WEBVTT - Surveillance: Italy Needs IMF Assistance, DB Economist Says 0:00:00.040 --> 0:00:02.640 Who you put your trust in matters. Investors have put 0:00:02.680 --> 0:00:07.000 their trust and independent registered investment advisors to the two 0:00:07.280 --> 0:00:11.360 four trillion dollars Why Learn more at find your Independent 0:00:11.400 --> 0:00:26.960 Advisor dot com. Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm 0:00:27.040 --> 0:00:30.920 Tom Keene with David Gura. Daily we bring you insight 0:00:31.000 --> 0:00:35.560 from the best in economics, finance, investment and international relations. 0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:40.559 Find Bloomberg Surveillance on iTunes, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot com, and 0:00:40.640 --> 0:00:48.480 of course on the Bloomberg We're back with David Folgers Landau. 0:00:48.600 --> 0:00:51.560 He's Deutsche Bank chief economist. David, when I look, first 0:00:51.560 --> 0:00:55.360 of all, your Mario draggy right, and you've done everything 0:00:55.400 --> 0:00:57.960 you could with your mandate to try and reflect the 0:00:57.960 --> 0:01:00.920 economy or at least show us to your recovery. You've 0:01:00.960 --> 0:01:04.679 taken risk out of yields because that's exactly what you wanted, 0:01:04.720 --> 0:01:07.480 so that there are no bond vigilantes. But actually, how 0:01:07.520 --> 0:01:09.440 do you deal with the Donald Trump presidency? Is it 0:01:09.640 --> 0:01:12.680 much more uncertainty? Again he's dealing with the exit of 0:01:13.000 --> 0:01:15.520 the UK from the European Union and we don't know 0:01:15.600 --> 0:01:20.360 what comes next. But continental Europe has been a challenged 0:01:20.400 --> 0:01:23.760 continent in economic terms for some time now. In that 0:01:23.840 --> 0:01:26.240 we have a central bank that's basically run out of 0:01:26.440 --> 0:01:30.200 ammunition and and overshot it's it's not it's mandate, but 0:01:30.240 --> 0:01:34.560 overshot its policy tools quite a bit, ending up with 0:01:34.600 --> 0:01:37.640 a couple of chilion balance sheet pretty soon. We have 0:01:38.400 --> 0:01:42.280 a government securities markets that don't properly signal risk anymore 0:01:42.400 --> 0:01:47.720 because of m and others. Uh. And we've got plus unemployment, 0:01:47.800 --> 0:01:52.600 youth unemployment, frances regular unemployment. Uh and we've just marked 0:01:52.600 --> 0:01:55.000 down growth to almost half we had it's just six 0:01:55.040 --> 0:01:58.720 months ago. This election has a tremendous impact on Europe, 0:01:58.720 --> 0:02:03.520 tremendously negative. Um think of defense. Think of defense in 0:02:03.560 --> 0:02:06.559 the sense that Europe basically doesn't have a proper defense 0:02:06.600 --> 0:02:12.040 posture except for NATO. If the President elect chooses to 0:02:12.080 --> 0:02:14.919 reduce his contributions to NATO, that will impose the tremendous 0:02:14.919 --> 0:02:16.880 burning Europeans. But can it be a wake up call? 0:02:16.960 --> 0:02:19.600 And in certain you know this US election result will 0:02:19.680 --> 0:02:23.080 shift European values or will it just spur the politicians 0:02:23.080 --> 0:02:25.840 attack that That is the big worry that people like 0:02:25.919 --> 0:02:27.560 me have, in the sense that yes, it should be 0:02:27.600 --> 0:02:29.080 a wake up call. It could be a wake up 0:02:29.120 --> 0:02:32.440 called Europe has the correct lead potential to catch up. 0:02:33.160 --> 0:02:36.680 The question is the political arrangements are so entrenched and 0:02:36.760 --> 0:02:39.080 it's so difficult to get changed done in Europe and 0:02:39.120 --> 0:02:42.720 to get policy reactions done quickly that I'm very pessimistic 0:02:42.720 --> 0:02:44.280 about that. Well, well then that let's care that for 0:02:44.400 --> 0:02:46.440 bring up the charter, Anthony, if you would in London. 