WEBVTT - Election Day Analysis 0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:13.200 Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. This is the Bloomberg 0:00:13.240 --> 0:00:17.560 Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at seven am Eastern 0:00:17.680 --> 0:00:21.280 on applecar Player, Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. 0:00:21.560 --> 0:00:24.800 Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch 0:00:24.840 --> 0:00:26.239 us live on YouTube. 0:00:26.480 --> 0:00:29.200 Listen an important discussion and Bob Woodward yesterday and our 0:00:29.280 --> 0:00:32.800 piercing conversation. Thanks for the many comments there, particularly from 0:00:32.840 --> 0:00:37.480 Trump supporters that felt mister Woodward was supporting the other team. 0:00:38.440 --> 0:00:41.000 And to have Tina Fordham with us right now. Fordham 0:00:41.000 --> 0:00:44.120 Global Insights is important. Off what Bob Woodward said yesterday 0:00:44.600 --> 0:00:48.000 that the Secretary Defense of the Biden administration has an 0:00:48.000 --> 0:00:52.120 affinity for the Vice President of the United States, Tinas. 0:00:52.159 --> 0:00:55.640 I know you know in Foreign Affairs magazine the Secretary 0:00:55.800 --> 0:00:59.920 of Defense writing and of course is extreme concern about 0:01:00.600 --> 0:01:05.440 Ukraine and quote Putin's aggression unquote. The Secretary of Defense 0:01:05.520 --> 0:01:11.600 goes the frauds and falsehoods of the Kremlin apologists. What 0:01:11.640 --> 0:01:14.679 does the Department of Defense and our foreign policy projection 0:01:14.880 --> 0:01:17.840 look like, whether Trump or Harris Victory. 0:01:20.480 --> 0:01:23.399 Well, I think we should admit to start with it. 0:01:23.480 --> 0:01:27.040 As we've gotten closer to polling day. In the US, 0:01:27.920 --> 0:01:33.399 the sounding the alarm about the risks of Trump and 0:01:33.440 --> 0:01:38.240 the White House have increased, and the Defense Secretary is 0:01:38.319 --> 0:01:41.240 talking about the fact that Trump has said that he 0:01:41.280 --> 0:01:44.880 would end the war in Ukraine on day one. He 0:01:44.920 --> 0:01:48.120 hasn't said how he would do that. But what is 0:01:48.440 --> 0:01:52.000 likely the biggest foreign policy implication in the short term 0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:54.480 of Trump and the White House has got to be 0:01:55.840 --> 0:01:59.680 his promised end to military aid to Ukraine. Even though 0:01:59.680 --> 0:02:03.560 you're has done a lot and done it quickly in 0:02:03.720 --> 0:02:06.640 European Union terms, and the UK has been very involved 0:02:06.680 --> 0:02:10.960 in this, it won't be possible to replace that aid 0:02:11.480 --> 0:02:14.800 in time. And you know, Putin's been playing a waiting 0:02:14.880 --> 0:02:17.359 game when it comes to Ukraine, and he's been much 0:02:17.400 --> 0:02:20.399 more active when it comes to US elections. 0:02:21.360 --> 0:02:23.680 Tina, you're based in London. I'd love to get a 0:02:23.800 --> 0:02:26.600 sense of kind of what the folks in the UK 0:02:26.680 --> 0:02:30.800 are thinking about this election, how closely they're paying attention 0:02:30.840 --> 0:02:33.240 to it, how do they view potential outcomes. 0:02:35.760 --> 0:02:37.920 Well, I mean, I guess I have a bit of 0:02:37.919 --> 0:02:41.960 a you know, self selected crowd around me. My phone 0:02:42.040 --> 0:02:46.080 is lighting up constantly today and in the UK people 0:02:46.400 --> 0:02:50.400 feel very close to the United States and so there's 0:02:50.600 --> 0:02:53.400 you know, affinity and concern on that front, and of 0:02:53.400 --> 0:02:57.639 course in the markets, our investor clients and corporate clients 0:02:58.320 --> 0:03:00.520 are really on the edge of their seats about this. 0:03:00.800 --> 0:03:05.600 It's impossible to position for an election as close as this, 0:03:05.760 --> 0:03:08.600 as Tom was saying at the start, but there is 0:03:08.800 --> 0:03:13.120 