it has a deadline, and they've put
Speaker 7: that deadline out at the end of the year. Hopefully
Speaker 7: they can clear this out of the way so that
Speaker 7: when they come back from the holiday break they can
Speaker 7: focus on appropriations.
Speaker 2: Funding concept, actual spending bills. Congresswoman, how dare you? We're
Speaker 2: spending time with Stephanie Murphy, the congresswoman from Florida. Mike
Speaker 2: Johnson speaking today the Speaker of the House about the
Speaker 2: January sixth committee, and I thought, okay, well, we need
Speaker 2: to get the congresswoman's reaction to this. I don't know
Speaker 2: if you heard what he said, but a couple of
Speaker 2: days ago he decided to release all of the security
Speaker 2: footage from January sixth. Today he implied that more needs
Speaker 2: to be done to obscure the faces of the rioters
Speaker 2: before the rest is released, so they are not somehow
Speaker 2: targeted by DOJ And he went on to say this
Speaker 2: about the work of the committee. This is literally just
Speaker 2: a couple of hours ago. Speaker Mike Johnson, I think.
Speaker 8: The January sixth committee was a partisan exercise. They claimed
Speaker 8: that it was bipartisan, but I think we all recognized
Speaker 8: that the two Republican members that served on that committee
Speaker 8: had another agenda. I think that what we got was
Speaker 8: a biased report. I think they hit some of the
Speaker 8: important evidence. And look, we want the American people to
Speaker 8: draw their own conclusions.
Speaker 2: And they will by hearing conversations like these, So I
Speaker 2: want you to react or respond the way that you
Speaker 2: see fit. But knowing that Mike Johnson tried to help
Speaker 2: overturn the twenty twenty election results in writing that amicus
Speaker 2: brief on the Texas case, what is he trying to
Speaker 2: do here?
Speaker 7: You know, it's really deeply disappointing that the Speaker of
Speaker 7: the House is trying to shield people who actually attacked
Speaker 7: the House in the Capitol physically on January sixth. But
Speaker 7: it isn't surprising, as you said, he was a part
Speaker 7: of one of the efforts to overturn the outcome of
Speaker 7: a free and fair election. But it should underscore for
Speaker 7: Americans the importance of this coming election. Imagine if on
Speaker 7: January sixth, we have a Speaker Johnson with the gabble,
Speaker 7: and he's able to delay the certification of presidential which
Speaker 7: was what they tried to do on January sixth. The
Speaker 7: purpose was to delay the certification. I think we'd be
Speaker 7: in a lot of trouble as a democracy. And so,
Speaker 7: you know, we are seeing signs all over the place
Speaker 7: how important this next election is. And I know everybody
Speaker 7: always says this is the most important election for years,
Speaker 7: every four years, but I honestly.
Speaker 2: Was more important every four years.
Speaker 7: Why well, when we're looking at the possibility of walking
Speaker 7: ourselves into electing a dictator or somebody who intends to
Speaker 7: use authoritarian means to govern. You know, I believe the
Speaker 7: former present when he says he will seek retribution when
Speaker 7: he lives up to the things that he promises that
Speaker 7: he's going to do. And so I think that's a
Speaker 7: really a dangerous situation to put our democracy.
Speaker 2: You think reelecting Donald Trump is electing a dictator.
Speaker 7: He has made statements about how he plans on using
Speaker 7: his power, about how he plans on changing the Department
Speaker 7: of Justice, about how he plans on going after political opponents.
Speaker 2: You think it meets that definition.
Speaker 7: I definitely think it has shades of authoritarianism and definitely
Speaker 7: is not democratic democratic.
Speaker 2: Let me push it a step further. Liz Cheney was
Speaker 2: on TV this morning, and her book has been quite
Speaker 2: the trove of over the past couple of days. The
Speaker 2: book just being released today, I believe. She was asked
Speaker 2: by NBC News if Donald Trump was elected, if he
Speaker 2: would ever leave, if you would attempt to overstay his term.
Speaker 2: She said one hundred percent yes, that if he is
Speaker 2: re elected, he will try to hold onto power as
Speaker 2: long as possible and never leave the White House. Do
Speaker 2: you agree with that?
Speaker 7: You might remember that the former president remarked in awe
Speaker 7: at President She's ability to make himself stay in.
Speaker 2: Power for rests Stump speech now right.
Speaker 7: And so in January sixth was an attempt to stay.
Speaker 7: The difference was that there were people involved who stood
Speaker 7: up to him, Republicans primarily, who wouldn't let their commitment
Speaker 7: to him override their commitment to this country. I'm not
Speaker 7: sure we'll be so lucky the next time.