0:02:46.480 --> 0:02:49.160 This is the Italian tenure and I requested back to 0:02:49.200 --> 0:02:52.240 two thousand eleven. And it's amazing off that red line, 0:02:52.760 --> 0:02:55.360 the leg the move up. If I talk about Italy 0:02:55.440 --> 0:02:58.600 as an emerging market to the rescue, it is supposed 0:02:58.639 --> 0:03:02.040 to come European fed realism. I don't observe it. Is 0:03:02.040 --> 0:03:04.800 it there? So what? It definitely is there? So here 0:03:04.880 --> 0:03:07.880 we have a country um that there has a hundred 0:03:08.520 --> 0:03:12.920 plus death the GDP ratio zero growth runs a deficit 0:03:12.960 --> 0:03:16.320 of three percent, so it keeps accumulating that um and 0:03:16.400 --> 0:03:20.840 it was trading a hundred PEPs above bond. Completely distorted. Now, 0:03:21.240 --> 0:03:24.800 given that the referendum is outcome is in doubt. You 0:03:24.840 --> 0:03:26.840 see it all sund going up behund. The basis points 0:03:27.040 --> 0:03:29.560 My worry is that as we come closer to the 0:03:29.600 --> 0:03:33.480 referendum date and as Trump's changes make themselves felt that 0:03:33.520 --> 0:03:36.880 you're going to see external investors pulling back completely and 0:03:36.920 --> 0:03:38.880 instead of getting a hundred paces point, but we're gonna 0:03:38.880 --> 0:03:41.160 go to four percent and then you're going to have 0:03:41.160 --> 0:03:43.560 an impact on the banking system in Italy and the 0:03:43.600 --> 0:03:46.840 rest of Europe. So for me, Italy is the country 0:03:46.840 --> 0:03:49.000 that I would I would worry about as a flash 0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:52.040 point for additional European princing jump in here? But what's 0:03:52.040 --> 0:03:54.280 so critical here? And you had Joe Stiglets is your 0:03:54.280 --> 0:03:57.680 morning mustard? This morning? There was a Stiglet's equation that 0:03:57.800 --> 0:04:00.400 even the most arch conservative ac car and a Mr 0:04:00.520 --> 0:04:03.600 Politician had to look at, which is that that g 0:04:03.880 --> 0:04:07.480 that growth rate in the formula of how a country 0:04:07.520 --> 0:04:10.880 moves forward? And as dr focus Landa Mensions, the little 0:04:10.960 --> 0:04:14.000 G isn't there for Italy and so much more of Europe. Right, 0:04:14.040 --> 0:04:17.159 But I guess the question is as appalling as it 0:04:17.200 --> 0:04:22.120 may seem to more liberal factions of politics or what 0:04:22.160 --> 0:04:25.599 we're accustomed to. Would someone from the five Star movement 0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:30.400 jump start growth into the or is that just unthinkable? No, 0:04:30.920 --> 0:04:33.080 I think that would be It's probably not going to happen. 0:04:33.120 --> 0:04:36.080 But what needs to happen is that if Italy gets 0:04:36.080 --> 0:04:38.520 into difficulty, it needs an I m F program, uh 0:04:39.160 --> 0:04:41.480 and others have to be a general realignment on the 0:04:41.560 --> 0:04:46.320 regular choice side, a market efficiency and labor market efficiency. 0:04:46.800 --> 0:04:50.640 And it's got to be done. But outside outside agency, 0:04:50.720 --> 0:04:52.600 I don't know actually will be accepted and withoud the 0:04:52.640 --> 0:04:57.160 alternative be for Italy to um sometimes choose to leave 0:04:57.200 --> 0:04:59.240 the European Union. At this is this is what I 0:04:59.240 --> 0:05:01.480 mean by saying this could be a wake up qualities. 0:05:01.520 --> 0:05:04.239 Changes could be made, but we have seen since OMT 0:05:04.560 --> 0:05:08.600 that that changes haven't been made. Okay, this is haven't 0:05:08.600 --> 0:05:10.279 been done. This is the I m F program. Bring 0:05:10.320 --> 0:05:12.760 up this chart of francying. This is the Egyptian pound. 0:05:13.080 --> 0:05:17.440 Are you Are you equating Italy with the depreciation managed 0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:19.920 by the I m F of the Egyptian pound. I mean, 0:05:20.080 --> 0:05:22.560 it's a little bit entertainment, your folks. I'm not equating 0:05:22.600 --> 0:05:25.200 Cairo to Rome. But come on, and I am F 0:05:25.320 --> 0:05:29.000 bailout of Italy or an I m F reorganization of Italy. 0:05:29.200 --> 0:05:32.719 That's strong language, not of the organization, not a bailout. 