enormous anxiety and it's pretty much across the board about 0:03:13.120 --> 0:03:15.840 what it would mean for the UK and Europe to 0:03:15.919 --> 0:03:18.240 have Trump back in the White House. And I think 0:03:18.240 --> 0:03:22.399 there's been less consideration really about what a Harris presidency 0:03:22.680 --> 0:03:28.760 would mean, apart from the expectation of continuity on NATO, Alcus, 0:03:29.400 --> 0:03:32.840 you know, the security umbrella in Asia. 0:03:34.320 --> 0:03:37.040 What have you heard, if anything, from some of the 0:03:37.200 --> 0:03:41.440 European leaders about a potential second Trump presidency in terms 0:03:41.520 --> 0:03:44.720 of just geopolitics in general. Again, as as you mentioned, 0:03:44.760 --> 0:03:46.720 there's so many hotspots around the world, from the Middle 0:03:46.760 --> 0:03:51.119 East to Ukraine. What would that mean. 0:03:50.920 --> 0:03:55.920 Potentially, Well, European elected officials will be at great pains 0:03:56.000 --> 0:03:59.320 not to say anything because you know, they don't want 0:03:59.320 --> 0:04:03.160 to be seen to be interfering in the elections. But 0:04:03.440 --> 0:04:06.400 there has been no secret about the fact that Brussels, 0:04:06.520 --> 0:04:10.920 for example, has been trying to trunk proof Europe, and 0:04:10.960 --> 0:04:15.280 that's the term that's been used, and that relates particularly 0:04:15.320 --> 0:04:19.240 to security and defense, as mentioned, But I think the 0:04:19.279 --> 0:04:21.840 other angle here, I mean, the obvious one is security 0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:24.599 and defense, and it matters enormously. But the other angle 0:04:24.640 --> 0:04:28.600 about why these US elections are being watched so closely 0:04:28.640 --> 0:04:33.720 and with so much anxiety is simply around the question 0:04:33.839 --> 0:04:37.840 about whether the US can have a peaceful transition. And 0:04:37.920 --> 0:04:40.680 I was very interested to see some polling data from 0:04:40.720 --> 0:04:45.280 the AP that talked about four and ten Americans are 0:04:45.360 --> 0:04:51.839 concerned about violent interference with elections. That's alarming. So I 0:04:51.880 --> 0:04:56.120 think the biggest litmus test is the functioning of our 0:04:56.200 --> 0:05:00.120 institutions and the acquiescence of whoever loses. 0:05:00.880 --> 0:05:04.440 One of the great changes here at Tina from twenty 0:05:04.640 --> 0:05:09.479 sixteen to twenty twenty to twenty twenty four, way beneath 0:05:09.520 --> 0:05:14.160 the fold in America, nobody's paying attention is ninety six 0:05:14.279 --> 0:05:20.160 miles from the Russian border in Finland Lapland, the United 0:05:20.200 --> 0:05:26.520 States is leading NATO artillery exercises. That's something I would 0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:29.400 not have said four years ago or eight years ago. 0:05:29.760 --> 0:05:35.360 What is the significance of NATO artillery exercises? A Cuba 0:05:35.400 --> 0:05:37.000 away from Putin's border. 0:05:39.640 --> 0:05:42.560 Well, that speaks to the fact that we have two 0:05:42.960 --> 0:05:47.080 new NATO member states since Russia decided to invade Ukraine, 0:05:47.120 --> 0:05:51.640 and those are Finland and Sweden. It wasn't expected. I 0:05:51.640 --> 0:05:54.119 suppose even five years ago. I actually had a bet 0:05:54.160 --> 0:05:56.839 with a Swedish banker friend of mine about this, that 0:05:56.880 --> 0:06:02.080 they would both join. But you take an interesting place, Tom, 0:06:02.120 --> 0:06:06.560 which is that one of the sort of open debates 0:06:06.600 --> 0:06:11.920 that's underway is whether those Nordic states would kind of 0:06:12.480 --> 0:06:16.720 form their own and mini NATO if US withdraws its 0:06:16.760 --> 0:06:20.000 support in one form or another. They have strong militaries 0:06:20.120 --> 0:06:22.640 and have had the mandatory draft, and I think a 0:06:22.680 --> 0:06:27.360 lot of Americans don't appreciate how prepared those countries are. 0:06:27.480 --> 0:06:32.240 Finland was at war with Russia, remember, and has a 0:06:32.320 --> 0:06:35.880 memory of being at war to defend their territory. But 0:06:36.040 --> 0:06:37.960 they do rely on US participation. 