Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 2: us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play
Speaker 2: and then droud Otto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen
Speaker 2: on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us
Speaker 2: live on YouTube.
Speaker 3: This is the Monday edition of Balance of Power. Thank
Speaker 3: you for joining us on Bloomberg TV and radio. But
Speaker 3: of course this isn't just like any other Monday. This
Speaker 3: is the Monday when we are marking one year since
Speaker 3: the October seventh attack on Israel by Hamas, and of
Speaker 3: course over the course of the last twelve months we
Speaker 3: have seen ongoing war between Israel and Hamas. In Gaza,
Speaker 3: Hamas firing fresh fire at Israel today, largely those missile
Speaker 3: Senate Tel Aviv were intercepted. But of course we also
Speaker 3: are seeing Joe not no longer just fighting in Gaza,
Speaker 3: but other regions as well, as Israel is continuing to
Speaker 3: conduct its strike operations in southern Webin against Hesbla, another
Speaker 3: Iranian proxy.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's right. We've continued to see across border skirmishes
Speaker 4: and air strikes against Beirut, but also Hamas firing rockets
Speaker 4: at Israel from Gaza. So the fact that we are
Speaker 4: at this solemn date does not mean that fighting is
Speaker 4: stopping or even pausing here. And we want to talk
Speaker 4: about this with Nick Watdams, who runs our national security
Speaker 4: coverage here out of Washington. It's great to see you, Nick.
Speaker 4: This is a precarious moment and I wonder what this
Speaker 4: day means for Iran and the proxies that have been
Speaker 4: attacking Israel.
Speaker 5: Well, there's so many uncertainties right now. I mean, the
Speaker 5: big issue obviously is that Israel has threatened to retaliate
Speaker 5: against Iran after its missile barrage a week ago, so
Speaker 5: we are all waiting to see what happens. Obviously, the
Speaker 5: signals are very cloudy. We don't really know what Israel
Speaker 5: will do, how severe they will go. But also given
Speaker 5: the fact, as you mentioned, they are essentially keeping up
Speaker 5: attacks on Hamas and has Bela, So you know, just
Speaker 5: saw an alert come across the system that Israel is
Speaker 5: telling people to move out of some of the coastal
Speaker 5: southern areas in Lebanon in advance of likely strikes there.
Speaker 5: So it looks like the Israeli attacks on has Belah
Speaker 5: are only widening, you know, I think it's just an
Speaker 5: extraordinarily said and a challenging moment to think that, you know,
Speaker 5: this all started a year ago, and here we are.
Speaker 5: This campaign is getting even more intense as Israel looks
Speaker 5: to eliminate Hamas and his bluff.
Speaker 2: For good well.
Speaker 3: And this also marks a full year being held hostage
Speaker 3: for many individuals that are still being held by Hamas.
Speaker 3: Obviously there has been domestic pressure on Netanyahu to reach
Speaker 3: some kind of agreement to bring those hostages home. Do
Speaker 3: we have a sense of whether or not that is
Speaker 3: moving forward at all, as we're still seeing the fighting
Speaker 3: on multiple fronts.
Speaker 5: At the moment, it appears there is absolutely no progress
Speaker 5: on the hostages. There had been talks some weeks ago
Speaker 5: about the possibility that we were inching tour to cease fire.
Speaker 5: I mean, it's been moving in fits and starts, but
Speaker 5: what it really seems like right now is a ceasefire
Speaker 5: is just in neither side immediate interest, at least militarily.
Speaker 5: I mean Prime Minister Netanyah who says he wants to
Speaker 5: get the hostages home, but he also wants to continue
Speaker 5: to prosecute this war against Hamas and you can't do both.
Speaker 5: You can't have a ceasefire that allows the hostages to
Speaker 5: return while also continuing that war. Hamas also, i think,
Speaker 5: understands that if it loses those hostages, it loses a
Speaker 5: point of leverage. There would be absolutely no reason for
Speaker 5: Israel to negotiate with Hamas if there were no hostages.
Speaker 5: So it's a terrible tragedy. We're in a situation where
Speaker 5: it feels like there has absolutely been no progress. I
Speaker 5: think the US officials are extremely skeptical that anything would
Speaker 5: happen on a Hamas ceesfire deal anytime soon, and that
Speaker 5: is partly why you also see Israel shifting to Hasbolav.
Speaker 5: They do not see any sort of conversation or about
Speaker 5: restraint with hamas As being a priority.
Speaker 4: We talk about the presidential race, of course, every day
Speaker 4: here on this program, and it does make you wonder
Speaker 4: if the next president, whether it's Kamala Harris or Donald Trump,
Speaker 4: will inherit this conflict at its lowest stage here.
Speaker 5: Certainly, it's been as tense as I can recall it
Speaker 5: being in the last year, especially given that Israel says
Speaker 5: it's not going to settle for just a limited message
Speaker 5: sending kind of strike against Iran that it's likely to
Speaker 5: be something much more severe, So that is a deep concern.
Speaker 5: And then you have the whole US element. I mean,
Speaker 5: obviously everybody's going to say, Okay, this Trump says, this
Speaker 5: wouldn't have happened on my watch. It's not clear to
Speaker 5: me what either of them would be able to do
Speaker 5: once they come into office to stop this thing, because
Speaker 5: Israel has shown over the last year that it is
Speaker 5: going to do exactly what it feels compelled to do
Speaker 5: without the approval of the US, and sometimes in direct
Speaker 5: opposition what the US wants.
Speaker 3: Well, the next president may also have be tasks with signing,
Speaker 3: for example, supplemental funding Israel as we talk about them
Speaker 3: intercepting rockets sent today by hamas of course having to
Speaker 3: intercept the missile barrage that was sent by Iran last week.
Speaker 3: Are we getting closer to a timement which in Israel
Speaker 3: stockpiles of both defensive and offensive weaponry are going to
Speaker 3: need to be replenished by the US.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 5: I mean, they get a fair number of their weapons
Speaker 5: that do not rely on the US and on that
Speaker 5: supplemental funding. Israel does have stocks, but I think that
Speaker 5: is not a huge concern at the moment, at least
Speaker 5: because there's such broad bipartisan support for Israel. There are
Speaker 5: some senators, some lawmakers who are calling for a restriction
Speaker 5: on weapons and ammunition sales to Israel, particularly those big
Speaker 5: two thousand pound bombs that it's dropped in some cases.
Speaker 5: But generally speaking, there are no real voices who have
Speaker 5: any power who can stop this thing. So the only
Speaker 5: challenge I think would be is if you have Israel
Speaker 5: funding somehow linked to Ukraine funding, because then it really
Speaker 5: would slow down because there is so much opposition to
Speaker 5: another supplemental for Ukraine. But I would suspect the Israel
Speaker 5: money will continue pretty much uninterrupted.
Speaker 6: All right.
Speaker 3: Nick Wadams leading our national security coverage here in Washington,
Speaker 3: thank you and thank you for your coverage over the
Speaker 3: last year. It's hard to believe that it's now been
Speaker 3: twelve months. And to Knick's point, we did see in
Speaker 3: the last supplemental package Israel and Ukraine funding and funding
Speaker 3: for the Asia Pacific as well, all of it attached together,
Speaker 3: and there is a question of how these will be
Speaker 3: addressed going forward. When sorting out any kind of funding
Speaker 3: here in Washington, is we know it's quite difficult.
Speaker 4: This again is why so many defense hawks did not
Speaker 4: want that six month cr to bring us into March
Speaker 4: without the opportunity to enhance funding. Whether there is an
Speaker 4: emergency request has yet to be seen, but this could
Speaker 4: be a very interesting lane duck as we also wait
Speaker 4: for another Category five hurricane.
Speaker 3: Well, that's absolutely true, Milton now barreling toward the Gulf
Speaker 3: coast of Florida once again. So as we have these
Speaker 3: conversations around funding and look forward to what kind of
Speaker 3: funding the picture will be in twenty twenty five, we
Speaker 3: want to bring in now Maya McGinnis, who, of course
Speaker 3: is that the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget where
Speaker 3: she serves as president. Because the committee put out today
Speaker 3: a fiscal impact paper on the potential Harris and Trump
Speaker 3: presidencies based on their campaign plans, and these figures are
Speaker 3: quite striking. The central estimate for how much a Harris
Speaker 3: presidency based on her campaign proposals would add to the
Speaker 3: debt three and a half trillion dollars. For Donald Trump,
Speaker 3: it's seven and a half trillion dollars. So for more
Speaker 3: on this, Miyamaguinnis is joining us now here on Bloomberg TV.