0:05:33.000 --> 0:05:36.640 Italy needs to reform its labor markets, its pension systems, 0:05:36.720 --> 0:05:41.479 legal systems, government governance, system, each banking system. This has 0:05:41.560 --> 0:05:44.080 not happened. It is not happened. It is posing at 0:05:44.160 --> 0:05:46.560 risk for the rest of Europe, and it isn't happening 0:05:46.560 --> 0:05:48.640 because of OMT. Once you take O m T D 0:05:48.720 --> 0:05:50.640 used to be out of the picture, you will see 0:05:50.920 --> 0:05:54.000 BTP rates going to four percent and then you will 0:05:54.040 --> 0:05:56.560 have this particular problem. Fancy, and I want to begin 0:05:57.000 --> 0:06:01.200 uh with this conversation with you on Italy and your 0:06:01.400 --> 0:06:04.360 thoughts on what Dr Folgers Lando said about the I 0:06:04.560 --> 0:06:07.400 m F coming in. To me, that's almost unimaginable that 0:06:07.480 --> 0:06:09.880 they would do, right, I mean, the problem to you know, 0:06:10.000 --> 0:06:11.880 David's point is that we've been trying to reform the 0:06:11.920 --> 0:06:14.880 country for what ten fifteen years. We had a lot 0:06:15.000 --> 0:06:18.200 more Well, you could argue that the former political class 0:06:18.240 --> 0:06:21.520 wasn't that keen on reforming, but you know, since Terrans 0:06:21.560 --> 0:06:24.080 he came into power, we're expecting many more things. Youth 0:06:24.160 --> 0:06:26.840 unemployment is absolutely true, and so what I agree with 0:06:27.279 --> 0:06:29.520 David on is that if you look at the Donald 0:06:29.560 --> 0:06:32.320 Trump presidency and the fact that he got elected when 0:06:32.360 --> 0:06:35.920 you have twenty percent even youth unemployment, that you are 0:06:36.000 --> 0:06:37.920 going to see a lot of people in it to 0:06:38.040 --> 0:06:40.160 the actually having for a protest vote, so it's very 0:06:40.200 --> 0:06:42.600 likely that he will lose a referendum. What comes next 0:06:42.640 --> 0:06:45.560 time wouldn't be palable, palatable to to the Italians to 0:06:45.640 --> 0:06:49.480 actually get into an i m F program, no, very 0:06:49.560 --> 0:06:52.160 very difficult, and I suspect that the European would put 0:06:52.200 --> 0:06:54.720 Europeans would put something together by way of Troy or 0:06:54.800 --> 0:06:57.120 something like that, to have it domestically, to have an 0:06:57.120 --> 0:07:00.920 inside European financed and with European rules, attack through it um. 0:07:01.320 --> 0:07:03.760 But that's not how the global financism is supposed to 0:07:03.800 --> 0:07:06.000 work the I m F since at the center if 0:07:06.040 --> 0:07:09.720 a country has debt difficulties, that's where the reforms are 0:07:09.720 --> 0:07:14.160 supposed to come from, and not just regionally. So I'm 0:07:15.720 --> 0:07:17.960 the actual outcome but probably not involved in I m F. 0:07:18.040 --> 0:07:19.720 But that's where it should be going. But again, the 0:07:19.840 --> 0:07:22.560 heart of the debate going back more than twenty years 0:07:22.800 --> 0:07:26.320 is Germany has the same currency as Italy and they're 0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:28.800 not the same economies. Are there? So look at the 0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:32.240 statistic from nineteen seventy to the year two thousand, when 0:07:32.240 --> 0:07:38.520 the Europe began, Germany revalued against the lira BO eight zero. 0:07:38.680 --> 0:07:41.160 Now that's over. You can't do it anymore have the 0:07:41.200 --> 0:07:43.880 same currency. Now that means Italy has to continue. You 0:07:43.920 --> 0:07:48.040 have a domestic domestic devaluation in prices. You can only 0:07:49.000 --> 0:07:50.920 and it's just very very hard to do. So this 0:07:51.040 --> 0:07:52.800 problem with Italy is going to be with us for 0:07:52.840 --> 0:07:57.200 a long time to come unless Italy implements very significant, 0:07:57.480 --> 0:08:01.640 very deep structural reform, and it can't do that by itself. 0:08:01.880 --> 0:08:04.480 David in twenty seconds, would it think be better off 0:08:04.520 --> 0:08:11.840 outside the Arizone? It's tough without reforms. Yes, with reforms, 0:08:11.880 --> 0:08:14.000 would be better inside the Eurozone obviously if it can 0:08:14.080 --> 0:08:17.240 put it to the uniforms stay in. Without it, you 0:08:17.400 --> 0:08:19.760 just have this. You're constantly on the village of crisis. 