0:06:38.240 --> 0:06:40.279 This came up last night at the dining room table, 0:06:40.760 --> 0:06:45.720 Tina Fordham. If President Trump wins a second term, where 0:06:45.760 --> 0:06:50.640 does he travel to first? Does he reducts his Pacific travels? 0:06:51.279 --> 0:06:54.560 Does he go to Europe? Will he try to redo 0:06:55.279 --> 0:06:56.560 twenty sixteen? 0:06:58.839 --> 0:07:01.440 So I actually have thought about that before. I love 0:07:01.440 --> 0:07:05.320 a thought experiment, Tom, but I don't think that Trump 0:07:05.880 --> 0:07:10.800 will feel compelled if he's reelected to do the traditional 0:07:10.920 --> 0:07:15.640 calling upon allies. Trump's also not really an ally guy, 0:07:16.280 --> 0:07:20.280 and if we look at his you know, campaign statements, 0:07:20.720 --> 0:07:23.640 they're really focused on the domestic. I mean, my sense 0:07:23.760 --> 0:07:28.800 is that Trump would likely subcontract his foreign policy, trade 0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:32.960 policy to experts who he trusts. Of course, the trouble 0:07:33.000 --> 0:07:34.920 for us is when we try to speculate what that 0:07:35.000 --> 0:07:38.000 looks like that most of the people who worked for 0:07:38.080 --> 0:07:42.200 him before have made it abundantly clear that they would 0:07:42.240 --> 0:07:43.880 never consider doing so again. 0:07:44.680 --> 0:07:46.760 Tina, we got to leave it there. Never enough time, 0:07:47.040 --> 0:07:50.000 Tina Fordham Fordham Global Inside. 0:07:54.400 --> 0:07:58.239 You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live 0:07:58.360 --> 0:08:01.680 weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Easter Listen on 0:08:01.720 --> 0:08:04.960 Apple car Play and Android Otto with a Bloomberg Business app, 0:08:05.080 --> 0:08:06.760 or watch us live on YouTube. 0:08:07.040 --> 0:08:09.239 There are moments in the blur of all this, folks. 0:08:09.840 --> 0:08:12.720 There's moments where any of our wonderful esting guests they 0:08:12.760 --> 0:08:16.760 say one single thing and like it doesn't go away. 0:08:16.960 --> 0:08:21.440 You remember, one hour, one day, one month later, got 0:08:21.600 --> 0:08:24.800 to mccunda said something a while back. I think it 0:08:24.840 --> 0:08:28.160 was I miscot him last time around because I was 0:08:28.160 --> 0:08:31.760 in Europe. But with Yale School of Management said something 0:08:31.840 --> 0:08:34.480 Paul that had carried for weeks and weeks and weeks, 0:08:35.000 --> 0:08:39.720 which is the undecided shrink. They shrink much more, and 0:08:39.760 --> 0:08:43.160 everybody caught up with Professor mccundy. He joins us down 0:08:43.160 --> 0:08:47.480 in studio on this election day. Where are the undecideds? Now? 0:08:47.800 --> 0:08:48.880 They got to decide. 0:08:49.440 --> 0:08:52.720 They have to decide at this point, pulling to everything 0:08:52.720 --> 0:08:55.839 here is guesses and stabs in the dark. But all 0:08:55.920 --> 0:08:58.240 the data I'm seeing suggests that in the last twenty 0:08:58.280 --> 0:08:59.920 four to forty eight hours, even even though I wanted 0:08:59.960 --> 0:09:04.880 to weeks, they've broken pretty strongly towards Harris the really 0:09:04.880 --> 0:09:08.160 decisive moment, and it's strikingly. It's striking So was the 0:09:08.200 --> 0:09:11.360 Madison Square Garden event. There's a lot of polling data 0:09:11.360 --> 0:09:14.480 coming out for Latinos, particularly Latinos in Pennsylvania that they 0:09:14.520 --> 0:09:16.880 all heard about it. It mattered to all of them, 0:09:17.320 --> 0:09:20.800 and it swung a substance. It swung some votes. Now 0:09:21.080 --> 0:09:22.640 I can't tell you that's enough to swing the election 0:09:22.760 --> 0:09:25.200 because there aren't many of those people like that. The 0:09:25.280 --> 0:09:27.760 undecided was last time I was here, it was three percent. 