Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch us
Speaker 1: live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business app, or listen on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2: As we head now to New Hampshire, less than a
Speaker 2: week off, and there are new numbers today, it's getting
Speaker 2: pretty noisy, you know. We talked to David Paleologos last
Speaker 2: week from Suffolk University and they're out with new numbers
Speaker 2: this morning. They are not tied as we talked yesterday.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump gets fifty percent in this poll, Nicky Haley
Speaker 2: thirty four percent. Bron DeSantis has all of five percent
Speaker 2: in New Hampshire. So it is looking like at two
Speaker 2: way race in the Granite State, but also a runaway
Speaker 2: win potentially once again for Donald Trump. And the question
Speaker 2: is what will happen if there is a gap like that.
Speaker 2: Knowing that expectations are very high for Nicky Haley, remember
Speaker 2: this ARC poll yesterday arg has Trump forty, Hayley forty.
Speaker 2: That's a pretty different story than what we have here.
Speaker 2: And what is a survey of five hundred likely Republican
Speaker 2: primary voters jan fifteen, Jan sixteen, the day and day
Speaker 2: after the Iowa CAUCUSUS. So you wonder if these numbers
Speaker 2: are moving based on that commanding win that we saw
Speaker 2: from Donald Trump, that race that was called so early.
Speaker 2: I'll back up a little bit further here to Emerson
Speaker 2: College's most recent poll, which is interesting because this brings
Speaker 2: you back to the eleventh and it was a bit
Speaker 2: of a different picture, which is why we wanted to
Speaker 2: talk about this with the polling director at Emerson, Spencer Kimball.
Speaker 2: He's with us right now. Spencer. It's great to see
Speaker 2: you and we welcome you. Has the landscape shifted in
Speaker 2: New Hampshire since Iowa, Well, we're.
Speaker 3: Going to see that over the next couple of days.
Speaker 3: But at this time, it looks like Trump still holds
Speaker 3: a double digit lead and Hailey is the alternative. DeSantis
Speaker 3: is where he was before Iowa, So it doesn't look
Speaker 3: like that second place finish out there really gave him
Speaker 3: much of a bump.
Speaker 2: Yet at the time, Wow, that's something else. Our expectations
Speaker 2: too high for Nikki Haley to be able to call
Speaker 2: this a win. The idea was if she struck within
Speaker 2: single digits, maybe even one, this thing that she'd be
Speaker 2: having new momentum that could carry her into South Carolina
Speaker 2: to make a difference. But it's feeling less like that,
Speaker 2: isn't it.
Speaker 3: It sure is. I think the big win she needed
Speaker 3: was out in Iowa to get that second place show.
Speaker 3: She didn't get there, came up a little bit short,
Speaker 3: and now she's in New Hampshire, and I think you
Speaker 3: got it. She's got to win New Hampshire in order
Speaker 3: to really become a player to win the nomination, because
Speaker 3: if you look forward, as you mentioned, South Carolina's at
Speaker 3: the end of February where she's trailing by twenty twenty
Speaker 3: five points, but that is her home state, so maybe
Speaker 3: she can rally some support at the last minute. But
Speaker 3: then you got to go to Texas and California for
Speaker 3: Super Tuesday, and she's trailing out there by over fifty
Speaker 3: points against Trump. So even if she was able to
Speaker 3: get over a couple of these hurdles, there's a big
Speaker 3: wall coming on Super Tuesday that she's going to have
Speaker 3: to get through.
Speaker 2: I mentioned your last poll of jen you were eleven
Speaker 2: that had Donald Trump at forty four percent in New Hampshire,
Speaker 2: followed by Haley at twenty eight who was up ten
Speaker 2: points since November. Do you think that momentum has gone.
Speaker 3: Then, yeah, it has slowed. So we've seen Trump's numbers
Speaker 3: drop over the course of the year. Basically he was
Speaker 3: up in the sixties, then down in the fifties. Now
Speaker 3: we have him in the mid forties going into Iowa.
Speaker 3: If you look at that Suffolk poll today, it looks
Speaker 3: like he actually gets a bump out of Iowa. Their
Speaker 3: previous poll had him at forty six. We had him
Speaker 3: at forty four, Now they have him at fifty, So
Speaker 3: I would presume our numbers would go up. I think
Speaker 3: the biggest difference though, is the two candidates that have
Speaker 3: dropped out since our poll. You have Chris Christy, who
Speaker 3: is more in the Haley lane where those voters would
Speaker 3: split in that direction. But then you had Ramaswami, who
Speaker 3: was actually beating DeSantis at that point when he's dropped out,
Speaker 3: and those votes are probably going to line up more
Speaker 3: with Trump. So there looks like there's some room for
Speaker 3: Haley to gain a little ground between those two. But
Speaker 3: based on what Suffolk put out today and what we've
Speaker 3: been seeing, she's got definitely a lot of room to
Speaker 3: make up.