0:08:31.600 --> 0:08:33.800 We continue to look forward here after the election of 0:08:33.840 --> 0:08:36.280 Donald Trump, to see what he might do policy wise, 0:08:36.440 --> 0:08:38.800 he might appointed his cabinet. Also useful here to look 0:08:38.880 --> 0:08:42.760 back and see how so many polls got it so wrong. 0:08:42.840 --> 0:08:45.240 Frank Newport is the editor in chief of Gallop, the 0:08:45.320 --> 0:08:48.160 venerable polling agency, and it's great to speak with you, Frank, 0:08:48.200 --> 0:08:50.880 Thanks for joining us. Thank you good to be with you. 0:08:51.320 --> 0:08:54.000 Help us understand here how so many people got this 0:08:54.160 --> 0:08:56.199 so wrong. Going into the election, it seemed like a 0:08:56.320 --> 0:08:58.320 sure bat that that Hillary Clinton was going to win 0:08:58.360 --> 0:09:02.959 the presidency. What happened, Well, we we've of course been 0:09:03.000 --> 0:09:05.360 looking at that. Gallup was not involved in trying to 0:09:05.440 --> 0:09:07.199 predict the election, So I'm kind of looking at this 0:09:07.280 --> 0:09:11.360 as a dispassionate outside observer. This time a confluence of factors. 0:09:11.480 --> 0:09:13.839 Let me mention several or quickly. One is, Hillary Clinton 0:09:13.920 --> 0:09:15.880 did win the popular vote, and she's probably gonna win 0:09:15.960 --> 0:09:18.080 by one to two percent. So it was a confusing 0:09:18.160 --> 0:09:21.640 election in that sense. Note that the national polls had 0:09:21.679 --> 0:09:24.680 said she would win the national vote were actually accurate 0:09:24.760 --> 0:09:26.559 and actually not that far off, probably going to be 0:09:26.640 --> 0:09:30.040 more accurate than they were in twelve. So these national 0:09:30.160 --> 0:09:33.400 polls had said, here's the popular vote. I think, given 0:09:33.440 --> 0:09:37.160 all the constraints that polling has underdid a pretty good job. Second, 0:09:37.280 --> 0:09:40.920 the problem was state polling, which is notoriously difficult in 0:09:41.040 --> 0:09:45.400 state flight Wisconsin, in Michigan, and North Carolina. To a degree, 0:09:45.840 --> 0:09:49.240 the polling had suggested that she would win and she didn't. Uh, 0:09:49.320 --> 0:09:52.760 And when those polls went arrived the so called forecasting models, 0:09:52.800 --> 0:09:56.520 which became all the rage this time. All they do 0:09:56.679 --> 0:09:58.559 is take those state polls and crank them into some 0:09:58.640 --> 0:10:01.600 pseudoscience models. So when those state polls weren't so good, 0:10:02.000 --> 0:10:07.000 these forecasting monum outles eight five percent ninety percent probability 0:10:07.080 --> 0:10:09.199 that you'll win, and everybody just took that as gospel. 0:10:09.240 --> 0:10:11.760 And that's why that compounded to make it really look 0:10:11.800 --> 0:10:15.040 like people were wrong. A nicely said Frank Newport. Helped 0:10:15.040 --> 0:10:17.199 me here with one over the square root of n 0:10:17.880 --> 0:10:22.120 in that, I find no one bothers to have pay 0:10:22.240 --> 0:10:26.439 reverence and honor to margin of error. With all the 0:10:26.640 --> 0:10:30.480 killing of polars and strategists and pundits, are we just 0:10:30.679 --> 0:10:35.599 juvenile in our disrespect for margin of error? Well? I 0:10:35.679 --> 0:10:37.800 think so, margin of error we can you uh, I 0:10:37.880 --> 0:10:40.839 think it just symbolizes the fact that polling is an 0:10:40.960 --> 0:10:43.959 estimate of a population parameter, and they're gonna be it 0:10:44.040 --> 0:10:46.679 can't be precise. It's very difficult, particularly in a state. 0:10:47.360 --> 0:10:51.160 Most states have hugely different voting in the metropolitan areas 0:10:51.200 --> 0:10:54.559 and outstate you know, truan Wisconsin, you know, Milwaukee is 0:10:54.600 --> 0:10:57.839 totally in Madison totally different than outstates. Tru in Pennsylvania, 0:10:58.120 --> 0:11:02.040 you know, Philadelphia is totally are strongly democratic, but the outstates, 0:11:02.200 --> 0:11:04.800 by Alabama, in Pennsylvania, so if you get those, you're 0:11:04.800 --> 0:11:07.160 trying to estimate turnout across these areas, and if you 0:11:07.240 --> 0:11:09.760 missed the turnout estimates, of course you're going to miss 0:11:09.800 --> 0:11:12.520 the overall estimate. And it's hard. In Wisconsin, the last 0:11:12.559 --> 0:11:15.320 poll was done six days before the election, the lot 0:11:15.320 --> 0:11:18.280 amount have changed. So, yes, polls are just estimates. And 0:11:18.360 --> 0:11:21.000 in these closed swing states are close by definition, right, 0:11:21.080 --> 0:11:22.760 so they're the hardest states of all to try to 0:11:22.920 --> 0:11:25.480 estimate what's going to happen in. So it's very tricky business. 