0:09:27.800 --> 0:09:29.800 It's probably less than that now, and a lot of 0:09:29.800 --> 0:09:33.439 people had already voted by the time those events happened. 0:09:33.880 --> 0:09:37.280 But the Harris campaign is not a lot quietly anymore, 0:09:37.280 --> 0:09:39.360 feeling very confident because of what they've seen in the 0:09:39.440 --> 0:09:39.920 last few. 0:09:39.800 --> 0:09:41.360 Days we had. 0:09:41.520 --> 0:09:43.600 Yesterday, the piece of music came out as the Seltzer 0:09:43.920 --> 0:09:48.360 poll coming out of Iowa that surprisingly showed Vice President 0:09:48.440 --> 0:09:53.040 Kamala Harris three points ahead. What do you make of that? 0:09:53.480 --> 0:09:58.000 Earthquake does not understate the impact that they had. And 0:09:58.200 --> 0:10:01.360 Seltzer's record in Iowa was so good that I occasionally 0:10:01.640 --> 0:10:03.800 I occasionally make jokes that she doesn't She's lived in 0:10:03.800 --> 0:10:05.840 Iowa a whole life. She only does Iowa. She doesn't 0:10:05.840 --> 0:10:08.160 pull the state. She just knows every Iowa voter and 0:10:08.200 --> 0:10:11.440 asks them what they'll do. She I mean, it's not 0:10:11.480 --> 0:10:13.240 that she's never been wrong. She missed a gubernatorial e 0:10:13.320 --> 0:10:15.720 race a couple of years a few years ago, but 0:10:15.840 --> 0:10:18.520 in general, her record is as close to perfect as 0:10:18.600 --> 0:10:21.080 Upholster can get. For her to say not just that 0:10:21.160 --> 0:10:25.240 it's close, but that Trump is three points down stunning, 0:10:25.840 --> 0:10:27.719 I'll add to that. Okay, let's say she had a 0:10:27.720 --> 0:10:30.640 statistical fluke. It can happen to anyone, even Seltzer, I 0:10:30.679 --> 0:10:33.560 don't really think Harris is gonna win Iowa. The Trump 0:10:33.600 --> 0:10:38.720 campaign's response was to leak internals saying that they that 0:10:38.760 --> 0:10:41.480 they had numbers saying he was five points up. That's 0:10:41.520 --> 0:10:43.560 really bad for Trump. If he's five points up, and 0:10:43.679 --> 0:10:45.400 he should be ten to fifteen points up in Iowa. 0:10:45.559 --> 0:10:47.920 If he's five points up in Iowa, that's really bad 0:10:47.960 --> 0:10:50.080 news for him across the country. Now, the one thing 0:10:50.120 --> 0:10:53.199 I'd say is it might be Iowa specific. Iowa's abortion 0:10:53.320 --> 0:10:57.720 band went into what went active in July, and basically 0:10:57.800 --> 0:11:00.720 Iowa local elections have been nothing but sat gration bombing 0:11:00.760 --> 0:11:05.320 on abortion, and so that might mean that a swing 0:11:05.480 --> 0:11:08.840 by white women that's what Seltz picked up based on Dobbs, 0:11:09.400 --> 0:11:11.520 is more intense in Iowa than it is anywhere else 0:11:11.520 --> 0:11:12.040 in the country. 0:11:12.920 --> 0:11:17.560 Turnout, I'm told that it's particularly important this election, given 0:11:17.600 --> 0:11:21.960 how close the election appears to be. Does one camp 0:11:22.040 --> 0:11:24.680 one party have an advantage there in terms of turnout. 0:11:25.440 --> 0:11:28.720 So everyone agrees that the Harris turnout machine is much better, 0:11:28.800 --> 0:11:30.960 Like that's just that's not even that the Trump people 0:11:30.960 --> 0:11:33.040 will tell you that it's just much more effective, partly 0:11:33.040 --> 0:11:35.520 because they the Trump people outsource their entire turnout operation 0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:38.520 of Charlie Kirk and Elon Musk, and you can't build 0:11:38.559 --> 0:11:40.400 these things on the fly like you actually have to 0:11:40.400 --> 0:11:45.120 spend years doing it. That being said, Trump had essentially 0:11:45.200 --> 0:11:48.640 no turnout in operation at twenty sixteen, none, and he 0:11:48.760 --> 0:11:51.400 got people who never who you know, a democratic turnout 0:11:51.440 --> 0:11:53.320 machine would have just written off is not worth approaching. 