Speaker 2: Pretty amazing as we spend time with Spencer Kimball, who
Speaker 2: runs polling at Emerson College, my alma mater. If I'm
Speaker 2: supposed to have disclose that Spencer. Nikki Haley says she's
Speaker 2: not going to debate again unless Donald Trump shows up.
Speaker 2: And ABC News and WMU are an important station in
Speaker 2: New Hampshire, have canceled their debate ahead of the primaries,
Speaker 2: and I don't think Donald Trump's about to show up.
Speaker 2: Ron de Santis said he'd be happy to debate two
Speaker 2: empty chairs, and I guess he's not going to have
Speaker 2: that opportunity. Is this important? Does it matter anymore? Has
Speaker 2: Donald Trump taught us that debates don't matter?
Speaker 3: Well, I hope not. I think they do matter. And
Speaker 3: I think it was a mistake for Haley to drop
Speaker 3: out of this debate. If you look at these numbers
Speaker 3: where she's trailing, she needs a bit of a game changer,
Speaker 3: and for her to be able to go on stage
Speaker 3: with DeSantis, even though he's in single digits out here,
Speaker 3: it would still give her some sort of platform to
Speaker 3: be able to make the case to the New Hampshire
Speaker 3: vo that might get people to focus in now. Granted,
Speaker 3: their debate before IOWA had lower ratings than expected, So
Speaker 3: maybe that goes into the equation. But without a debate
Speaker 3: or some focusing event, it's hard to imagine what's going to,
Speaker 3: you know, change the momentum. If she had come out
Speaker 3: of Iowa in second place, I think that's a different story.
Speaker 3: But without that second place, when where does that momentum
Speaker 3: where's you know, start pushing her in the you know,
Speaker 3: in the back as opposed to blowing in her face
Speaker 3: at this time.
Speaker 2: Well, Spencer, a lot of eyes were rolling where they
Speaker 2: heard from both Nicky Haley and Ronda Santis the night
Speaker 2: of the Iowa caucus. I'm sure you saw these speeches.
Speaker 2: Rond de Santis with the rock and roll It's got
Speaker 2: a C d C play, and Ia the Tiger. He says,
Speaker 2: we punched our ticket coming out of Iowa. People went crazy.
Speaker 2: Nicky Haley said that this is now a one on
Speaker 2: one race, a two candidate race between her and Donald
Speaker 2: Trump because she won one of ninety nine counties in Iowa.
Speaker 2: Do both of them need a reality check or are
Speaker 2: they about to get one? In New Hampshire?
Speaker 3: Well, certainly, I think Governor DeSantis is going to get
Speaker 3: a reality check if he comes in single digits in
Speaker 3: New Hampshire. Plus you know he's got to fight in
Speaker 3: South Carolina next. He doesn't have Florida coming up that
Speaker 3: might be a firewall, though he in the polling is
Speaker 3: trailing in Florida by thirty points to the former president.
Speaker 3: So I was surprised by those. I thought it was
Speaker 3: an opportunity for DeSantis to kind of take the high road,
Speaker 3: come in second above expectations and walk off the stage
Speaker 3: at that time, because look what's coming ahead of him
Speaker 3: in New Hampshire or South Carolina. Hailey, on the other hand,
Speaker 3: I think had already had pre planned speech for her
Speaker 3: performance in Iowa and should have pivoted a little bit
Speaker 3: based on the results. But without that, she's now looking
Speaker 3: at this as at least in New Hampshire and probably
Speaker 3: South Carolina, it is a two person race, but she's
Speaker 3: trailing by fifteen points, which in politics, as we know,
Speaker 3: is a considerable margin to make up.
Speaker 2: Well, what do you make of the whole last minute
Speaker 2: thing in New Hampshire. Not to mention the unpredictable nature
Speaker 2: of forty percent independent showing up coming from different corners
Speaker 2: of the state can create some noise here. Obviously, there's
Speaker 2: almost a week left of campaigning, more town halls, more
Speaker 2: door knocking. Do you think that these numbers could move.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that there is. The window is slightly
Speaker 3: cracked for Nicki Haley if you look at the road ahead,
Speaker 3: but it's a crack. You know. Donald Trump is walking
Speaker 3: through a garage door at this point for the nomination.