Speaker 2: It must be strange for you to rationalize the work
Speaker 2: that you did on the January sixth Committee as a
Speaker 2: career defining moment. You can correct me if I'm wrong.
Speaker 2: You've been lauded for it. You'll be awarded again for
Speaker 2: it tomorrow in New York. To rationalize that with what
Speaker 2: you're hearing from the Speaker of the House today was
Speaker 2: such an extreme contrast.
Speaker 7: You know, to me, my service on January sixth was
Speaker 7: a patriotic thing to do. I love this country, and
Speaker 7: I know you know you fight hard in campaigns for
Speaker 7: your team to win, but when you don't, you accept
Speaker 7: the loss and you have a peaceful transfer of power.
Speaker 7: That's core to maintaining our democracy is a peaceful transfer
Speaker 7: of power. And I couldn't believe that, as somebody who
Speaker 7: had escaped a country that made political transitions through violence,
Speaker 7: that I found myself on January sixth hiding in the
Speaker 7: basement of the Capitol while my fellow Americans ransacked the
Speaker 7: building in an effort to overturn the elections. So my
Speaker 7: service on January sixth was my patriotic duty to shed
Speaker 7: light on what happened and to ensure that it never
Speaker 7: happens again.
Speaker 2: Incredible. I appreciate your answering that the way you did.
Speaker 2: Stephanie Murphy, the former congresswoman Democrat from Florida, thank you
Speaker 2: for always being with us when you come to Washington.
Speaker 2: It's great to see you again. I've bet a great Thanksgiving.
Speaker 2: Happy new You're in advance if we don't see it
Speaker 2: before then, but we'll try to fix that. I'm Joe
Speaker 2: Matthew on the fastest show in Politics. Stay with us
Speaker 2: US here on the radio, on the satellite, and on YouTube.
Speaker 2: This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch the
Speaker 1: program live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the
Speaker 1: tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: Not a very fun day in the classroom for the
Speaker 2: presidents of some of America's top universities today, including Harvard.
Speaker 2: This hearing underway on Capitol Hill that we told you
Speaker 2: about with the presidents of Harvard, Mit, and Penn. It
Speaker 2: has to do with anti semitism on campus, and you
Speaker 2: can imagine where lawmakers are going on this. They've received
Speaker 2: enormous criticism for the language and the actions that we've
Speaker 2: heard and seen from pro Palestinian protesters on these campuses.
Speaker 2: Here's a taste with Harvard President Gay, who is speaking
Speaker 2: with at least Dephonic earlier, Claudine Gay of Harvard. Again
Speaker 2: with your counterparts from pen and mights he here's Stephonic
Speaker 2: and Gay in the hearing earlier.
Speaker 10: I will say again that type of hateful speech is
Speaker 10: personally abhorrent to me.
Speaker 11: Do you believe that type of hateful speech is contrary
Speaker 11: to Harvard's code of conduct? Or is it allowed at Harvard?
Speaker 10: It is at odds with the values of Harvard.
Speaker 11: Can you not say here that it is against the
Speaker 11: code of conduct at Harvard?
Speaker 10: We embrace a commitment to free expression, even of views
Speaker 10: that are objectionable, offensive, hateful. It's when that speech crosses
Speaker 10: into conduct that violates our policies against bullying.
Speaker 11: Does that speech not cost that barrier? Does that speech
Speaker 11: not call for the genocide of Jews and the elimination
Speaker 11: of Israel.
Speaker 2: That's more of what I expect here, and we could
Speaker 2: keep going with it as we introduce Wendy Benjamins into
Speaker 2: the conversation of Chris Bloomberg's senior Washington editor in a
Speaker 2: regular voice here on the program. This is an interesting
Speaker 2: exercise because I'm not sure anything comes of it. Will
Speaker 2: there be new policies or is this just a public
Speaker 2: scolding from some angry lawmakers.
Speaker 9: Well, that's what the lawmakers exactly are saying, is that
Speaker 9: these are very nice words that doctor Gay and the
Speaker 9: others are saying that they don't tolerate hate speech, and
Speaker 9: they don't tolerate their students feeling threatened, etc.
Speaker 10: Etc.