0:11:53.880 --> 0:11:55.440 He got them to show up and vote for him. 0:11:55.559 --> 0:11:58.760 There's nothing that helps your turnout more than a clear, 0:11:58.840 --> 0:12:02.400 consistent message by a care ors met a candidate. You know, 0:12:02.600 --> 0:12:05.199 whether you like Donald Trump or not, that is a 0:12:05.320 --> 0:12:07.280 pretty good description of his campaign. 0:12:08.520 --> 0:12:10.760 What do you think I mean? Is Pennsylvania the state 0:12:10.800 --> 0:12:12.400 we should be focusing on or are there some other 0:12:12.440 --> 0:12:13.800 places we should be looking. 0:12:13.880 --> 0:12:18.160 I would start with Pennsylvania. So let's say it's harder 0:12:18.200 --> 0:12:20.640 to get early info from states than it is from 0:12:20.840 --> 0:12:24.600 particular areas, So it varies from election to election. But 0:12:24.679 --> 0:12:27.200 I'll tell you in twenty sixteen, I was looking at 0:12:27.240 --> 0:12:30.320 some areas in Virginia, and I was I was in China, 0:12:30.360 --> 0:12:32.760 of all things. I was doing an election commentary in Beijing. 0:12:32.920 --> 0:12:36.439 Among the strangest experiences of my life. And so about 0:12:36.559 --> 0:12:39.360 nine pm local time, which would have been nine and sorry, 0:12:39.440 --> 0:12:41.400 nine am local time, which had been nine pm time here, 0:12:41.720 --> 0:12:43.720 I got those results and turned to some people next 0:12:43.720 --> 0:12:47.280 to me and said, I think one's gonna lose this time. 0:12:47.480 --> 0:12:51.160 There's actually Pennsylvania guests also Delaware. They're oddly I mean, 0:12:51.200 --> 0:12:53.640 obviously they're gonna win Delaware, but if it's closer than 0:12:53.679 --> 0:12:56.400 you expect, that would be a pretty bad sign for Harris. 0:12:57.280 --> 0:13:01.440 Picking presidents, I mean, mister Trump is unique, even as 0:13:01.440 --> 0:13:05.040 supporters will agree, it's a unique process. What have we 0:13:05.160 --> 0:13:08.360 learned your wonderful book picking presidents? What have we learned 0:13:08.760 --> 0:13:12.520 about picking presidents? It prepares us for twenty twenty eight? 0:13:13.640 --> 0:13:16.319 I think counterintuitively, the thing maybe we should learn is 0:13:16.400 --> 0:13:20.559 that campaigns. Campaigns are just too long. I think Harris 0:13:20.559 --> 0:13:23.560 got a real benefit from being I mean, maybe this 0:13:23.679 --> 0:13:26.520 was too short for her, but the two year long 0:13:26.559 --> 0:13:28.920 election cycle that we've been doing for presidential campaigns, it 0:13:29.000 --> 0:13:32.360 drives everyone in saying it forces people to take positions 0:13:32.360 --> 0:13:34.280 that end up being completely in defensive. 0:13:34.440 --> 0:13:36.880 So to be clear, here, for Vice President Harris, she 0:13:36.960 --> 0:13:39.240 had an advantage because of the delay. 0:13:39.800 --> 0:13:41.800 I won't say I think she would rather have had 0:13:41.840 --> 0:13:43.839 a normal cycle, And I have to give her credit 0:13:43.880 --> 0:13:45.520 for being able to perform this balancing act in the 0:13:45.520 --> 0:13:47.559 shortest kind of time. But if I were a normal candidate, 0:13:47.920 --> 0:13:50.040 I would rather do six months than two years. 0:13:50.120 --> 0:13:54.360 Charlie Cook led his before election essay with we grew 0:13:54.440 --> 0:13:59.120 up with landslides. I was explaining at home what they 0:13:59.160 --> 0:14:03.440 did to mcgovernor in seventy two. That's beyond the realm 0:14:03.520 --> 0:14:07.120 of how we think. Now. Do you desire, professor, that 0:14:07.200 --> 0:14:11.480 we get back to landslides, back to where we vote 0:14:11.520 --> 0:14:14.400 for somebody with an image, or we just wedded to 0:14:14.480 --> 0:14:16.360 this polarity forever. 0:14:16.760 --> 0:14:18.640 So I don't think we are. We saw landslide in two 0:14:18.600 --> 0:14:21.360 thousand and eight and twenty twelve was not that close. 