Speaker 3: Lots of space for him to make up and to
Speaker 3: continue to grow his delegate count. So at some point
Speaker 3: you don't want it to boomerang on Haley, who's run
Speaker 3: a really well primary member She was in single digits.
Speaker 3: She's picked up twenty four points in New Hampshire in
Speaker 3: the last seven eight months, so you can see that
Speaker 3: she has run a good campaign. But if she stays
Speaker 3: in it too long, she might upset the base of
Speaker 3: the party and could hurt her chances if she was
Speaker 3: to run again in twenty.
Speaker 2: Eight Fascinating stuff here. All the while, Donald Trump maybe
Speaker 2: going through a garage door. I think that's what you said.
Speaker 2: It was a courtroom door or yesterday, and he's going
Speaker 2: to be back today a jury selection of the case
Speaker 2: of Egene Carrol. Not I think what you would describe
Speaker 2: as a positive story for any candidate yet he continues
Speaker 2: to spend a majority of his time in courtrooms as
Speaker 2: opposed to early states, and his numbers keep rising. Should
Speaker 2: Dicky Haley and Rond de Santis try to get indicted
Speaker 2: at this point, Spencer.
Speaker 3: Well, that's generally not the traditional ways canidates to get attention.
Speaker 3: But in this day and age, things that were up
Speaker 3: or down, and you know, backwards is forwards. So no,
Speaker 3: I wouldn't encourage that type of behavior. I think that
Speaker 3: they kind of need to be looking more big picture
Speaker 3: and think about maybe it's not twenty four is their year,
Speaker 3: Maybe twenty twenty eight is their year when we know
Speaker 3: that most likely it's an open seat. And so while
Speaker 3: you want to get things lined up right now and
Speaker 3: to win now, there is that big picture to consider
Speaker 3: for both of them.
Speaker 2: Glad we got some time together, Spencer Kibble. Are you
Speaker 2: going to be in New Hampshire when we're there next
Speaker 2: week or are you running numbers from Boston?
Speaker 3: Oh? No, they sent me up to Manchester. I was
Speaker 3: out and I as well.
Speaker 4: It was cold.
Speaker 2: Oh come on, how did you get home? I'm still
Speaker 2: trying to get home. I'll tell you what.
Speaker 3: Chicago at seven in the morning.
Speaker 2: All right, So we understand each other. Let's meet up
Speaker 2: in Manchester. Let's have you come on from the primary
Speaker 2: and I look forward to seeing you there.
Speaker 1: Spencer.
Speaker 3: That's great. Well see and we'll have a new poll
Speaker 3: at the end of the week.
Speaker 2: When is that on Friday Sunday? We use all right, perfect,
Speaker 2: keep us posted. I look forward to it. It we'll
Speaker 2: have late numbers from Spencer Kimball. Thank you, sir, Emerson
Speaker 2: College polling director. With us here on Bloomberg's sound on
Speaker 2: as we assembled the panel. They made it home. Rick
Speaker 2: Davis and Geenie Shanzano fresh off the Iowa caucuses and
Speaker 2: on your radio and on YouTube with us now are
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Politics signature panel. And boy, this is interesting here. Genie.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure your thoughts on these new polls, but
Speaker 2: it looks like Nicky Haley may have peaked in New Hampshire.
Speaker 2: Is that how you're reading it? Yeah?
Speaker 4: First of all, Joe Matthew, it is great to see you,
Speaker 4: and I hope you make it home. You have and
Speaker 4: killing it out there trying to get home. It's like
Speaker 4: plain strains and autumn it is.
Speaker 2: I'm looking for John Candy. I haven't found him yet,
Speaker 2: but you just got home yourself, so I think you
Speaker 2: know what we're going for.
Speaker 4: You just got home and warmed up. You know, I
Speaker 4: think this thing does seem to be Donald Trump did
Speaker 4: get a bump out of Iowa as we look at
Speaker 4: New Hampshire. But I would just preface all of this
Speaker 4: by saying New Hampshire, as I am sure all of
Speaker 4: our posters can tell us, is notoriously hard to pull.
Speaker 4: And so that is one caveat I would put to
Speaker 4: looking out all these numbers. Just look at the Senate
Speaker 4: race in twenty twenty two. They had enormous challenges. They
Speaker 4: were off by eight to twelve points. Tough place to pull.