Speaker 3: And Radio Maya. There's a lot to unpack here. If
Speaker 3: we could just begin with with the thesis around Donald
Speaker 3: Trump specifically, because while that central figure is seven and
Speaker 3: a half trillion, the high figure is over fifteen trillion dollars.
Speaker 3: What would get us there and why is that your
Speaker 3: base case?
Speaker 7: Absolutely?
Speaker 8: So to start, obviously, this is not great news for
Speaker 8: the overall fiscal pitch Richure, and the reason is because
Speaker 8: candidates are promising to do so many things that they
Speaker 8: think will win over voters. When it comes to former
Speaker 8: President Trump, obviously he has an agenda that is very
Speaker 8: tax heavy. He is going to extend his tax cuts,
Speaker 8: and he's going to add numerous new tax cuts, including
Speaker 8: potentially bringing the corporate tax down significantly.
Speaker 7: Lower than it already was.
Speaker 8: He also has very significant spending commitments, and one of
Speaker 8: the big ones that would get you to that highest
Speaker 8: number is he's talking about higher levels of spending for defense,
Speaker 8: and this could mean a huge range of things.
Speaker 7: One of the challenges we have in this effort is.
Speaker 8: To figure out what is the specific proposal of a candidate.
Speaker 8: They're not very specific on the stump, and what the
Speaker 8: overall effects would be. So we see huge differences in
Speaker 8: the effects of his policies on the economy, and some
Speaker 8: of the responses in things like how much he'd spent
Speaker 8: on defense, and in particular the big tariffs that he's
Speaker 8: talking about, which would raise a lot of revenue. But
Speaker 8: they are huge questions about what the overall effects, both
Speaker 8: in terms of retaliation and effects on the economy would
Speaker 8: be of those tariff policies.
Speaker 4: The cumulative deficits from twenty twenty six to twenty thirty five.
Speaker 4: What we're talking about here, Maya, Your research is driving
Speaker 4: the fiscal conversation today in Washington. You're in all of
Speaker 4: the tip sheets this morning. You're here on Balance of
Speaker 4: Power talking about this, and I can only imagine what
Speaker 4: your inbox looks like. You do right, if the next
Speaker 4: president does not lead in putting a fiscal reform plan
Speaker 4: in place, will hit the record debt level this country
Speaker 4: has ever seen. What does that fiscal reform look like?
Speaker 4: If they're taking advice from Mia mcguinnis.
Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean, and I think the reason we're getting
Speaker 8: a lot of attention for this report is it is
Speaker 8: such an important moment of consequence for the fiscal picture,
Speaker 8: and we are on track to be bar borrowing twenty
Speaker 8: trillion dollars over the next decade before all those emergencies
Speaker 8: which you just talked about, which seem to be coming
Speaker 8: more and more quickly.
Speaker 7: And yet I think.
Speaker 8: Partially due to the huge polarization right now, we have
Speaker 8: candidates who really do compete on who can give away
Speaker 8: more things. So those are norms that are going to
Speaker 8: be difficult to change. Not being a politician, though, I
Speaker 8: get to talk about what we really should be doing.
Speaker 8: We're focusing right now from both the candidates overall, on
Speaker 8: big tax cuts and big spending increases before we consider
Speaker 8: any of those, and there are lots of smart policies
Speaker 8: within there. But the first thing we have to do
Speaker 8: is get a plan so that our debt is not
Speaker 8: growing faster than the overall economy. We have to look
Speaker 8: at all the things that aren't on the table from
Speaker 8: these candidates. We have to look at how we're going
Speaker 8: to raise broad amounts of new revenue. It's not just
Speaker 8: going to be in millionaires and billionaires. It's not just
Speaker 8: going to be in corporations. Those things can be a
Speaker 8: part of it, but there's going to have to be
Speaker 8: significant new revenue just to keep the debt where it
Speaker 8: is as a share of GDP would take nine trillion
Speaker 8: in savings. The candidates haven't proposed anywhere close to that amount,
Speaker 8: and that will have to be coupled with big spending reductions.
Speaker 8: The caps that they put in place as part of
Speaker 8: the Fiscal Responsibility Act. Those should be continued going forward.
Speaker 8: But we're going to have to look at the biggest
Speaker 8: drivers of the debt, which is where the candidates don't
Speaker 8: really want to talk, but the aging of the population,
Speaker 8: are growing healthcare costs, and right now the fastest growing
Speaker 8: part of the budget is interest. The way you cut
Speaker 8: that one is by bringing your deficits down. But we
Speaker 8: do have to look at Social Security and medicare, both
Speaker 8: of which are headed to be insolvent in a very
Speaker 8: short amount of time. And instead of kind of pandering
Speaker 8: to seniors and trying to scare them about fixing the programs,
Speaker 8: we need real fixes for them, probably looking at both
Speaker 8: revenues and spending reductions to make sure they will be solvent.
Speaker 7: But we have to talk about the fact that there are.
Speaker 8: Trade offs and budgets, and if the candidates want to
Speaker 8: pursue the things they're looking at, that should only come
Speaker 8: after a debt deal, and then they should guarantee that
Speaker 8: every new policy would be fully paid for and put
Speaker 8: out the details of the pay fors are just as
Speaker 8: specific as the details of all the new things they
Speaker 8: want to promise to do.
Speaker 7: That kind of the.
Speaker 3: Opposite of p That's what we're always asking about here
Speaker 3: here on Bloomberg. How do you pay for it? You
Speaker 3: don't often get necessarily a straight answer. Maya to your
Speaker 3: point on just to keep stasis, keep things steady. You
Speaker 3: do find in your low cost estimate that the Harris
Speaker 3: plan would be roughly deficit neutral. Your lower end estimate
Speaker 3: for the Trump plan would still increase the debt by
Speaker 3: one point four or five trillion. So maybe it's it's
Speaker 3: not enough just to try to keep the status quo,
Speaker 3: but to bring that down. What assumptions are you making
Speaker 3: about where interest rates will be when you do this analysis,
Speaker 3: Because as we talk about some of their plans also
Speaker 3: being inflationary, that could mean a higher for a longer
Speaker 3: interest rate environment as well.
Speaker 7: You know it could, and we've seen that that can happen.
Speaker 8: We've seen that big amounts of borrowing push up and
Speaker 8: cause inflation, lead to inflation and push up interest rates,
Speaker 8: and that could certainly happen under the scenario.
Speaker 7: We stick with the scenarios that.
Speaker 8: Are put out there by the Congressional Budget Office, and
Speaker 8: it actually is often as possible we rely on estimates
Speaker 8: from the CBO or other impartial evaluators of these plans,
Speaker 8: so that doesn't get overly political and we don't have
Speaker 8: to make huge assumptions in doing this. But it's rather
Speaker 8: conservative where we're assuming interest rates will be, and there
Speaker 8: is a real risk that the more we put push
Speaker 8: into the borrowing, the more.
Speaker 7: That we'll push up rates.
Speaker 8: And what we know is that with the high levels
Speaker 8: of debt, we currently have just a small increase in
Speaker 8: interest rates, like one percentage point above what we're assuming
Speaker 8: can lead to about three hundred billion dollars more a
Speaker 8: year in interest costs. So there's a huge range of
Speaker 8: changes that could have from the economic effects.
Speaker 4: Maya we've only got a minute left, But we tend
Speaker 4: to hear from those representing the Trump camp and Donald
Speaker 4: Trump surrogates and supporters say, you're not factoring in the growth.
Speaker 4: We're going to drill, baby, drill, bring prices lower, and
Speaker 4: we're going to grow out of this. As we saw
Speaker 4: revenues increase when the Trump tax cuts were first enacted.
Speaker 7: Respond to that, Yeah, we will absolutely hear that.