0:14:23.200 --> 0:14:27.360 This polarity is deeply operational, and I'll says, speaking as 0:14:27.400 --> 0:14:29.640 a political scientist for a second, we don't really understand 0:14:29.640 --> 0:14:31.840 why we don't have good theories as to what is 0:14:31.840 --> 0:14:33.920 going on, as to why the elections. The elections are 0:14:33.960 --> 0:14:37.880 so perfectly balanced right now. I think the American political 0:14:37.920 --> 0:14:40.800 system basically does not work when it is in deadlock. 0:14:41.480 --> 0:14:42.560 Other political systems do. 0:14:42.720 --> 0:14:45.880 But to the laureate to mit. Is it, you know, 0:14:45.920 --> 0:14:48.080 in the Power and Progress? Is it just a separation 0:14:48.200 --> 0:14:51.040 of the nation year between the haves and they have nots? 0:14:51.520 --> 0:14:53.280 Is that really all this comes down to. 0:14:53.720 --> 0:14:56.840 I don't think so. I think that is a driving issue. 0:14:57.000 --> 0:15:01.080 But although the Trump campaign sort of said images, it's 0:15:01.080 --> 0:15:03.360 image of itself that it portrays is of the working 0:15:03.560 --> 0:15:07.800 sort of the working class tribunal. Trump voters are significantly 0:15:07.840 --> 0:15:11.280 wealthier than Harris voters. They were significantly wealthier than Biden 0:15:11.360 --> 0:15:13.520 voters in twenty twenty. They will be significantly well Maharris 0:15:13.640 --> 0:15:16.240 was twenty twenty four. And so you have a real 0:15:16.240 --> 0:15:20.240 conflict between the image of the campaigns and their voter base. 0:15:20.360 --> 0:15:22.160 And that is going to be resolved eventually, but it 0:15:22.240 --> 0:15:22.840 might take a while. 0:15:23.040 --> 0:15:25.680 Love can't wait to talk to you after this election. 0:15:26.520 --> 0:15:28.920 Got a Macunda with this, of course, of Yale his 0:15:29.000 --> 0:15:32.360 book Picking Presidents, How to Make the Most consequential Decision 0:15:32.920 --> 0:15:33.600 in the World. 0:15:34.040 --> 0:15:38.320 This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Listen live each weekday 0:15:38.400 --> 0:15:41.600 starting at seven am Eastern on applecar Play and Android 0:15:41.640 --> 0:15:44.480 Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen 0:15:44.600 --> 0:15:47.720 live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. 0:15:48.080 --> 0:15:50.800 Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty. 0:15:50.960 --> 0:15:53.960 Dan Tobin joins the City Group and courses London watch 0:15:54.840 --> 0:15:58.640 for them, and he's of course with FX there a 0:15:58.720 --> 0:16:01.840 G ten effects strategy. It's City Group. So if you 0:16:01.960 --> 0:16:08.080 bracket Euro Trump Harris Euro right now is I'm looking 0:16:08.080 --> 0:16:10.160 at damn. My eyes are failing me here one oh nine? 0:16:10.840 --> 0:16:14.560 With Trump? Where's Euro? With a Harris? Where's Euro? Yeah? 0:16:14.600 --> 0:16:17.800 Well, I mean very simply, if Trump wins Euro, dollar 0:16:17.920 --> 0:16:21.160 goes down potentially all the way towards around one oh five. 0:16:21.240 --> 0:16:22.800 That'd probably be a bit of a stretch, but it 0:16:22.800 --> 0:16:26.160 could get down that far. If Harris wins, Euro higher 0:16:26.240 --> 0:16:28.600 at least back to one ten, but there might be 0:16:28.640 --> 0:16:31.960 some difficulty getting higher than that, simply because data in 0:16:32.000 --> 0:16:33.920 the US has been outperforming the Euro. 0:16:34.240 --> 0:16:39.080 So with Harris, the euro strength is it's asymmetric. Is 0:16:39.120 --> 0:16:42.520 it about euro stronger? Is it sell the dollar with Harris? 0:16:42.680 --> 0:16:45.440 No, this is absolutely about the dollar. And actually there's 0:16:45.640 --> 0:16:47.360 dollar yen would be a trade we'd be looking. 