Speaker 4: Putting that aside, I do think that both Trump and
Speaker 4: Nicky Haley are getting something of a bump out of it.
Speaker 4: But in my mind, as we look at New Hampshire overall,
Speaker 4: I can see this as a case where winning for
Speaker 4: Nicky Haley is actually losing if she wins on the
Speaker 4: backs of independence. And that's the thing I think we
Speaker 4: have to keep in mind, because Donald Trump will come
Speaker 4: right back and he will make Hay out of that
Speaker 4: and make her into the poster child of the never trumpers.
Speaker 4: And that is a thing strategy for her.
Speaker 2: Well, it's interesting, Rick Davis, because I think we can
Speaker 2: argue that John McCain made his way to the nomination
Speaker 2: on the backs of independence. But we're in a different
Speaker 2: world now, aren't we.
Speaker 5: Yeah, the party's a little different. I mean, it's a
Speaker 5: little more polarization. It gets worse every year. But I
Speaker 5: would say, I mean, you know, if Donald Trump would
Speaker 5: be willing to give up all the independents that are
Speaker 5: voting for him, and in the recent arg poll it shows,
Speaker 5: let me see, as many as twenty four percent of
Speaker 5: his base going in there on his vote is independent.
Speaker 5: So now Haley appeals to fifty one percent, so he's
Speaker 5: losing badly in that category. But I'm not sure he's
Speaker 5: going to take a quarter of his vote and say
Speaker 5: go what. So I think people have to be a
Speaker 5: little cautious about complaining about independence in New Hampshire. And
Speaker 5: we do know that South Carolina allows it's an open
Speaker 5: primary state. I was independence vote there, and you know,
Speaker 5: I'm sure Haley's like, go ahead, you know, throw that punch,
Speaker 5: piss off all those independence in South Carolina before we
Speaker 5: get there. So it's not as easy as what he
Speaker 5: was able to make it out to be in Iowa
Speaker 5: because really it's a much more conservative state than any
Speaker 5: of them that they're going to play in between now
Speaker 5: and Super Tuesday.
Speaker 2: Genie the Hailey super Pac SFA Fund Catchy is up
Speaker 2: with a new anti Trump ad campaign. They're framing him
Speaker 2: as a bully and a liar. The line is Trump
Speaker 2: is lying about Nicky. That's what bullies do. Is that
Speaker 2: the right message for the closing week?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 4: I think it's the right message. They've got to get
Speaker 4: the independence out to vote. And when you compare to Iowa,
Speaker 4: sixteen percent of those Iowa caucus goers saw themselves as independent,
Speaker 4: it's close to half in a New Hampshire primary where
Speaker 4: Democrats aren't playing. So she's got to make that case,
Speaker 4: and I think she could have a very good night
Speaker 4: in New Hampshire potentially on the backs of that kind
Speaker 4: of spending, that kind of organization, and that kind of.
Speaker 2: Argument, all the while Donald Trump in court and poised
Speaker 2: to win another We'll see. We're not making predictions here,
Speaker 2: but the polls out today would suggest that this could
Speaker 2: be an interesting contest in New Hampshire. And we'll have
Speaker 2: a lot more on this. This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch the
Speaker 1: program live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the
Speaker 1: tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: As we consider what's going on in New Hampshire or
Speaker 2: not going on leading up to the New Hampshire primary,
Speaker 2: there'll be no debate. There was supposed to be on
Speaker 2: more ABC News and WMUIR. We talked about it a
Speaker 2: bit earlier with Spencer Kimball from Emerson Polling. Nikki Haley,
Speaker 2: taking a cue from Donald Trump, says she's not going
Speaker 2: to go unless he does. And ron De Santis, who
Speaker 2: was looking forward to sharing time with two empty chairs,
Speaker 2: says she's making the wrong move. Here's Ronda Santis in
Speaker 2: New Hampshire.
Speaker 6: You owe the people of New Hampshire a debate. This
Speaker 6: is a time honored tradition that you debate in New
Speaker 6: Hampshire the week before the New Hampshire primary. So I
Speaker 6: plan on being there on Thursday. I understand why she
Speaker 6: doesn't want to debate and yes, Donald Trump should debate
Speaker 6: as well, But either way, I'm going to be there, and.