0:11:25.760 --> 0:11:28.199 Right going into election day, the Donald Trump campaign was 0:11:28.320 --> 0:11:31.400 very confident that it was very confident in its internal polling. 0:11:31.960 --> 0:11:34.719 Help us understand the difference there between internal polling and 0:11:34.760 --> 0:11:37.400 the kind of polling that Gallop does that other polling 0:11:37.440 --> 0:11:41.160 houses do. Of course, success is a father, failure as 0:11:41.240 --> 0:11:44.599 many is an orphan. You know, success has many fathers. So, 0:11:44.679 --> 0:11:47.000 of course, to the people who want so, you know, 0:11:47.040 --> 0:11:49.959 we knew it all along. Internal polling is nothing but 0:11:50.320 --> 0:11:52.400 the polling that's paid for and done by the candidates. 0:11:52.440 --> 0:11:54.440 They just don't release the publicly. Is that sometimes it's 0:11:54.480 --> 0:11:56.640 pretty good. They have pretty good posters and they do 0:11:56.720 --> 0:11:58.720 their own poll they do them in some unusual ways 0:11:58.840 --> 0:12:01.160 to try to predict what's had and going. A candidate says, 0:12:01.800 --> 0:12:04.160 my internal calling too was extra. Why he's talking about her, 0:12:04.240 --> 0:12:06.680 She's talking about the calling that they paid for, which 0:12:06.720 --> 0:12:08.760 can be good. These people are pretty skilled that work 0:12:08.800 --> 0:12:11.040 for the candidates very quickly here and we're gonna we're 0:12:11.040 --> 0:12:13.319 gonna have you stay with us. A lot of talk 0:12:13.400 --> 0:12:16.320 about the the effect of the email investigation. How large 0:12:16.360 --> 0:12:18.000 did that loom here on voters minds going to the 0:12:18.000 --> 0:12:21.559 ballot box on Tuesday? It was huge. We asked with 0:12:21.640 --> 0:12:23.800 the project we did with Michigan University of Michigan, and 0:12:23.840 --> 0:12:26.400 George said, we were asking voters every day, what did 0:12:26.440 --> 0:12:28.599 you reach here here about Hillary Clinton and Trump? In 0:12:28.640 --> 0:12:31.040 the last day or two, an email just dominated, going 0:12:31.080 --> 0:12:34.640 all the way back to July. Um emails, emails, emails. 0:12:34.720 --> 0:12:36.319 I wrote this in a piece of emails with the 0:12:36.360 --> 0:12:39.120 bane of Hillary Clinton's existence. She wishes she'd never seen 0:12:39.200 --> 0:12:42.280 an email. I'm sure, but a lot of voters just 0:12:42.480 --> 0:12:45.640 last on the emails in all their manifestations. You know 0:12:45.720 --> 0:12:49.480 whom I Avideen's emails or servers emails, Podesta's emails, all 0:12:49.520 --> 0:12:52.080 these different kind of emails came to symbolize it. Looked 0:12:52.120 --> 0:12:54.800 like to us for voters a lot of her weaknesses 0:12:54.840 --> 0:12:57.720 in terms of their perception she was dishonest and also 0:12:57.840 --> 0:13:00.240 kind of colluding with the power. David Durry here with 0:13:00.400 --> 0:13:02.840 Tom Keene, also joined by Frank Newport, editor in chief 0:13:02.960 --> 0:13:04.960 of Gallup. We were talking about some of the issues 0:13:05.080 --> 0:13:08.680 on voters minds going to the ballot box on Tuesday. Frank, 0:13:08.800 --> 0:13:10.800 let me ask you what we know about turnout. Our 0:13:10.840 --> 0:13:14.320 conversations ahead of election, they all centered on how readily, 0:13:14.360 --> 0:13:16.640 how easily these candidates could get people to come to 0:13:16.720 --> 0:13:18.959 the pulse. What do we know now six days out 0:13:18.960 --> 0:13:23.560 about how well they did that? Well? The vult are 0:13:23.600 --> 0:13:25.439 still being counted to some degree, but it looks like 0:13:25.520 --> 0:13:28.360 overall turnout is not was not high. In