0:16:47.200 --> 0:16:48.360 At more because wrack at that. 0:16:48.440 --> 0:16:54.320 Please, it's a proxy one, it's a proxy for rates, 0:16:54.400 --> 0:16:56.560 and so rates should go down, You'll should go down 0:16:56.600 --> 0:16:59.240 if we see a Harris win, and so dollar yen 0:16:59.280 --> 0:17:00.000 should go down as well. 0:17:00.840 --> 0:17:04.119 Since the beginning of time, when I think about trading currencies, 0:17:04.160 --> 0:17:07.600 I think about City, Bank and City. Now you guys 0:17:07.600 --> 0:17:12.960 are New York, London, Asia, you trade everything. How are 0:17:12.960 --> 0:17:15.400 you guys staffing up for the next twelve to twenty 0:17:15.440 --> 0:17:18.480 four hours globally currency desk at City. 0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:20.879 Oh, it's it's gonna be busy, and it's gonna be 0:17:20.920 --> 0:17:23.360 all hands on deck at least tonight until we have 0:17:24.119 --> 0:17:25.960 you know, probably until midnight. We have to see how 0:17:26.000 --> 0:17:28.879 the results are coming out, but certainly twenty four to 0:17:28.960 --> 0:17:31.440 seven we will have staff and we will be there. 0:17:31.359 --> 0:17:35.119 For what currency pair, What indicator of FX is what 0:17:35.280 --> 0:17:37.920 Dan Tobin's gonna watch off the Bloomberg at City. 0:17:37.800 --> 0:17:40.120 I'm gonna be watching dollar Yen and dollar max. Those 0:17:40.119 --> 0:17:41.639 will be the two key ones to keep an eye on. 0:17:41.720 --> 0:17:43.760 Talk to us about dollar Mexican hit pay, So what's 0:17:43.800 --> 0:17:46.760 the relationship there, what's driving that trade? 0:17:46.760 --> 0:17:47.240 These days? 0:17:47.480 --> 0:17:49.800 Dollar max has a lot of domestic stories, but it's 0:17:49.840 --> 0:17:53.880 also sensitive to the US dynamic if Trump wins, both 0:17:53.960 --> 0:17:57.240 because the USMCA will come under review and so there's 0:17:57.320 --> 0:18:00.560 some potential uncertainty around there, and also because there's been 0:18:00.560 --> 0:18:03.200 a lot of border disputes, so Mexus comes into focus 0:18:03.480 --> 0:18:03.919 and remains. 0:18:04.440 --> 0:18:07.520 So Max's twenty point one three. If Trump is going 0:18:07.560 --> 0:18:10.679 to win or appear to win, it weakens to twenty 0:18:10.720 --> 0:18:12.960 one twenty two in that area. 0:18:13.080 --> 0:18:15.120 It's hard to say overnight, but certainly potentially. 0:18:15.200 --> 0:18:19.040 Yeah, I don't, you know, it's completely unfair, but the directions. 0:18:18.680 --> 0:18:19.640 Absolutely that story. 0:18:19.720 --> 0:18:21.920 When you talk to your clients, do you feel like 0:18:21.960 --> 0:18:26.240 they're hedged today? Are they making bets today? Are they 0:18:26.320 --> 0:18:29.640 just saying I'm on the sidelines today because there will 0:18:29.680 --> 0:18:30.800 be movements in your market? 0:18:30.880 --> 0:18:31.080 Yeah? 0:18:31.119 --> 0:18:34.639 Absolutely. For the most part, the big accounts have really 0:18:34.680 --> 0:18:37.320 reduced positioning and are trying to go in as lightly 0:18:37.359 --> 0:18:41.160 positioned as possible. The more active clients they're long dollar, 0:18:41.200 --> 0:18:43.080 they've reduced some of that. They were a lot more 0:18:43.119 --> 0:18:45.480 long dollar last week when Trump odds were a bit higher. 0:18:46.200 --> 0:18:47.800 Still leaning towards long dollar though. 0:18:48.200 --> 0:18:51.320 So all right, let's go seventy two hours, three, four 0:18:51.359 --> 0:18:52.360 or five days from now? 0:18:52.720 --> 0:18:53.840 What long term? 0:18:53.880 --> 0:18:57.679 Long term? Let's get back to more fundamentals. What's your 0:18:57.800 --> 0:19:00.560 view here at the currency markets? Where do you see 0:19:00.640 --> 0:19:01.200 value here? 0:19:02.040 --> 0:19:02.320 Yeah? 0:19:02.359 --> 0:19:05.680 Probably outside of the dollar we'd be looking at things 0:19:05.720 --> 0:19:08.480 like the Australian dollar. Actually there's a lot of value 0:19:08.480 --> 0:19:11.320 there just because the domestic story is strong, and there's 0:19:11.320 --> 0:19:15.040 potential for some hedge changes next year. At the end 0:19:15.080 --> 0:19:16.760 of the day, though, the data in the US is 0:19:16.760 --> 0:19:19.199 still holding up, and so it's hard to see a 0:19:19.280 --> 0:19:22.000 real big sell off coming for the dollar. Even if 0:19:22.000 --> 0:19:24.240 Harris wins and the dollar selves off, it probably will 0:19:24.240 --> 0:19:26.240 be momentary and the dollar probably rally. 