Speaker 2: So I hope both of them come. You can plan
Speaker 2: on it all he wants. They canceled it. As we
Speaker 2: reassemble our panel with Rick Davis and Genie Shanzy o
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Politics contributors. You know the line, Rick, People in
Speaker 2: New Hampshire don't only expect to meet all the candidates.
Speaker 2: They judge them by how many times they get to
Speaker 2: meet them, how many times they shake their hands. And boy,
Speaker 2: I don't know the impact of this. DoD debates not
Speaker 2: matter anymore in a place like New Hampshire. Did Nicky
Speaker 2: Haley make the right move here?
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's hard to tell. Donald Trump already upset the
Speaker 5: debate Apple Car a long time ago. Right, we haven't
Speaker 5: had a debate with the front runner in it, and
Speaker 5: so maybe voters have become desensitized to the fact that
Speaker 5: you're just not going to see a legitimate Republican debate
Speaker 5: where all the contestants are there. And I have absolutely
Speaker 5: no doubt my own judgment that the debates have actually
Speaker 5: hurt the undercard, right, I mean, by debating each other,
Speaker 5: they have actually diminished their own candidacies amongst each other
Speaker 5: and elevated Trump's. And the fact is, other than Chris Christy,
Speaker 5: nobody really attacked Donald Trump in these debates. So he's
Speaker 5: had a real free hand at this thing. And so
Speaker 5: I think Nicki Haley look at out for he own
Speaker 5: self interest, looks at the debate with a candidate who's
Speaker 5: got less than five percent, probably round five. That's simply
Speaker 5: a bad political decision to make, getting on a stage
Speaker 5: with someone who literally cannot beat you, but will spend
Speaker 5: the entire debate, as he did in the last one,
Speaker 5: attacking you over and over and over.
Speaker 2: Right, Well, that sounds like Donald Trump's argument, Jeanie, are
Speaker 2: we done with old fashioned debates? Or is this just
Speaker 2: a symptom of this cycle.
Speaker 4: I think it's a symptom that this cycle. I hope
Speaker 4: it is. I know people who are going to attend
Speaker 4: that debate, young people, I should say, their first presidential
Speaker 4: primary debate. They were excited to do that in New Hampshire.
Speaker 4: It's been taken away from them. Even Trump supporters have
Speaker 4: said that they do wish he was on that stage
Speaker 4: just so they could see him. That said, you know,
Speaker 4: I think Nicky Haley, if I was advising her. I
Speaker 4: would say it's the right decision. She got a lot
Speaker 4: of support coming out of those first you know, three
Speaker 4: four debates, but quite frankly, in that last debate, she
Speaker 4: didn't really help herself that much. And it doesn't make
Speaker 4: a lot of sense for her to go there and
Speaker 4: get beat up by Ron DeSantis, who's essentially doing Trump's
Speaker 4: dirty work. Because the thing to keep in mind is
Speaker 4: that what Donald Trump. As conciliatory as he was the
Speaker 4: few minutes after the Iowa win, six hours later, he
Speaker 4: was taking to truth social calling her Nimroda, and he
Speaker 4: was also showing these pictures of her morphing into Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 4: He is going to say, even if she wins big
Speaker 4: in New Hampshire, she isn't winning amongst Republicans. She's winning
Speaker 4: on the backs of independence and the big bad media,
Speaker 4: and he is going to attack her for that. So
Speaker 4: this is what she is facing. She needs to debate him,
Speaker 4: not Ron DeSantis. And she knows that.
Speaker 2: What did he call her?
Speaker 4: I shouldn't repeat it. It nimroda, nim rod.
Speaker 2: That's a new one. I haven't gosh, we're testing out
Speaker 2: new names, I guess for Donald Trump. What do you
Speaker 2: make of this sort of last minute framing here, Rick,
Speaker 2: this is the way he turned on Vivik Ramaswami going
Speaker 2: into Iowa. Not that he's had nice things to say
Speaker 2: about his former ambassador, but some think that she might
Speaker 2: even be vying for a vice presidential role here. Does
Speaker 2: that still remain a possibility? You know?
Speaker 5: I mean, I've never met a presidential candidate in forty
Speaker 5: years who conducted their campaign in order to be the
Speaker 5: vice presidential candidate. Especially at this point where you've crossed
Speaker 5: so many bridges and you've spent so much money, and
Speaker 5: you've committed so much your time. You're looking for that
Speaker 5: brass ring, and at this point, everybody in this race
Speaker 5: believes they have a way to get it, and so
Speaker 5: I think all of that is just chatter. I would say.