Speaker 8: Oh, you're ignoring the huge, massive dynamic gains in all
Speaker 8: of this first and many of our assumptions we do
Speaker 8: assume behavioral changes and dynamic changes to GDP.
Speaker 7: We look at that.
Speaker 8: In order to evaluate a whole plan, you have to
Speaker 8: look at the positive and negative effects on growth. By
Speaker 8: the way, seven and a half trillion and new borrowing
Speaker 8: has tremendously.
Speaker 7: Negative effects on growth.
Speaker 8: So it's quite likely the dynamic effects of this plan
Speaker 8: would do more harm to the economy than growth. And
Speaker 8: if you look at what happened in the tax cuts
Speaker 8: last time, they actually came in pretty much as assumed,
Speaker 8: which was they created some growth, but not nearly enough
Speaker 8: to pay for themselves. They led to large revenue losses
Speaker 8: and sort of the bump up we saw a couple
Speaker 8: of years ago didn't come from tax cuts. They came
Speaker 8: from coming out of COVID and some timing changes and
Speaker 8: market performances. But it is just a truth. As sad
Speaker 8: as it is, tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Speaker 8: Same spending increases they don't pay for themselves.
Speaker 4: Maya It's great to see you. Thank you for sharing
Speaker 4: your new research with us. Maya McGinnis back with us
Speaker 4: on Bloomberg Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget where she
Speaker 4: is president. You can find a lot more on this
Speaker 4: online and on the terminal with Kaylee Lines. I'm Joe Matthew.
Speaker 4: This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Can
Speaker 2: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 2: ron Oto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also
Speaker 2: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 2: Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: As we hear some new remarks from Kamala Harris on
Speaker 4: the situation in Israel, she sat down for an interview
Speaker 4: with sixty Minutes. This is not something that you would
Speaker 4: have seen last night. It's actually part of their election
Speaker 4: special that will air later today. This is the special
Speaker 4: we talked about that Donald Trump chose to not take
Speaker 4: part in, and they did speak about the situation in Israel.
Speaker 4: The Vice President was asked about the vera of our
Speaker 4: alliance between Washington and Benjamin nettan Yahoo. Here's how she.
Speaker 7: Answered, I think with all due respect.
Speaker 6: The better question is do we have an important alliance
Speaker 6: between the American people and the Israeli people, And the
Speaker 6: answer to that.
Speaker 7: Question is yes.
Speaker 4: Kamala Harris out with a statement on this October seven,
Speaker 4: much like Joe Biden each separate statements, Vice President Harris
Speaker 4: calling the Hamas attack a year ago today pure evil,
Speaker 4: reiterating her commitment to the security of Israel as unwavering.
Speaker 4: That's a quote, also saying she is heartbreaking, heartbroken over
Speaker 4: the scale and death and destruction in Gaza. It's where
Speaker 4: we pick up our conversation with Brad Schneider, Congressman Democrat
Speaker 4: representing Illinois tenth district and a member of the House
Speaker 4: Foreign Affairs Committee. He's also co founder co chair of
Speaker 4: the Abraham Accords Caucus. Congressman, thank you for being with
Speaker 4: us on such an important day. This is obviously something
Speaker 4: that is not becoming more quiet. It's escalating, and I
Speaker 4: wonder if you see any chance that this will be
Speaker 4: resolved by the election on November fifth.
Speaker 9: Well, thank you for having me. And it is a
Speaker 9: very auspicious day. It was exactly one year ago where
Speaker 9: Hamas launched thousands of terrorists, thousands of rockets, killing twelve hundred,
Speaker 9: taking two hundred and fifty hostage, and leading to the
Speaker 9: conflict we've seen over the past year. It's hard to
Speaker 9: imagine that a resolution is on the near horizon. As
Speaker 9: was mentioned, I don't think i'd call it a widening
Speaker 9: conflict in the region. His ballas started firing rockets at
Speaker 9: Israel on October eighth. The houthis from Yemen. Iran has
Speaker 9: launched two strikes in April in October first. It's certainly escalating,
Speaker 9: and it's hard to imagine that it'll be resolved within
Speaker 9: the next four weeks. But the United States has you
Speaker 9: just had Vice President Harris said very clearly, United States
Speaker 9: stands united with Israel, the people of Israel and their
Speaker 9: fight existential battle against the Iran and its proxies, and
Speaker 9: we need to make sure that Israel defeats Amass, it
Speaker 9: defeats his Bala, and that ultimately we can get onto
Speaker 9: that road for peace where all the people in the
Speaker 9: region can give their children the future they deserve.
Speaker 4: Well, with all of that said, here you're attending and
Speaker 4: speaking at an event in Highland Park today honoring those
Speaker 4: murdered and taken hostage on October seventh. I wonder if
Speaker 4: we have moved on from the idea of an agreement
Speaker 4: that would secure the release of the rest of the
Speaker 4: living hostages. As we learned today, another Israeli hostage has
Speaker 4: been confirmed dead. We talk so much about the two
Speaker 4: front conflict that's happening, the potential for a ceasefire. We
Speaker 4: don't talk enough, Congressman, about the hostages who are still
Speaker 4: being held.
Speaker 9: No, you're right, and I hadn't heard about the confirmation
Speaker 9: of another hostage killed. There's one hundred and one hostages
Speaker 9: in Gaza, people who were taken from Israel on October seventh.
Speaker 9: We know that many of those are no longer living.
Speaker 9: It doesn't change the fact until they are returned, their
Speaker 9: bodies are returned. The families can't get closure, can't bury
Speaker 9: their loved ones, and have observed the morning period that
Speaker 9: they all rightly should be able to observe. And we
Speaker 9: know that some, hopefully many, are still living. The goal
Speaker 9: is to get them home as quickly as possible. I've
Speaker 9: worn this yellow ribbon now for three hundred and sixty
Speaker 9: seven days, hoping to bring the hostages home, hoping for
Speaker 9: a pathway. It rests with Yahya Sinwar. He has the
Speaker 9: ability to release the hostages, to bring this war to
Speaker 9: an end in Gaza, to free the people of Gaza
Speaker 9: to rebuild and renew their lives and their communities, but
Speaker 9: renew it in a way free from the terrorist infrastructure
Speaker 9: that Hamas has built in the terrorists and threats against Israel.
Speaker 4: Well, Congressman as I mentioned you remember of the House
Speaker 4: Foreign Affairs Committee. What will be the US commitment militarily
Speaker 4: here to help defend Israel if this continues to escalate.
Speaker 4: We know that Israel is working on a response to
Speaker 4: Iran right now, and we've surged an enormous number of
Speaker 4: military equipment, thousands of troops to the Middle East. What
Speaker 4: are we preparing for?
Speaker 9: Well, I think we have to be prepared to confront Iran.
Speaker 9: Iran launched almost two hundred ballistic missiles at Israel a
Speaker 9: week ago tomorrow. It was an escalation unlike anything we've
Speaker 9: seen in the region before. Thankfully, with US support and others,
Speaker 9: Israel was able to thwart the attack second time in
Speaker 9: a year, in less than a year, and the response
Speaker 9: against Iran, as President Biden said, it needs to be proportionate.
Speaker 9: One hundred and eighty ballistic missiles is not a small strike.
Speaker 9: It's a major strike. It targeted all ten million people
Speaker 9: living in Israel. Israel needs to restore us to terms
Speaker 9: as it's done with hisballa in Lebanon, and we need
Speaker 9: to get to a place where the regime understands that
Speaker 9: they don't have a free hand. They continue to support
Speaker 9: terrorism in Lebanon, in Gaza, in Jeaven. They're a disruptive influence.
Speaker 9: Horanda is disruptive influence to the region, to the interests
Speaker 9: of peace in the region as well as the interest
Speaker 9: of the United States, So I expect in Congress as
Speaker 9: well as the Administration stands by Israel, our most important
Speaker 9: ally in the region, but also stands with our other
Speaker 9: allies in confronting the existential threat that a ramposes.