Speaker 9: But Okay, then what's next seems to be the big
Speaker 9: question here? Are they going to institute policies? And there's
Speaker 9: a very fine line between instituting policies against threatening speech
Speaker 9: and squelching the freedom of speech on a university campus
Speaker 9: where one is supposed to be able to air all
Speaker 9: the views. So I don't envy being in the presidence
Speaker 9: of the university's shoes. On the other hand, right outside
Speaker 9: the hearing room, as our field producer Tyler Kendall was
Speaker 9: telling us, there were it was incredibly angry and like
Speaker 9: pre fight pushing and stuff like that from pro Palestinian
Speaker 9: protesters at pro Israeli protesters. So it was going on
Speaker 9: in real time just outside the door.
Speaker 2: Yeah, really incredible optics here, And you wonder if it's
Speaker 2: not lawmakers who will end up make a difference, but
Speaker 2: very wealthy alumni right who are not only protesting think
Speaker 2: of Bill Ackman, think of even Mitt Romney, but pulling
Speaker 2: back on money.
Speaker 9: Right, some of them, who are some of the best
Speaker 9: grassroots fundraisers for these universities, have decided, I mean in
Speaker 9: terms of collecting other alumni donations and giving them. They
Speaker 9: are down to one dollar donations in protests. And then
Speaker 9: while this hearing was going on, a group of U
Speaker 9: Penn students sued the university in a Philadelphia court for
Speaker 9: not doing enough to protect them on campus. So it's
Speaker 9: just a very very tense and difficult. This is almost
Speaker 9: the culmination of what's been happening on campuses for a while. Yes,
Speaker 9: as a lot of views are being heard, the word
Speaker 9: you didn't always be heard on campuses.
Speaker 2: Listen to Penn's Liz McGill. Everyone has their own approach
Speaker 2: here and how she interacted with lawmakers today.
Speaker 12: This is from opening Anti Semitism, an old, viral and
Speaker 12: pernicious evil has been steadily rising in our society, and
Speaker 12: these world events have dramatically accelerated that surge. Few places
Speaker 12: have proven immune, including Philadelphia and campuses like ours. This
Speaker 12: is unacceptable. We immediately investigate any hateful act, cooperating with
Speaker 12: both law enforcement and the FBI. Where we have identified
Speaker 12: individuals who've committed these acts in violation of either policy
Speaker 12: or law, we initiate disciplinary proceedings and engage law enforcement.
Speaker 2: Isn't that a more effective message? Here's the action which.
Speaker 9: Takes Yes, that is a much just what I was
Speaker 9: thinking before you as that much more effective message, much
Speaker 9: more calming congress down, much more calming down. And what
Speaker 9: they really don't want is any federal oversight or pulling
Speaker 9: back of grants or things like that that these that
Speaker 9: I mean, this is a pocketbook issue for these universities,
Speaker 9: not only alumni donations as we mentioned earlier, but students
Speaker 9: not wanting to go there, and then of course the
Speaker 9: federal government pulling back on on any large ass they
Speaker 9: give they give the university. So yes, I think here's
Speaker 9: what I'm going to do about it. Isn't better response.
Speaker 2: We'll see what comes, if anything, of this hearing and
Speaker 2: talk about it with our pal Wendy Benjaminson. But it's
Speaker 2: a debate. We're looking forward to tomorrow night. We got
Speaker 2: the lineup only for this time, right. Actually, this is terrible.
Speaker 2: I had to stop and think, well, wait, who else
Speaker 2: was there?
Speaker 11: Was?
Speaker 2: Tim Scott?
Speaker 9: Was Tim Scott the last time?
Speaker 2: I don't know if that makes a difference for any
Speaker 2: of these four. It's going to be DeSantis, Haley, Christy Ramaswami.
Speaker 2: What's the strategy for any of them?
Speaker 1: Is this?
Speaker 2: I mean, who's watching? Does it matter? This is the
Speaker 2: big race for second big deal right.
Speaker 9: Right exactly our college Philip Bump and the Washington Post
Speaker 9: had a headline today that said, Nikki Haley surges dot
Speaker 9: dot dot to double digits.
Speaker 2: You know, this is to thirty points behind Trump, right.
Speaker 9: I think there is still benefit in hearing from the alternatives.
Speaker 9: You know, Trump is on a glide path to win
Speaker 9: Iowa and go on and on and win the nomination.
Speaker 9: On the other hand, the governor endorsed somebody else. Nikki
Speaker 9: Hilly is doing well in New Hampshire. There is a
Speaker 9: lot of discomfit among you know, Republicans with Donald Trump,
Speaker 9: and so if they are looking for an alternative. Okay,
Speaker 9: your chart shows Hally as ten percent to Donald Trumps
Speaker 9: sixty one. You know, maybe there's twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 2: After and that's nationally realizing she's doing better in New
Speaker 2: Hampshire she's doing. You know. Alan Lickman was calling us
Speaker 2: out on Balance of Power last evening for being part
Speaker 2: of essentially a media narrative that this is some sort
Speaker 2: of mainstream media narrative that there's no real difference between
Speaker 2: what Nikki Haley and Ronda Santis are doing. They're both
Speaker 2: losing badly to Donald Trump.