fact, it 0:13:28.440 --> 0:13:30.920 was lower than the last several elections. So overall this 0:13:31.120 --> 0:13:35.400 was not a robust turnout election, and that's important. Enthusiasm 0:13:35.520 --> 0:13:38.480 was at the lowest we've measured in Gallup before the election, 0:13:38.559 --> 0:13:41.000 so people just weren't excited about it. Two very unfavorably 0:13:41.040 --> 0:13:44.959 evaluated candidates. It certainly doesn't look like um from what 0:13:45.080 --> 0:13:47.079 I've seen so far, that Hillary Clint was able to 0:13:47.160 --> 0:13:50.040 duplicate the turnout among certain groups of rock Obama had 0:13:50.080 --> 0:13:54.040 been able to generate. That would be young people and minorities, um. 0:13:54.120 --> 0:13:56.040 And to some degree, she didn't get the same level 0:13:56.080 --> 0:13:58.679 of vote Latino's actually did. It looked like when the 0:13:58.720 --> 0:14:01.560 acted polls slightly less for her than they did vote 0:14:01.600 --> 0:14:04.280 for Barack Obama against mid Remney back in two twelve. 0:14:04.320 --> 0:14:06.520 So that was an issue as well. And if everybody 0:14:06.600 --> 0:14:10.160 has talked about and noted, the data clearly suggests that 0:14:10.960 --> 0:14:13.559 Trump was able to get higher than usual turn out 0:14:13.600 --> 0:14:16.920 in rural areas, areas outside metropolitan areas, and some of 0:14:17.000 --> 0:14:19.280 these key swing states, and that was very, very important 0:14:19.320 --> 0:14:23.920 for him. Newport, How will your world change? I'm in 0:14:24.040 --> 0:14:27.920 the camp of not wanting to bash on Polsters. I 0:14:27.960 --> 0:14:30.960 think there's a lot more moving parts going on. But 0:14:31.120 --> 0:14:33.360 is it the same old, same old four years from 0:14:33.400 --> 0:14:38.560 now or will it forever change for Polsters? Well, I'm 0:14:38.600 --> 0:14:42.800 not sure it will forever change at all. Again, Gallup 0:14:43.280 --> 0:14:45.320 was not involved in the horse phrase estimate at all, 0:14:45.400 --> 0:14:47.280 which is a change. You know, we decided to put 0:14:47.320 --> 0:14:50.240 our effort elsewhere, we think, and I personally think there's 0:14:50.280 --> 0:14:52.600 too much effort on just trying to forecast who's gonna 0:14:52.600 --> 0:14:55.360 win which could spend more time on understanding why candidates 0:14:55.400 --> 0:14:57.960 winning and what the voters want candidates to do. All 0:14:58.000 --> 0:14:59.880 of this huge amount of effort in time, and the 0:15:00.040 --> 0:15:02.680 forecasting goes away after the elections. Who carriage? You know 0:15:02.800 --> 0:15:06.400 that doesn't have any lasting value broadly speaking, it's a 0:15:06.440 --> 0:15:09.480 good question. The industry as a whole is always looking 0:15:09.600 --> 0:15:11.240 to change. You know. We used to do all of 0:15:11.280 --> 0:15:13.720 our interviewing in person. That shifted to the telephone. There's 0:15:13.720 --> 0:15:18.040 a lot of institutions that are doing internet polling now, 0:15:18.640 --> 0:15:20.960 you know, trying to use the internet or smartphones. So 0:15:21.040 --> 0:15:23.520 I think the methods that posters us are going to 0:15:23.680 --> 0:15:26.360 change and may be different four years from now, regardless 0:15:26.360 --> 0:15:28.760 of the election, just in general. But our goal will 0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:31.400 remain the same, and that is trying which I think 0:15:31.480 --> 0:15:33.880 is critically important in the democracy. Trying to measure and 0:15:33.960 --> 0:15:36.680 understand what Americans are thinking and feeling. That's an important 0:15:36.720 --> 0:15:38.600 goal and we need to keep doing that. Frank, some 0:15:38.680 --> 0:15:41.280 of our colleagues at another news outlet, I won't name 0:15:41.320 --> 0:15:45.760 it already, looking ahead to go ahead please. It's a 0:15:45.840 --> 0:15:48.640 piece in the hill looking at the top ten Democrats 0:15:48.680 --> 0:15:51.480 who might run for for the nomination in two thousand twenties. 