Speaker 4: You know what's interesting to me, Congressman, is that the
Speaker 4: analysis always leads us to the point where we hear
Speaker 4: that nobody wants to go to war. Israel is not
Speaker 4: looking to go to war with Iran, and Iran is
Speaker 4: not looking to go to war with Israel. Everyone's trying
Speaker 4: to save face. And when this tit for tat continues,
Speaker 4: they feel no option but to respond. And with that said,
Speaker 4: as Israel prepares to respond to Iran. Now once again,
Speaker 4: if you see any diplomatic off ramps or if this
Speaker 4: really is only a military solution.
Speaker 9: Well, at the end of the day, there has to
Speaker 9: be a diplomatic solution. It has to be Iran reversing course.
Speaker 9: They are moving towards a nuclear weapon. The policy the
Speaker 9: United States, the right and correct policy the United States,
Speaker 9: is that Duran will never have a nuclear weapon. That
Speaker 9: is a policy shared by not just Israel, but our
Speaker 9: allies in the region, are arabellies in the region, and
Speaker 9: so it would be far better to get to a
Speaker 9: diplomatic solution without having to take other measures for Iran
Speaker 9: to back away, to get back in compliance with an
Speaker 9: agreement that said they wouldn't enrich uranium, to highly enrich
Speaker 9: what near weapons grade levels that they would allow ine
Speaker 9: vectors in to ensure that their nuclear program is a
Speaker 9: civilian nuclear program and not a military program. There's every
Speaker 9: reason to believe that it is a military program, and
Speaker 9: the United States, working with our allies, has to be
Speaker 9: prepared to do everything necessary to ensure that Iran can
Speaker 9: never have that nuclear weapon they so desire.
Speaker 4: Congressman Schneider I started our conversation by asking you if
Speaker 4: you thought this might resolve by the election. I don't
Speaker 4: think you do, and I don't think anyone does at
Speaker 4: this point. So in our remaining minute here, I wish
Speaker 4: we had more time, But in our minute left, will
Speaker 4: the result of the election here in the United States
Speaker 4: help to determine the outcome of what's happening in the
Speaker 4: Middle East.
Speaker 9: Well, thanks, I'm happy to come back and talk more
Speaker 9: about this. I think the results of the election will
Speaker 9: have a significant impact. President Biden, to his credit, has
Speaker 9: stood by Israel longer than any previous president US president
Speaker 9: in a time of war. He's the only president to
Speaker 9: have visited Israel during a time of war. It's imperative
Speaker 9: that the United States remains committed to Israel's right to
Speaker 9: defend itself, to secure its borders, protected citizens, and as
Speaker 9: we talked about at the beginning, to rescue the hostage.
Speaker 9: We need to make sure that the United States continues
Speaker 9: to lead on a global stage, that we stay engaged
Speaker 9: with our allies, that we strengthen the alliances like NATO,
Speaker 9: like other alliances, build on the Abraham of courts, and
Speaker 9: stay Thank you.
Speaker 4: For engaging with us today. Congressman. Let's get more time
Speaker 4: next time. Brad Schneider, Democrat from Illinois with us on
Speaker 4: this seventh of October. This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 2: us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo, car Play
Speaker 2: and then Froudoto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on
Speaker 2: demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live
Speaker 2: on YouTube. Show.
Speaker 3: It is October seventh. That has now been one full
Speaker 3: year since the Hamas attack on Israel, which of course
Speaker 3: killed more than a thousand people and resulted in hundreds
Speaker 3: more being taken hostage. Many of those hostages have also
Speaker 3: died over the course of the last twelve months.
Speaker 4: And so imagine what it was like this morning for
Speaker 4: Israeli's to wake up in communities along the Gaza Strip
Speaker 4: to air raid sirens as they did on this day
Speaker 4: one year ago. In fact, there was shelling from Gaza
Speaker 4: from Hamas. Most all of the projectiles were brought down
Speaker 4: by Israel. But the idea that we're marking this solemn
Speaker 4: date does not indicate that the fighting is stopping today, Kaylee.
Speaker 10: No.
Speaker 3: In fact, it points all signs point to this fight
Speaker 3: continuing for some time. So we want to turn now
Speaker 3: to Evelyn Farkas of the McCain Institute, where she is
Speaker 3: executive director. She's also a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Speaker 3: Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia. Welcome back to Bloomberg
Speaker 3: TV and Radio. Evelyn, I know you yourself. This past
Speaker 3: summer visited some of the scenes of the death of
Speaker 3: October seventh, including where the Nova Music Festival was being held,
Speaker 3: where four hundred more than that were killed and forty
Speaker 3: taken hostage, including a kaboots as well where sixty four
Speaker 3: civilians were killed nineteen were taken hostage into Gaza. Can
Speaker 3: you just give a first your personal reflections on the
Speaker 3: events of that day and the year that has followed.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean, Kaylee, obviously there's no way to take
Speaker 6: in the tremendous loss of life and also just the brutality.
Speaker 6: You know, the Nova Music Festival. It's out there, it's
Speaker 6: a very kind of dry, but then there are trees
Speaker 6: and it's it's as open, almost like a field of trees,
Speaker 6: of small trees, and you can imagine these young people
Speaker 6: just having a party, enjoying themselves, and then to see
Speaker 6: just you know, sign after sign with a remembrance of
Speaker 6: all of these young people, like a field of people
Speaker 6: mowed down by the brutal Hamas terrace. So that was
Speaker 6: really dramatic, and you know, walking through there, it was
Speaker 6: just sort of like.
Speaker 7: A holy site.
Speaker 6: Almost going to the kibbutz I went to far Asa,
Speaker 6: that was different because we had a guide in that case,
Speaker 6: and it was a woman who was a survivor. She
Speaker 6: wasn't there on the day of the actual attack, but
Speaker 6: her family was, and she told all kinds of stories,
Speaker 6: and I think the biggest takeaway that she had was
Speaker 6: that she no longer believed that she could sit and
Speaker 6: peacefully have tea in the big field between her kibbutz
Speaker 6: and Gaza where the Palestinians lived, whom many of whom
Speaker 6: she had known, and have tea and live together in harmony.
Speaker 6: But she said very clearly that I need them to
Speaker 6: have security and prosperity in order for US Israeli Jews
Speaker 6: to have security as well. So it was a very
Speaker 6: somber visit, and of course this anniversary just dredges up
Speaker 6: all of the anxiety which has not been put to
Speaker 6: rest over the past year. I think that much is clear, Evelyn.
Speaker 4: We've frequently heard the events of October seventh, the attack
Speaker 4: on October seventh, compared to nine eleven, that this was
Speaker 4: Israel's nine to eleven, and some see it if in
Speaker 4: fact impacting by many magnitudes larger. When you consider the
Speaker 4: population and the percentage of people whose lives were taken
Speaker 4: on this day, how many more nine to elevens will
Speaker 4: it take to end this?
Speaker 6: Well at the nine to eleven comparison is actually pretty good, Joe,
Speaker 6: because first of all, while there were warnings, the government
Speaker 6: didn't take proper action in advance, so there were intelligence failures,
Speaker 6: just as we had intelligence failures here in the US
Speaker 6: and the run up to nine to eleven. The second
Speaker 6: comparison that's app is that it took first responders a
Speaker 6: while to get to the scene, but then they actually
Speaker 6: couldn't save very many people, so the killing was very quick,
Speaker 6: and in that respect it's similar. And then, of course
Speaker 6: the shock to the entire society, the fact that Israel,
Speaker 6: a country that has the strongest military in the Middle East,
Speaker 6: the nuclear power in the least the country that we
Speaker 6: have always the United States provided military assistance to in
Speaker 6: order to make sure that they have what we call
Speaker 6: a qualitative edge militarily, that somehow they could be vulnerable
Speaker 6: to such an attack, such an existential attack. I think
Speaker 6: that is just like nine to eleven. How do we
Speaker 6: avoid it? I think we need to make sure that
Speaker 6: for once and for all, there is a solution to
Speaker 6: the Palestinians' right to self determination. And as the woman
Speaker 6: that I spoke to in far As of the Kibwutz said,
Speaker 6: and actually Palestinians that also I met with in Ramala,
Speaker 6: they also spoke about the need for security for both sides,
Speaker 6: I think we need to find a way back to
Speaker 6: a two state solution. It will be very hard because
Speaker 6: right now the current Israeli government has been talking about
Speaker 6: a one state solution, and the far right members of
Speaker 6: Nateyahu's government they're not interested in a two state solution.