0:19:26.240 --> 0:19:28.239 Do you have a I mean, G ten, it's not 0:19:28.560 --> 0:19:32.639 but China, How do you affect a China trade given 0:19:32.680 --> 0:19:37.320 the Congress coming out, presume fiscal support, more help, et cetera. 0:19:37.840 --> 0:19:40.159 How does city group affect a China belief? 0:19:40.960 --> 0:19:43.159 Yeah, I mean, the key question is going to be 0:19:43.200 --> 0:19:45.080 what kind of tariffs do we get if we do, 0:19:45.160 --> 0:19:47.480 in fact get a Trump presidency, and to offset that, 0:19:47.560 --> 0:19:49.720 what kind of stimulus where we get from the Chinese side? 0:19:49.720 --> 0:19:52.680 And we do have the Standing Committee meeting on November eight, 0:19:53.040 --> 0:19:55.320 so there it will potentially be a lot of volatility 0:19:55.320 --> 0:19:57.760 around the currency. But very simply, if Trump wins, we 0:19:57.800 --> 0:20:01.159 expect dollars CNH to move higher. Harris wins, we can 0:20:01.200 --> 0:20:03.200 actually see dollars CNH more stable. 0:20:03.680 --> 0:20:07.639 The pound sterling, what's the call there? How do you 0:20:07.680 --> 0:20:09.560 how do you feel about sterling right here? 0:20:09.840 --> 0:20:10.919 Structurally we like it. 0:20:11.040 --> 0:20:13.800 We think there's opportunity for investors which have been very 0:20:13.840 --> 0:20:17.320 underweight the UK since Breadxit, to start moving assets back 0:20:17.359 --> 0:20:21.280 into the UK. Guilt yields look somewhat attractive here. So 0:20:21.320 --> 0:20:24.520 we see potential for a stronger sterling, especially against the Euro, 0:20:24.600 --> 0:20:26.760 into next year. But in the short term it's not 0:20:26.800 --> 0:20:29.880 trading to its domestic fundamentals. It's trading too concerns around 0:20:29.920 --> 0:20:31.400 the budget, around and across the US. 0:20:31.600 --> 0:20:33.800 I'm trying of question you do technicals, which we do 0:20:33.840 --> 0:20:37.119 a lot here instrumants, technicals and radio really work. And 0:20:38.080 --> 0:20:42.080 the answer here is when someone says the vector and 0:20:42.119 --> 0:20:45.920 the dollar is strong dollar, is there an established trend 0:20:46.680 --> 0:20:49.480 I call it soup? Or is it technically just soup? 0:20:49.560 --> 0:20:50.920 Where the dollar is right now? 0:20:50.960 --> 0:20:53.200 If we pull out far enough, there is a very 0:20:53.240 --> 0:20:56.480 clear trend since the Great Financial Crisis for a stronger dollar, 0:20:56.520 --> 0:20:59.960 and in fact, the US has been the outperforming economy 0:21:00.280 --> 0:21:01.560 in the global development. 0:21:01.560 --> 0:21:03.520 So does it gets you on YenS through one sixty? 0:21:03.680 --> 0:21:06.280 I mean Gartman's frame in it for gold, But that's 0:21:06.320 --> 0:21:09.240 Gartman making gold chat. Can you, as a major bank 0:21:09.440 --> 0:21:13.440 frame out a fan distribution it gets a yen back 0:21:13.480 --> 0:21:15.040 out over one sixty. 0:21:15.040 --> 0:21:19.080 That would require a much higher US tenure yield. And 0:21:19.160 --> 0:21:21.280 given that the FED is already in a cutting cycle, 0:21:21.320 --> 0:21:22.919 and then in general we're seeing a bit of a 0:21:22.920 --> 0:21:25.399 slowan on in the US, it's hard to see that 0:21:25.480 --> 0:21:28.360 absence some kind of fiscal shock. Now that's not impossible, 0:21:28.400 --> 0:21:31.480 given you know, we have a potential red wave coming, 0:21:31.560 --> 0:21:33.639 but it's hard for us to see that we actually 0:21:33.640 --> 0:21:35.359 think the yen can strengthen into next year. 0:21:35.600 --> 0:21:38.240 Paul said, you're everywhere? Where are you based for City Group? 0:21:38.280 --> 0:21:39.520 Are you in like Dubai or. 0:21:40.200 --> 0:21:42.200