Speaker 5: On the name thing, let's just be totally clear. This
Speaker 5: was a birther attack on Nikki Hayley by Donald Trump
Speaker 5: on truth social It's her first name. He misspelled it,
Speaker 5: which may have been intentional, and he's trying to draw
Speaker 5: people's attention to her ethnic heritage. And it's exactly what
Speaker 5: he did to Barack Obama. And it should be absolutely
Speaker 5: deplored because it is a way to interject racism into
Speaker 5: the New Hampshire campaign.
Speaker 2: Well, that seems to be a familiar place for him here, Genie,
Speaker 2: how does that play in New Hampshire?
Speaker 4: Hopefully it doesn't play well anywhere. It's an ugly, ugly
Speaker 4: thing that he has done and he continues to do.
Speaker 4: And I hope that the New Hampshire voters and voters
Speaker 4: across the country see it for the racist statement that
Speaker 4: it is. It is an ugly thing to say. But
Speaker 4: the reality is these things have only helped Donald Trump
Speaker 4: with the magabase, and unfortunately for Republicans, the magabase is
Speaker 4: pretty much where the party is now. We only need
Speaker 4: to look at the fact that senators and House members
Speaker 4: of the House keep endorsing him because they feel that
Speaker 4: they are threatened to be challenged. And so again, a
Speaker 4: win in New Hampshire for her, unless she finds a
Speaker 4: way back into that Republican full a win on the
Speaker 4: backs of independence and Democrats or even one he can
Speaker 4: describe that way, is going to make it very difficult
Speaker 4: for her to go forward. She can go forward, but
Speaker 4: it's gonna make it difficult for her. And let's not
Speaker 4: forget Nikki Haley was endorsed in her gubernatorial race by
Speaker 4: Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. She was able to cross that.
Speaker 4: So if anybody can do it, it's her. But it
Speaker 4: is a tough thing to do in the face of
Speaker 4: a president who's really should be seen as an incumbent
Speaker 4: and who really is willing to play dirty as he
Speaker 4: moves forward. She's up to the challenge, but it is
Speaker 4: a big challenge for anybody to meet.
Speaker 2: You guys forced me onto the truth social I'm looking
Speaker 2: at this picture morphing her face into Hillary Clinton. It says,
Speaker 2: Haley with the old Clinton logo and you get the
Speaker 2: Clinton pants suit going here. It's nightmare fuel. I can't
Speaker 2: look away from it. So bizarre, Rick Davis, what's going
Speaker 2: on inside Nikki haley headquarters right now as they try
Speaker 2: to take advantage of these remaining days.
Speaker 5: Well for her, the focus is much like where they
Speaker 5: were in Iowa at this point, the final sort of pitch.
Speaker 5: She's pushing the electability and how she can beat Biden
Speaker 5: in a way that's significantly better for the GOP than
Speaker 5: the claims of victory by Donald Trump. And they're worried
Speaker 5: about turnout right. I mean, there was a huge decrease
Speaker 5: in turnout in Iowa because of the storm, probably, but
Speaker 5: certainly that's a good way to blame it. But almost
Speaker 5: eighty thousand out of the one hundred and ten thousand,
Speaker 5: I mean, the difference between them, seventy thousand people fewer
Speaker 5: showed up in Iowa. And they need a turnout, They
Speaker 5: need people showing up. It's pretty clear a low turnout
Speaker 5: helps Donald Trump. His base going to come no matter what.
Speaker 5: And so I know that they're looking at sort of
Speaker 5: how do they deliver that vote. And in a primary,
Speaker 5: arguably it's a little easier without the incredibly cold weather,
Speaker 5: it should be easier. And so this is going to
Speaker 5: be a test really of whether or not she can
Speaker 5: take the momentum that she has drive into the final
Speaker 5: weekend of the election and identify her voters to turn out.
Speaker 2: He knows because he's been there and he's done it.
Speaker 2: Rick Davis, great analysis, along with Genie Shanzo, both of
Speaker 2: whom will be with us in New Hampshire. And I'll
Speaker 2: tell you what, We're heading there this weekend. Wonderful. We'll
Speaker 2: get back home from there at least it won't be
Speaker 2: quite as cold as Rick said, and we'll have special
Speaker 2: coverage straight through the process, the day of the primary
Speaker 2: day and the day after here on Bloomberg's Sound On.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound On podcast. Catch us
Speaker 1: live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business App, or listen on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 7: Considering the stakes in the game that's being played here,
Speaker 7: this idea that the President and even Republican Senate leaders
Speaker 7: like Mitch McConnell, who's one of the Big four that
Speaker 7: are going to be there, desperately want to get aid
Speaker 7: for Ukraine through and are probably finding themselves pretty frustrated
Speaker 7: with the reticence on the part of the House and
Speaker 7: at least maybe willing to make a deal with the
Speaker 7: House on the border. I guess it's just a question
Speaker 7: of how hard a line Mike Johnson is going to
Speaker 7: want to walk here.