Speaker 6: But the only way to have lasting peace is for
Speaker 6: the Palestinians also to see their rights respected.
Speaker 10: Well.
Speaker 3: And that lasting piece may feel far away to many,
Speaker 3: as we are seeing instead of a cooling in the
Speaker 3: conflict and escalation in it. As Joe and I were mentioning,
Speaker 3: not only were rockets fired at Israel, but Israel is
Speaker 3: continuing to conduct its strike operations in southern Lebanon. As
Speaker 3: we consider, and you just mentioned the intelligence failures that
Speaker 3: led to the events, or at least were a contributing
Speaker 3: factor to what happened on October seventh, When we consider
Speaker 3: the safety of Israel, which clearly was not safe on
Speaker 3: that day. Is Israel safer now that it has to
Speaker 3: at least a certain extent, been able to attack the
Speaker 3: capabilities of those that would threaten it, including Hamas and Hesbalah,
Speaker 3: or because of their actions, has it actually created more
Speaker 3: danger in the region, including from Iran that set missiles
Speaker 3: Israel's way last week.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I would say, Kelly, if you're looking at the
Speaker 6: threat picture at the moment, Israel has bought itself some time.
Speaker 6: So the Iranian proxies Hamas in Gaza and Hesbola coming
Speaker 6: from the north, so coming from Lebanon, they have been
Speaker 6: beaten down badly. Even the Israeli Defense Minister said in
Speaker 6: September that Hamas was no longer a real capable military
Speaker 6: threat to the state of Israel. I don't know what
Speaker 6: his latest assessment is. Clearly Hesbola has been incredibly weakened.
Speaker 6: But let's not forget that the real threat is coming
Speaker 6: from Iran. Iran is using these two groups plus the
Speaker 6: Houtis in Yemen to attack Israel so that it doesn't
Speaker 6: get into a direct war with Israel. That appears to
Speaker 6: perhaps have changed, and that would put Israel in a
Speaker 6: more dangerous situation if indeed it did get into direct
Speaker 6: war with Iran potentially.
Speaker 4: Well, some think this is an opportunity to strike Iran
Speaker 4: to change the order in the balance of power in
Speaker 4: the Middle East. Evelyn, what should Israel do is it
Speaker 4: calculates its next move?
Speaker 6: Well, Joe, I think that Israel, together with the United States,
Speaker 6: we are their treaty. Ally, we should be talking about
Speaker 6: how do we bring about regime change without invading Iran
Speaker 6: and putting pressure on Iran, using military force, using diplomatic pressure,
Speaker 6: using all of our other allies in the Middle East
Speaker 6: is an important part of this, and we haven't seen
Speaker 6: a strategy articulated by the Israeli government. There is a
Speaker 6: bit of an opportunity here when it comes to the
Speaker 6: nuclear program, because the biggest threat to Israel is that
Speaker 6: Iran gets a nuclear weapons program, which means that Iran
Speaker 6: can neuter Israel's advantage in the nuclear Arena if they
Speaker 6: did come to blows direct war, and so we don't
Speaker 6: want Iran to have a nuclear weapons program for that reason,
Speaker 6: also because we don't want more countries in the Middle
Speaker 6: East deciding and around the world frankly deciding that they
Speaker 6: also want their nuclear programs. That makes the world a
Speaker 6: lot more dangerous. So there may be calculations going on.
Speaker 6: I think they should be behind the scenes and not
Speaker 6: out through the media that pertain to the nuclear facilities
Speaker 6: in particular.
Speaker 3: Well, as you describe something that could make the world
Speaker 3: more dangerous, I think it's fair to say, Evelyn, that
Speaker 3: the world feels pretty dangerous already, and it could be
Speaker 3: a very dangerous world that the next president of the
Speaker 3: United States inherits. How do you if we operate under
Speaker 3: the assumption that this conflict will not be resolved when
Speaker 3: the next president is inaugurated, how could the nature of
Speaker 3: a change depending on who it is in the White
Speaker 3: House and what kind of administration we'll be looking at.
Speaker 6: Kayly, if it's Kamala Harris, I believe that she would
Speaker 6: be more engaged in trying to solve the conflict. First
Speaker 6: of all, there's the personal element. Her husband is Jewish. Second,
Speaker 6: of all, there's the reality that for the United States,
Speaker 6: we need to protect Israel's right to exist, and it's
Speaker 6: really in jeopardy right now, so that's a US national
Speaker 6: security interest. We also want to protect as much as
Speaker 6: we can stability in the least and, as I said,
Speaker 6: address the nuclear and terrorist threat posed by Iran. So
Speaker 6: I believe that she'll get more engaged. Right now. The
Speaker 6: Biden administration, frankly, is probably somewhat hamstrung by the fact
Speaker 6: that we have upcoming elections and anything they do, if
Speaker 6: it doesn't turn out in the short run, if it
Speaker 6: causes friction or controversy in the short run, it could
Speaker 6: be bad for Kamala Harris. But I do think that
Speaker 6: if the vice president were to win, she would be
Speaker 6: more engaged. With regard to Donald Trump, we know that
Speaker 6: he's generally given a carte blanche that he's been in
Speaker 6: office before as president, so he's given a carte blanche
Speaker 6: to the far right and to Natanyahu in Israel before.
Speaker 6: That doesn't, frankly make me optimistic because he would be
Speaker 6: more willing than to go along with what they call
Speaker 6: the one state solution, which means essentially just putting the
Speaker 6: Palestinians in these kinds of settlements in Gaza in the
Speaker 6: West Bank, which, as we've seen, is just a powder
Speaker 6: keg and a recipe for more conflict. So I think
Speaker 6: that the hands off of approach of Donald Trump would
Speaker 6: be the much more dangerous one for the US and
Speaker 6: for Israel.
Speaker 4: As we consider the preparations underway here for a response
Speaker 4: to Iran Evelyn. The US has sent ships, it has
Speaker 4: sent missiles, fighter jets, and thousands of troops to the region.
Speaker 4: What else is needed?
Speaker 6: I think aggressive diplomacy. We had an opportunity back in
Speaker 6: the fall, when the Israeli Defense Minister was saying that
Speaker 6: Hamas is severely degraded and it's no longer an organized
Speaker 6: military threat to the State of Israel, to negotiate a
Speaker 6: release of the hostages, who you know, this is the
Speaker 6: anniversary of them being held in captivity. That was an
Speaker 6: opportunity that was lost, but it's not permanently lost, and
Speaker 6: so I think that's what we need to focus on
Speaker 6: right now, trying to get those hostages out. Whatever short
Speaker 6: term deal you have to make with Hamas, I think again,
Speaker 6: you know, as long as it's a prisoner exchange and
Speaker 6: within the normal bounds of this kind of negotiation should
Speaker 6: be worth it to the Israeli government, certainly to the
Speaker 6: Israeli people, and to the US government.
Speaker 4: Evelyn's great to have you back. Evelyn Farcas's executive director
Speaker 4: of the McCain Institute at Arizona State University.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 2: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 2: roud Oro with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also
Speaker 2: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 2: Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: There was no mistaking the second rally in Butler and
Speaker 4: the difference between the second rally and the first one Butler, Pennsylvania.
Speaker 4: Donald Trump back at this time in a glass box,
Speaker 4: of course, prompted by the assassination attempt that took place
Speaker 4: upon his first visit to the farm in Butler, came
Speaker 4: back to mark the spot where the campaign changed in July,
Speaker 4: and he had a very famous man with him, the
Speaker 4: richest man in the world, decided to show up. We
Speaker 4: knew he would be there Elon Musk and as we
Speaker 4: asked out loud here on this program on Friday. Would
Speaker 4: he actually speak to the crowd, Would he come up
Speaker 4: on the stage, stand at the podium. You know, Donald
Speaker 4: Trump's gonna call him up there, And yes it happened.
Speaker 4: Here is Elon Musk from Saturday in Butler.