Speaker 9: Well at the moment they are. But he does have
Speaker 9: a point that let's see what happens when the votes
Speaker 9: are taken.
Speaker 2: Yes, but do you qualify momentum as a real thing,
Speaker 2: because that's what we're talking about here.
Speaker 9: Well, yeah, I mean momentum works until it doesn't, right,
Speaker 9: I mean he has momentum and then he could say
Speaker 9: something as she has. She does have moments.
Speaker 2: Described as a wounded bird if you asked right.
Speaker 9: Right, he is getting. The attention he's getting is increasingly negative.
Speaker 9: The attention she is getting Haley is increasingly positive. She
Speaker 9: has also got the benefit of people who are looking
Speaker 9: whose primary goal is to stop Donald Trump from coming
Speaker 9: back to the White House, and it doesn't really matter
Speaker 9: to them who it is as long as it's not
Speaker 9: Donald Trump. Jamie Diamond was suggesting that even Democrats give
Speaker 9: to Nicki Haley, and I think Reid Hoffman today gave
Speaker 9: to Nicki Haley two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. That's
Speaker 9: not jump change. And so you know, yes, I guess
Speaker 9: she does have momentum. The question is will it be
Speaker 9: enough to beat him in a significant state of course,
Speaker 9: right after New Hampshire for the Republicans of South Carolina,
Speaker 9: her home state.
Speaker 2: And a chance to codify what may.
Speaker 9: Have just happened right exactly. With Tim Scott out of
Speaker 9: the running, he was the South Carolina Senator. That could
Speaker 9: be that South Carolinians will come around for her. On
Speaker 9: the other hand, he got tremendously cheered at a stadium
Speaker 9: in South Carolina a couple of weeks ago.
Speaker 2: I have to ask you, Wendy, while you're with us,
Speaker 2: about whether young people are showing up. This new youth
Speaker 2: vote poll from Harvard the Institute for Politics pretty interesting. Here.
Speaker 2: It finds just forty nine percent of eighteen to twenty
Speaker 2: nine year olds definitely planned to vote for president forty
Speaker 2: nine percent. That's down from fifty seven percent in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 12: Was good.
Speaker 2: One Hispanic Americans had the steepest drop Black American Young
Speaker 2: Black American voter's second steepest. They've basically ruled out both
Speaker 2: of these old guys. As they see it, they are
Speaker 2: what we called double haters. That's right, Okay, if you're
Speaker 2: looking at eighteen to thirty year olds, though, that's coming
Speaker 2: out of Joe Biden's side, if anywhere, it.
Speaker 9: Is largely coming out of Joe Biden's height. I'm sure
Speaker 9: there are young people to support Donald Trump, but yes,
Speaker 9: mostly the reason they turned out so much in twenty
Speaker 9: sixteen and twenty twenty, well, first let's start at they
Speaker 9: turned out incredibly in two thousand and eight to elect
Speaker 9: Barack Obama because that was going to be part of history,
Speaker 9: and it's fun to be part of history. But twenty
Speaker 9: sixteen and twenty twenty, it was an anti Trump movement,
Speaker 9: and Biden seemed like their kind of guy, and he
Speaker 9: promised a lot of things on climate and student loans
Speaker 9: and all these things. Well, here we are four years later,
Speaker 9: and the bill has come due, and we have an
Speaker 9: eighty one year old Democratic president and a seventy eight
Speaker 9: year old likely challenger and people eighteen to thirty. I mean,
Speaker 9: these guys are their grandparents' age. They just don't see
Speaker 9: they don't see politics the same way. They don't see
Speaker 9: the world the same way. They've grown up in a
Speaker 9: completely different world than these guys did, and so yes,
Speaker 9: I think their thought is forget it, I'll just stay home,
Speaker 9: which is terrible because we need their voice here.
Speaker 2: We are, I guess six months to a year. But
Speaker 2: the bill has come due, boy, and Wendy has receipts.
Speaker 2: It's great to see you as always, Wendy Benjamins in
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Washington, Senior Editor. Thanks for listening to the Sound
Speaker 2: On podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already,
Speaker 2: at Apple, Spotify and anywhere else you get your podcasts,
Speaker 2: and you can find us live every weekday from Washington,
Speaker 2: DC at one pm Eastern Time at Bloomberg dot com.