0:15:51.520 --> 0:15:53.080 So here we are. You know, with five six days 0:15:53.080 --> 0:15:56.280 since election, we're already starting to look ahead to what 0:15:56.480 --> 0:15:59.040 what what? What do we learn from this campaign about 0:15:59.080 --> 0:16:03.640 the persistence of campaigning in the year two thousand and sixteen. Well, 0:16:03.720 --> 0:16:06.120 we know the public thought this campaign was horrible. The 0:16:06.200 --> 0:16:08.680 tone was negative. They weren't satisfied was how it was wrung. 0:16:08.760 --> 0:16:10.560 It went on too long. The public doesn't like the 0:16:10.600 --> 0:16:13.600 electoral college, who would rather go to a direct popular vote. 0:16:13.640 --> 0:16:16.040 That's been evident for decades now. Public would like a 0:16:16.080 --> 0:16:18.760 lot of change in this UM. It's hard to get 0:16:18.760 --> 0:16:21.720 a precise measure on how short the campaign should be, 0:16:21.840 --> 0:16:23.720 but I think Americans would be quite happy if we 0:16:23.840 --> 0:16:26.040 cut down this year and a half's worth of slug 0:16:26.120 --> 0:16:29.400 food campaigning UM down to something that was much more 0:16:29.440 --> 0:16:31.960 reasonable in terms of time, if that's what you're asking 0:16:32.480 --> 0:16:34.840 rather than I mean, you're right, these candidates are already 0:16:34.880 --> 0:16:42.400 assembling staffs now looking ahead to Frank. What will we see? Oh, 0:16:42.560 --> 0:16:45.080 we think we just lost Frank Newport. Well we think 0:16:45.200 --> 0:16:47.960 him for his effort today, David, you and I can 0:16:48.000 --> 0:16:52.280 continue here. David, I thought, without question, the most important 0:16:52.360 --> 0:16:56.240 essay the weekend was Robert Skidelski, Lord Skadelsky writing in 0:16:56.280 --> 0:17:00.600 Project Syndicate, the great Keynesian biographer, who who gave us 0:17:01.160 --> 0:17:04.080 David immense history, and that's in so much of the 0:17:04.119 --> 0:17:07.240 analysis has been missing. We can barely get some people 0:17:07.280 --> 0:17:09.479 to go back to the nineteen sixty and the regime 0:17:09.600 --> 0:17:13.320 change of JFK. We certainly have trouble going back to 0:17:13.400 --> 0:17:17.000 early Eisenhower, even back to the twenties and Calvin Coolidge 0:17:17.040 --> 0:17:20.040 and Skidelski did that with a vengeance of how things 0:17:20.119 --> 0:17:23.760 can unravel if it's not properly managed. Lord Skodolski, who 0:17:23.800 --> 0:17:25.600 I think you're gonna be speaking with with tomorrow, he's 0:17:25.760 --> 0:17:28.920 with us tomorrow. Incredible piece and and made me think 0:17:28.960 --> 0:17:31.280 of the conversation that we had with Neil Ferguson on 0:17:31.440 --> 0:17:33.320 on Friday. He was trying to view a bit of 0:17:33.400 --> 0:17:36.399 it into the conversation. Now a couple of days out, 0:17:36.440 --> 0:17:38.320 I got around to reading that Michael Barone piece that 0:17:38.480 --> 0:17:40.159 that you wanted me to to check out in the 0:17:40.200 --> 0:17:42.560 Washington's amer Michael Brown's column on the heels of that election. 0:17:42.640 --> 0:17:44.960 He called, uh, it astounding. That was the lead to 0:17:44.960 --> 0:17:47.000 the piece. Astounding, That's the best word to describe the 0:17:47.040 --> 0:17:50.159 tumultuous election night into to most people's surprise victory of 0:17:50.200 --> 0:17:53.879 Donald Trump. UH in that election really interesting as I 0:17:53.960 --> 0:17:56.960 began to sort of sift through the demographics looking at 0:17:57.000 --> 0:18:00.000 the at who voted something Frank Newport was talking about 0:18:00.119 --> 0:18:02.000 just a few moments ago, and who didn't vote? And 0:18:02.080 --> 0:18:04.879 I think that the headline there of the fact that 0:18:05.000 --> 0:18:07.200 so many fewer people went to the polls. It's gonna 0:18:07.200 --> 0:18:08.680 be something we're gonna be working with for a while. 