Speaker 11: President Trump must win to preserve the Constitution. He must
Speaker 11: win to preserve democracy in America. This is a must
Speaker 11: win situation. Must win. So I have I have won.
Speaker 11: One ask for everyone in the audience, everyone who watches
Speaker 11: this video, everyone in the live stream, this one request.
Speaker 11: It's very important. Register to vote.
Speaker 4: He got up there with the black hat. If you're
Speaker 4: with us on YouTube, you see the black Maga hat.
Speaker 4: He's called himself Dark Maga, although he was lighter than air.
Speaker 4: If you watch the event, literally two feet off the ground,
Speaker 4: jumping up and down with his arms up in the
Speaker 4: air as the crowd went wild. Charlie Dent is back
Speaker 4: with us, the former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, senior advisor
Speaker 4: to the group are Republican Legacy Congressman. It's great to
Speaker 4: see you. Welcome back. Does Elon Musk bring any new votes,
Speaker 4: any extra votes to Donald Trump from Pennsylvania?
Speaker 12: Yeah, I really don't think so I've never been one
Speaker 12: to believe that these celebrity endorsements matter that much. You know,
Speaker 12: maybe Taylor Swift does, because she's a cultural icon and
Speaker 12: a unique singular figure, but I don't think it really matters.
Speaker 12: And you know what I find it interesting is that
Speaker 12: Elon Musk is talking about preserving democracy, and that's of
Speaker 12: course to the argument that Democrats are making about Trump.
Speaker 12: Each side is claiming that the democracy is on their side,
Speaker 12: and each is the other side is a democracy. It's
Speaker 12: really it's really remarkable.
Speaker 4: I'm so happy you pointed that out, Congressman. I spent
Speaker 4: all Sunday morning because I like to torture myself watching
Speaker 4: the Sunday morning news shows, and I saw the likes
Speaker 4: of Speaker Johnson and many others calling out Democrats. And
Speaker 4: Donald Trump has blamed Democrats for the assassination attempts that
Speaker 4: he has withstood because of what you just said, this
Speaker 4: line that Donald Trump could be in the end of democracy.
Speaker 4: But as we just heard from Elon Musk, and we
Speaker 4: hear at every speech from Donald Trump, Kamala Harris would
Speaker 4: be the end of the country. In fact, Elon Musk
Speaker 4: said if she was elected, there would never be another election.
Speaker 4: Can we forget to just move past the double standard?
Speaker 9: Here?
Speaker 4: Both sides are saying this, aren't they?
Speaker 12: Well, yeah, what's so incredible about this whole election cycle
Speaker 12: is that the stakes have been raised so high. Donald
Speaker 12: Trump and his supporters say we won't have a country
Speaker 12: anymore if he's not elected. The Democrats say, if Trump
Speaker 12: is elected, we won't have a democracy anymore. And so
Speaker 12: now we've raised the pitch this such a high fever
Speaker 12: that we see these radicals coming out now, like we
Speaker 12: saw in Butler, that disturbed young man who attempted to
Speaker 12: assassinate Donald Trump. Thankfully Donald Trump survived that. And then
Speaker 12: we also had the situation in Florida where the individual
Speaker 12: down there seemed to be politically motivated. Of course Secret
Speaker 12: Service boarded that assassination attempt. And so I can see
Speaker 12: how we have reached this point of political violence or
Speaker 12: perhaps civil disorder, which could of course occur after the
Speaker 12: election regardless of outcome. But we've had violence in our
Speaker 12: political system. We saw that Donald Trump and his supporters
Speaker 12: did attempt to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power and
Speaker 12: try to overturn an outcome they did not like we
Speaker 12: saw that in leading up to January sixth, and certainly
Speaker 12: on January sixth. Obviously the system helped. But I mean,
Speaker 12: you can make a case of Donald Trump did try
Speaker 12: to overturn a free and fair election.
Speaker 4: Yeah. I think a lot of people have been making
Speaker 4: that case. And we also remember Elon Musk aforementioned on
Speaker 4: his own ex formerly Twitter amusing openly about why no
Speaker 4: one had tried to assassinate Joe Biden or Kamala Harris
Speaker 4: following the second one against Donald Trump. But I'll tell
Speaker 4: you what, Congressman, your state is sure is something. We've
Speaker 4: got new numbers from Emerson College, new polling. This isn't
Speaker 4: even a one point race. This is just flat tide
Speaker 4: Emerson College polling, real clear Pennsylvania survey. Forty eight percent
Speaker 4: of voters support Donald Trump, Forty eight percent of voters
Speaker 4: support Vice President Kamala Harris. Half voters expect Harris to win,
Speaker 4: forty nine percent expect Trump to win. Pennsylvania still the
Speaker 4: state to decide the election, and what makes it break
Speaker 4: one way or the other?
Speaker 12: Yeah, Pennsylvania is the keystone. It is the battleground state
Speaker 12: of all battleground states. Muhlenberg College just did a poll.
Speaker 12: They do good pulling public polling. They did a poll
Speaker 12: last week also had it tied I believe at forty
Speaker 12: eight eight. So this is a dead heat no matter
Speaker 12: how you look at this, if you look at if
Speaker 12: you really dissect Pennsylvania, though, Harris needs to do extremely
Speaker 12: well in the Philadelphia media market, specifically the city of
Speaker 12: Philadelphia and the four collar counties. She needs to run
Speaker 12: up the numbers there. She needs to do well in
Speaker 12: the Lehigh Valley, and she will win only a handful
Speaker 12: of other counties around the state. She'll win Monroe County,
Speaker 12: probably in the Poconos Center County where penn State is
Speaker 12: in the middle estate in Alleghany County. But the two
Speaker 12: counties to watch in Pennsylvania are Northampton County, my old
Speaker 12: district is the ultimate bell Weather county in the state
Speaker 12: and perhaps the nation, and Erie County. Those are the
Speaker 12: two counties. And I don't I'm not big on predictions,
Speaker 12: but I will say this, I will predict this. Whichever
Speaker 12: candidate wins Northampton in the Erie Counties will likely win
Speaker 12: the president. We'll win Pennsylvania and we'll win the presidency.
Speaker 12: So this state is if you look at Pennsylvania, you
Speaker 12: know East of the Susquehanna River south and east, it's
Speaker 12: really more like a Northeastern state. And if you look
Speaker 12: at Pennsylvania, maybe west of the Essquehanna, it's kind of
Speaker 12: more like a Midwestern state. And so it's it's a
Speaker 12: few different states out there, and the issue sets in
Speaker 12: the economy is always a big issue out in the
Speaker 12: western part of the state. The eastern part of the
Speaker 12: state in many ways is more prosperous, and you know,
Speaker 12: I think social issues play a more dominant role there.
Speaker 4: What was it, James Carvel said, you've got Philadelphia in
Speaker 4: Pittsburgh and Alabama in the middle. With that said, conference,
Speaker 4: if it's really coming down to Pennsylvania here, why didn't
Speaker 4: Kamala Harris pick your governor Shapiro?
Speaker 12: Well, you know that mystified me. I thought, Okay, for
Speaker 12: Kamala Harris, there is no path to her victory without Pennsylvania.
Speaker 12: Trump is probably true for Trump, but he has to
Speaker 12: win Georgia. But probably true for both candies, but especially
Speaker 12: for Harris. So I was surprised she didn't select Shapiro
Speaker 12: because Shapiro was particularly strong in the Philadelphia media market,
Speaker 12: and he also won in many counties where Joe Biden
Speaker 12: did not, and Tim Waltz, who's a friend I served him.
Speaker 12: He's a good man, you know. He basically if you
Speaker 12: look at the map of Minnesota, Waltz and Biden won
Speaker 12: in the same places. So Shapiro I thought, brought more
Speaker 12: value and in the state that she must win and
Speaker 12: where she is frankly not performing as she needs as
Speaker 12: well as she needs to. So I thought it was
Speaker 12: a I thought it was an error that she didn't
Speaker 12: select him. You know, she obviously had her reasons. In
Speaker 12: the end, she may win and she'll look like a genius.