Speaker 2: That's true, and it's all happening against the backdrop of
Speaker 2: this funding debate. I'm guessing we're not shutting down. Kale
Speaker 2: I was making the point last hour. We've got all
Speaker 2: the screens up on the wall here. You and I
Speaker 2: don't always have that in Washington, but all the you know,
Speaker 2: the TV screens are up here in the big fish
Speaker 2: bowl studio.
Speaker 7: You're in the fancy studio.
Speaker 2: Well, yours is pretty fancy too. But still I don't
Speaker 2: see any countdown clocks anywhere. That's nobody's taken this seriously,
Speaker 2: or I guess we're just bored with it. I don't know.
Speaker 2: Maybe we're always about to shut down. It's like a nightmare.
Speaker 7: Third time we've found ourselves in this situation, isn't it exactly?
Speaker 7: And we might find ourselves again in early March.
Speaker 2: That's true, that's the new ladder right March one, March eight,
Speaker 2: assuming this thing passes. The Senate got their procedural vote
Speaker 2: done last night, sixty eight thirteen, pretty encouraging, So I
Speaker 2: guess we're going to figure this out. The question is,
Speaker 2: will we ever have a real budget? Something we've asked
Speaker 2: Miam againness before. She's president of the Committee for a
Speaker 2: Responsible Federal Budget. Amaya, it's great to have you back.
Speaker 2: Are you encouraged by no countdown clocks? Or is it
Speaker 2: just me.
Speaker 5: Right?
Speaker 8: We don't want to keep counting kind of down and
Speaker 8: seeing that nothing happens. But on the other hand, how
Speaker 8: discouraging it is that this has just become normal and
Speaker 8: that it's all for show, so we are going to
Speaker 8: kick the can again. We are by the time we
Speaker 8: start to deal with the next moment where decisions have
Speaker 8: to be made, we will almost be halfway through the
Speaker 8: fiscal year. And if you're actually thinking about how the
Speaker 8: budget process is supposed to work, it's just a few
Speaker 8: weeks from now that the President is supposed to be
Speaker 8: submitting his budget for the next fiscal year. We haven't
Speaker 8: even begun to deal with this fiscal year. So it's
Speaker 8: all to routine, a reminder of just how broken we are.
Speaker 8: And yeah, I guess we're tired of the drama, but
Speaker 8: it doesn't mean that it's any less dysfunctional than it
Speaker 8: has been the entire time.
Speaker 7: Yeah, maya, the timeline is all out of whack here,
Speaker 7: But just on the timeline is the real deadline that
Speaker 7: we're going to be dealing with April when that sequester
Speaker 7: kicks in. The one percent quittes across the board, including
Speaker 7: for defense.
Speaker 8: You know, I think there are a number of moments
Speaker 8: where they are action forcing in one way or another,
Speaker 8: because there's always something that if not enough people go
Speaker 8: along with there will be real consequences. So I do
Speaker 8: think that March deadline absolutely matters. But we are still
Speaker 8: kind of skirting around what the specific funding levels will be.
Speaker 8: And if we hit that sequester moment, then we know
Speaker 8: what they will be, and so I think that's always
Speaker 8: been an important date. But right now my belief is
Speaker 8: we will start to have whatever funding bills are able
Speaker 8: to pass, that they will be done by the beginning
Speaker 8: of March, and then the tricky thing will be how
Speaker 8: do you figure about out what to do with the
Speaker 8: rest of the govern the pieces they couldn't pass an
Speaker 8: individual appropriations? Will it look like a big Christmas tree
Speaker 8: omnibus with lots of things hidden inside of it, or
Speaker 8: will it just be a CR maybe at the sequester
Speaker 8: level or somewhere around there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we've heard the idea of a year long CR floated.
Speaker 2: I could almost hear you. Your ears must have been burning, Maya.