0:18:08.760 --> 0:18:11.600 Here I put the bar chart out. I can't remember, sorry, folks, 0:18:11.640 --> 0:18:14.840 I can't remember the citation, but a very simple bar 0:18:15.040 --> 0:18:19.119 chart that basically said, uh, the president of two thousand 0:18:19.240 --> 0:18:21.960 eight and the president of two thousand twelve, they simply 0:18:22.000 --> 0:18:26.000 didn't show up. For Secretary Clinton, David tell our global 0:18:26.119 --> 0:18:29.800 audience the color of protests Saturday and Sunday, UH in 0:18:30.200 --> 0:18:32.560 New York and around the country. Was it different than 0:18:32.600 --> 0:18:35.520 the previous days? Was there something distinctive? I got the 0:18:35.560 --> 0:18:38.239 sense I wasn't in Manhattan on on Saturday, but from 0:18:38.280 --> 0:18:40.400 social media and talking to friends, I got a sense 0:18:40.440 --> 0:18:42.479 that the protests were growing in size. I think there 0:18:42.560 --> 0:18:44.680 was a march from from Union Square up Fifth Avenue. 0:18:45.000 --> 0:18:47.520 So I think that that that anger continues, and that 0:18:47.600 --> 0:18:51.080 anger seems to be getting channeled into these into these protests. 0:18:51.520 --> 0:18:53.480 I continue to wonder Tom sort of what the the 0:18:53.680 --> 0:18:55.720 the end result of that will be, In other words, 0:18:55.760 --> 0:18:57.520 what are there Yes, there are grievances here. There are 0:18:57.520 --> 0:19:00.160 people who were upset with how the election turned out 0:19:00.200 --> 0:19:04.200 on Tuesday. Uh, they're they're making that dissatisfaction known. But 0:19:04.280 --> 0:19:06.040 I don't know what the the end game for that is. 0:19:06.160 --> 0:19:07.920 And of core, he said, this was something that Donald 0:19:07.960 --> 0:19:10.680 Trump talked about in that interview last night, Leslie Stall 0:19:10.760 --> 0:19:12.280 asking him, you know, if he had a message for 0:19:12.440 --> 0:19:15.800 for those protesters, and he said two words, stop it. 0:19:15.920 --> 0:19:18.040 And CBS since then has gotten a lot of criticism 0:19:18.119 --> 0:19:21.120 for for holding that as we've seen a violence estimate, 0:19:21.440 --> 0:19:24.040 you know, in cities across the country. Donald Trump with 0:19:24.320 --> 0:19:27.639 a concise message to protesters there to lay off. It 0:19:27.800 --> 0:19:30.720 was interesting coming out of hethrow folks. The vibrancy, of 0:19:30.800 --> 0:19:33.720 course of the airport always visible. I got in on 0:19:33.840 --> 0:19:37.639 early Sunday morning, but they're driving out around the acclaimed rotary. 0:19:38.359 --> 0:19:42.640 David Gurrow was the big billboard sign obviously talking their 0:19:42.680 --> 0:19:45.640 book of the runway coming up in eight or nine 0:19:45.840 --> 0:19:48.639 years ago. It was, you know, interesting to see the 0:19:48.720 --> 0:19:52.000 core infrastructure project of the Western world as we know 0:19:52.160 --> 0:19:55.720 it bannered across UH the entryway to the four lane 0:19:55.760 --> 0:19:59.240 highway into London. Speaking infrastructure here again that the conversation 0:19:59.320 --> 0:20:02.800 here center on on on that infrastructure package. Donald Trump's 0:20:02.800 --> 0:20:04.960 promised to double what Hillary Clinton would have done, so 0:20:05.240 --> 0:20:07.440 so he will no doubt be hashing that out with 0:20:07.480 --> 0:20:10.240 how Speaker Paul Ryan and the Senate Majority Leader. I 0:20:10.359 --> 0:20:13.680 was struck over the weekend by how Donald Trump is 0:20:13.720 --> 0:20:16.760 beginning to piece together his his administration, obviously hiring Steve 0:20:16.840 --> 0:20:19.480 Bannon and runs previous for senior positions in his staff. 0:20:19.520 --> 0:20:22.080 He called the President of China last night, rather received 0:20:22.080 --> 0:20:24.720 a phone call from the President of China last night. UH. 0:20:25.240 --> 0:20:27.840 He said that the president wished him well after the 0:20:27.920 --> 0:20:31.439 historic election, and according to the Trump transition team here, 0:20:31.520 --> 0:20:33.840 during the call, the leaders established a clear sense of 0:20:33.920 --> 0:20:37.119 mutual respect for one another, and President Electrump stated that 0:20:37.160 --> 0:20:38.680 he believes the two leaders will have one of the 0:20:38.760 --> 0:20:42.040 strongest relationships for both countries moving forward. I'm just thinking 0:20:42.080 --> 0:20:44.520 what James Foley was saying here about the degree to 0:20:44.560 --> 0:20:46.919 which the rhetoric we heard on the campaign trail may erode. 0:20:55.840 --> 0:20:59.199 Who you put your trust in matters. Investors have put 0:20:59.280 --> 0:21:03.160