Speaker 12: But I just thought, if Pennsylvania as the ballgame, Shapiro
Speaker 12: could have really helped her because he does present well,
Speaker 12: he's smart, he's got a more centrist path and could
Speaker 12: help her on issues like fracking in Pennsylvania and others
Speaker 12: where she's.
Speaker 4: Stuck with it. Interesting spending time with former Republican Congressman
Speaker 4: Charlie Dennis. I mentioned you're a senior advisor to a
Speaker 4: group called Our Republican Legacy, and I wonder where your
Speaker 4: head is looking forward to November. If Donald Trump wins
Speaker 4: or if he doesn't win, is this last stand of
Speaker 4: maga will MAGA end with Donald Trump or is it
Speaker 4: the new direction of the GOP.
Speaker 12: Well the reason why we exist at our Republican legacy.
Speaker 12: We are trying to create that counter argument to MAGA
Speaker 12: or a counter narrative. You know, if Trump loses, I
Speaker 12: think that we will be in a much stronger position
Speaker 12: to present an alternative case, as we've talked about before,
Speaker 12: based on core principles like the constitution, the rule of law.
Speaker 12: We believe in free and fair elections, we believe in
Speaker 12: free markets. We are against these ridiculous and destructive tariffs.
Speaker 12: We believe in peace, due strength, and instructive international engagement
Speaker 12: that embraces allies that rejects autocrats like Putin. And so
Speaker 12: we think we can make this argument, and we intend
Speaker 12: to make this argument not just now, but after the election,
Speaker 12: and particularly if Trump loses. I believe there are significant
Speaker 12: numbers of Republicans who want a different direction, as do
Speaker 12: many other Americans. The principles that we outlined and our
Speaker 12: five to four principles are ones that have sustained a
Speaker 12: Republican party for over one hundred and seventy years one
Speaker 12: hundred and seventy years, and we believe they can carry
Speaker 12: us forward, There's no question about it, and a lot
Speaker 12: of Republicans need to hear an argument too. Often Republicans
Speaker 12: who are critical of Trump, maybe particularly an elected office,
Speaker 12: they will complain about them behind closed doors, but nobody's
Speaker 12: hearing that. Silence is not an alternative narrative to MAGA.
Speaker 12: That's why we have to have a proactive agenda, which
Speaker 12: is what we are presenting. And we think that not
Speaker 12: just Nicky Haley voters, but a lot of people who
Speaker 12: vote for Donald Trump wants something better too. And I
Speaker 12: don't think we believe independence and many Democrats will also
Speaker 12: read with what we're talking about.
Speaker 4: Haven't heard anyone refer to Nicki Haley voters for a minute. Congressman,
Speaker 4: it's good to see you come back. We only have
Speaker 4: four weeks to go here, and obviously Pennsylvania couldn't be
Speaker 4: more important. A former Republican Congressman from the great state
Speaker 4: of Pennsylvania, Charlie Dent. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington. Our
Speaker 4: signature panel back together today. We've got Rick and Jeanie
Speaker 4: following another wild weekend on the campaign trail. We'll get
Speaker 4: their take on Trump and Musk and Butler and Kamala
Speaker 4: Harris starting the new media Blitz. It starts right now.
Speaker 4: We'll have a lot more coming up on Bloomberg.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Ken
Speaker 2: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and enroun
Speaker 2: Oto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen
Speaker 2: live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 2: Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 3: I'm Kaylee Lines alongside Joe Matthew here in Washington, will
Speaker 3: continue to bring you the latest from the campaign trail
Speaker 3: and also on the issues that could move the needle
Speaker 3: in swing states, including this latest headline out of Georgia.
Speaker 3: Remembering last week, a judge in Fulton County overturned the
Speaker 3: state's six week abortion band, found it unconstitutionally prohibited abortions. Now,
Speaker 3: Georgia Supreme Court today has struck struck down that ruling,
Speaker 3: putting back into place that six week band while it
Speaker 3: considers the appeal here. This, of course, putting a spotlight
Speaker 3: on the issue of reproductive rights in a state that
Speaker 3: ultimately could decide the electoral College and ultimately the election.
Speaker 3: And it comes Joe just after Kamala Harris sat down
Speaker 3: for an interview on the popular podcast Call Her Daddy
Speaker 3: with Alex Cooper, a conversation centered very much around women's
Speaker 3: rights and reproductive rights. And of course it's just one
Speaker 3: part of a media blitz Harris will have underway this week.
Speaker 3: Is we'll also hear from her tonight in a sit
Speaker 3: down on sixty minutes, which Donald Trump initially agreed to
Speaker 3: and then decided not to do.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I'll be curious to hear what they tell us
Speaker 4: on CBS about how that all transpired. Apparently there will
Speaker 4: be a bit of a background story on why it
Speaker 4: is only one of the two candidates. Tim Walls will
Speaker 4: also be involved. But yeah, you're right, this is quite
Speaker 4: the media blitz and somewhat different than what you might suspect,
Speaker 4: not sitting down with journalists or news agencies. It's the view.
Speaker 4: She's headed to New York tonight the View Howard Stern,
Speaker 4: The Howard Stern Show, and then Stephen Colbert all, I
Speaker 4: think we can argue you friendly audiences. We'll see how
Speaker 4: the panel feels about it. Rick Davis and Genie Shanzano
Speaker 4: are with us our signature panel Bloomberg Politics contributors. She is,
Speaker 4: of course, political science professor at Iona University. He is
Speaker 4: partner at stone Court Capital and Genie, I wonder your
Speaker 4: thoughts on the selections here. We're going to have a
Speaker 4: lot of eyeballs and ears on these interviews. They are
Speaker 4: mainstream programs. The View of course will have its own brand,
Speaker 4: and so will Howard Stern. What do you make of
Speaker 4: the selections, knowing specifically that Howard Stern has made a
Speaker 4: career on racist and sexist humor.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean it.
Speaker 10: Is quite a list as I'm here listening talk about
Speaker 10: Howard Stern, and then Kayla is talking about Call Her Daddy,
Speaker 10: which we know is a show primarily for young women
Speaker 10: and primarily about sex and dating and all those things.
Speaker 1: You know. You just I think back to like remember.
Speaker 10: When Bill Clinton went on like our Sineo Hall or
Speaker 10: Boxers versus Briefs, and we.
Speaker 1: Were all in uproar.
Speaker 10: It's down right tame compared to where we are now
Speaker 10: and these selections. But you know, to me, she's been
Speaker 10: getting a lot of heat for not doing interviews.
Speaker 1: So they are flooding the zone, so to speak.
Speaker 10: They have a variety of media outlets they're talking to
Speaker 10: or she is talking to as well as her running
Speaker 10: mate Tim Waltz, and you know, they are trying to
Speaker 10: appeal to certain segments. For my mind, the most important
Speaker 10: is Howard Stern. She also did this podcast called All
Speaker 10: the Smoke, which is very appealing to young African American men.
Speaker 10: These are constituencies she needs to reach. And then the
Speaker 10: call her daddy is of course doubling down on her,
Speaker 10: you know, enormous support with young women.
Speaker 1: So she is hitting all the bases here.
Speaker 10: I think she should add to these, go to the
Speaker 10: local media in the Swing States. Local media still matters
Speaker 10: an awful lot on the campaign trail, so I think
Speaker 10: she should continue to do that. She's done some, but
Speaker 10: the more the better in my mind.
Speaker 3: And we'll resteat state here that both Kamala Harris and
Speaker 3: Donald Trump have a standing invitation to come sit down
Speaker 3: for an interview here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. So Rick,
Speaker 3: with that in mind, we would like to see them
Speaker 3: here if you were running this campaign, where else would
Speaker 3: you send her? Frankly, both of the candidates, what audiences
Speaker 3: are they not actually reaching that they still need to
Speaker 3: as they try to get every last vote.
Speaker 13: Well, if you talk about Howard Stern, and you're talking
Speaker 13: about ten million viewers a week listeners. Then you got
Speaker 13: to talk about Joe Rogan, like what an interesting interview
Speaker 13: that would be if Kamala Harrison and Donald Trump individually
Speaker 13: booked the end of that show. But look, I think
Speaker 13: that one of the things you mentioned earlier is that
Speaker 13: these are all very targeted. I mean, Howard Stern's demographic is,
Speaker 13: you know, wealthier, you know, thirty five to forty five
Speaker 13: year old. You know, these are profiles of swing voters,
Speaker 13: younger women, young black men. You're going to see a
Speaker 13: lot of focus on those people who have a message
Speaker 13: into those demographics. And I think the ultimate slam dunk
Speaker 13: is going to be deploying Barack Obama later in the campaign.
Speaker 13: Here later in the campaign we only got twenty eight
Speaker 13: days ago, because one of the places that the Harris
Speaker 13: campaign needs shoring up is with those young black men
Speaker 13: who have had flirtations with Donald Trump's messaging. So I
Speaker 13: think that it's the best thing I did, and the
Speaker 13: most fun I've ever had as a campaign manager, was
Speaker 13: matching up news outlets with demographics and finding people who
Speaker 13: had great input but maybe not nationally nationally recognized so
Speaker 13: much more fun than just booking your Canada on the
Speaker 13: nightly news or a Sunday talk show.
Speaker 4: Well, we saw Donald Trump interviewed by Elon Musk. Of course,
Speaker 4: Genie and Elon Musk showed up in Butler, Pennsylvania this week,
Speaker 4: and we told you he'd be there. This is, of course,
Speaker 4: the site of the first attempted assassination against Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: And while we're talking about one campaign's leveraging of pop
Speaker 4: culture and celebrity, we should talk about this. Elon Musk
Speaker 4: was brought up on the stage inside the glass box
Speaker 4: that Donald Trump speaks in the bulletproof box. Here's what
Speaker 4: he said.
Speaker 11: President Trump must win to preserve the Constitution. He must
Speaker 11: win to preserve democracy in America. This is a must
Speaker 11: win situation. Must win. So have I have one one
Speaker 11: ask for everyone in the audience, everyone who watches this video,
Speaker 11: everyone in the live stream. This one request. It's very important.
Speaker 11: Register to vote.
Speaker 4: I don't know if that will be as powerful as
Speaker 4: Taylor Swift's attempts to register voters at vote dot org. Genie,
Speaker 4: but I want to ask you about the double standard
Speaker 4: and the rhetoric here because I spent all Sunday morning
Speaker 4: watching news programs in which we heard from the likes
Speaker 4: of Speaker Mike Johnson and other Republicans who said that
Speaker 4: Democrats were responsible for Donald Trump and the attempt at
Speaker 4: assassinations because they have framed him, as we hear from
Speaker 4: Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and others as the end of democracy.
Speaker 4: But we just heard as well from Elon Musk as
Speaker 4: we do from Donald Trump, that Trump must win to
Speaker 4: preserve democracy in America. Elon Musk went further to say
Speaker 4: that if Trump loses, there won't be another election. So
Speaker 4: is this coming from both sides or not?
Speaker 10: It is coming from both sides, that both sides are
Speaker 10: using this provocative language. We heard it also, just to
Speaker 10: add to your litany, from Lara Trump on CNN saying
Speaker 10: that it was a choice between good and evil. We
Speaker 10: heard from Eric Trump talking about the fact that Democrats
Speaker 10: are trying to kill his father. So the rhetoric is
Speaker 10: on both sides. And you know, we've talked about this
Speaker 10: a little bit before, but it's important to underscore what
Speaker 10: happens when both sides use this kind to provocative Brederick
Speaker 10: is sort of a dilution where voters throw up their
Speaker 10: hands and say, I'm just.
Speaker 1: Going to discount all of it.
Speaker 10: It's sort of like when they play those medicine commercials
Speaker 10: and they give you the litany of bad things that
Speaker 10: can happen to you if you take this aspirin. Well,
Speaker 10: you start to say, can't be all that bad because
Speaker 10: everything from the smallest to the biggest issues can happen.
Speaker 10: And so that's a known theory. It has an impact
Speaker 10: on people and they sort of start to discount. And
Speaker 10: can I just say my favorite part of Elon Musk's
Speaker 10: appearance was not just the dark maga, but his jumping,
Speaker 10: which reminded me of time cruise on over Free's couch.
Speaker 1: What is happening?
Speaker 5: Why is he?
Speaker 1: Oh?
Speaker 3: The jumping memes have been plentiful in the last forty
Speaker 3: eight hours. That is all I will say about that.
Speaker 3: There also is, to Joe's point, Rick, this question about
Speaker 3: how much having someone like Elon Musk in your corner
Speaker 3: actually matters. Bloomberg and Morning Consoles actually, in our latest
Speaker 3: swing state poll found that Elon Musk across the seven
Speaker 3: battleground states has a forty percent favorable reading thirty four unfavorable.
Speaker 3: Taylor Swift, who of course came out and endorsed Harris
Speaker 3: after the debate with Donald Trump forty seven percent favorable,
Speaker 3: thirty six percent unfavorable. So I'm not sure as we
Speaker 3: consider the favorability here how much that might make a
Speaker 3: difference Rick. But it also is a question of the platform.
Speaker 3: Surely both can reach a large audience. We all know
Speaker 3: about Taylor Swift's Instagram following, but Elon Musk literally owns
Speaker 3: x one of the social media platforms in which information
Speaker 3: true or falls about this election is being propagated. Is
Speaker 3: that the most powerful weapon of all?
Speaker 4: It may be one of the most powerful.
Speaker 13: It depends upon what motivation you have, and whether or
Speaker 13: not those motivations are generating positives or negatives for the
Speaker 13: candidate you choose to endorse. The Taylor Swift thing is
Speaker 13: pretty benign, right. First of all, they're both popular, which
Speaker 13: is better than most politicians can say. Second, you know,
Speaker 13: does Taylor Swift's support actually make a voter looked twice
Speaker 13: at the candidate she's endorsing, And I would say that's
Speaker 13: probably true based on the pulling I've seen.
Speaker 4: You know, she can drive eyeballs, and of.
Speaker 13: Course there's a negative effect when she endorsed Kamala Harris
Speaker 13: after the first after the debate, we saw Republicans saying
Speaker 13: she's much more unfavorable than they had in larger numbers
Speaker 13: before the endorsement. And I have no doubt that this
Speaker 13: will have the same effect on someone like Elon Musk.
Speaker 13: But when you control a huge media outlet that's out
Speaker 13: there twenty four hours a day, seven days a week,
Speaker 13: like X, I would say your leverage to influence the
Speaker 13: dialogue in the campaign, and therefore, potentially the outcome is
Speaker 13: significantly higher. And unless Taylor Swift decides to hit the
Speaker 13: road and start campaigning every day, Elon Musk is going
Speaker 13: to have a little more influence than she's going to
Speaker 13: have on the outcome of this selection.
Speaker 4: The New York Times with quite a piece today on
Speaker 4: Donald Trump's speaking style and cognitive ability, pointing to a
Speaker 4: computer analysis that finds Trump's rally speech is now last
Speaker 4: an average of eighty two minutes, up from forty five
Speaker 4: in twenty sixteen. He uses thirteen percent more all or
Speaker 4: nothing terms like always or never, thirty two percent more
Speaker 4: negative words than positive, and making references to the eighties
Speaker 4: and nineties, Hannibal Lecter, Johnny Carson, carry Grant, and so on.
Speaker 4: I guess it goes further back. Genie and our remaining
Speaker 4: thirty seconds. Will Democrats make a bigger issue of age
Speaker 4: in these last four weeks?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think they should.
Speaker 10: And speaking of the New York Times, they have been
Speaker 10: running a lot of pieces, as you mentioned, talking about
Speaker 10: age because of course it fell by the wayside after
Speaker 10: Joe Biden Withdrew and Donald Trump is an elderly man.
Speaker 10: And let's just say another difference between Taylor Swift and
Speaker 10: Elon Musk of many, Taylor Swift doesn't get billions of
Speaker 10: dollars in government contracts, just saying there is.
Speaker 3: Yeah, last I checked, no uh rocket company owned by
Speaker 3: Taylor Swift, Genie Shanzano and Rick Davis, our signature political panel.
Speaker 4: Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make
Speaker 4: sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 4: or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find
Speaker 4: us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern
Speaker 4: at Bloomberg dot com.