Speaker 2: We're talking about a tax deal as well, though, and
Speaker 2: it's interesting that we're trying to tweak revenue even though
Speaker 2: we can't seem to figure out a budget here. But
Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer's endorsed this new tax compromise that's coming from
Speaker 2: Jason Smith and Ron Wyden Ways and Means Chair, Senate
Speaker 2: Finance Chair. I'm going to let everyone know right now
Speaker 2: that Kayley is going to be interviewing Jason Smith on
Speaker 2: balance of power later he's going to be the man
Speaker 2: of the moment. This would pair an expansion of the
Speaker 2: child tax credit MAYA with more corporate friendly tax policy.
Speaker 2: Is that a wash in your mind? Where's the committee
Speaker 2: on this?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 8: So first, let me agree with the point that you
Speaker 8: just made that really we should pass budgets before we
Speaker 8: do a lot of policies that would normally be a
Speaker 8: part of budgets. I had some folks from other countries
Speaker 8: in here the other day asking me about how our
Speaker 8: budget process works, and they just didn't get it. They
Speaker 8: were like, you don't have a budget, but you still
Speaker 8: pass policies spending taxes. How does that work? And I
Speaker 8: could not give them a good answer. So I wish
Speaker 8: we did this in a normal sequence. On this specific deal,
Speaker 8: there's really both very very good things and some discouraging things.
Speaker 8: On the good side, these folks who I didn't think
Speaker 8: would come up with a deal necessarily, we're able to
Speaker 8: come up with a tax deal that is pretty much
Speaker 8: offset or paid for, And one of the goals from
Speaker 8: a fiscal perspective is how do we rebuild that muscle
Speaker 8: memory that if something is worth doing, whether it's a
Speaker 8: spending increase or a tax cut, you also have to
Speaker 8: figure out how you're going to pay for it. You
Speaker 8: should borrow during emergencies, borrow during recessions, but normal times
Speaker 8: you've got to pay for things. And so they do
Speaker 8: use some offsets that actually bring the policies back down
Speaker 8: to where they are paid for. So that's the way
Speaker 8: a compromise canon should work. Nonetheless, there's still some gimmicks.
Speaker 8: One of them is that these are only temporary tax extensions,
Speaker 8: both on the business side and the child tax credit side.
Speaker 8: They're sensible policies, they make sense that they're brought together,
Speaker 8: but they're going to expire in twenty twenty five. And
Speaker 8: this whole thing of let's put in place policies that
Speaker 8: we want to be permanent, but will just make them
Speaker 8: temporary to shrink the price tag. That doesn't work. And
Speaker 8: if you actually what you estimate the overall costs making
Speaker 8: this permanent or an antenure window, you're looking at upwards
Speaker 8: of half a trillion dollars, So there is a big
Speaker 8: price tag here if we tackle this comprehensibly.
Speaker 7: So for that reason, do you not think this deal,
Speaker 7: which has not yet been written into legislation, should be
Speaker 7: passed by Congress?
Speaker 1: You know?
Speaker 8: I think, yeah, this is a one hand or the
Speaker 8: other for real. For me, I think I'm very supportive
Speaker 8: of the fact that it is paid for and that
Speaker 8: the Chairman went through that work of figuring out where
Speaker 8: the offsets are and they're not all gimmicks that which
Speaker 8: we often see just made up things. They're real pay
Speaker 8: for us, and they're decent policies. They make sense. I
Speaker 8: think I would go ahead with this bill, and then
Speaker 8: we're going to have twenty twenty five to figure out
Speaker 8: all of the tax policies which will be expiring all
Speaker 8: of the Trump tax cuts, many of which both Republicans
Speaker 8: and Democrats want to extend, but lots of people are
Speaker 8: rightfully saying you can only do so if you pay
Speaker 8: for them. But I hope on the budget process front,
Speaker 8: we will yes get in the habit of paying for
Speaker 8: things like they do here, but stop the habit of
Speaker 8: making things just for one or two years, which adds
Speaker 8: to the uncertainty and some cynics would say, adds to
Speaker 8: the fundraising capabilities of people on various committees because you
Speaker 8: have tax Lobbyistsy's pushing for those things to be extended.
Speaker 8: I don't think that's the right way to make policy.
Speaker 2: Can't imagine such things in Washington. As we spend time
Speaker 2: with Miami, Guinnis from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Speaker 2: That's a big meeting at the White House today that
Speaker 2: we've been talking about Maya, not about this budget specifically,
Speaker 2: but the request, the supplemental request that the President made
Speaker 2: for Ukraine that also now has been sort of linked
Speaker 2: with this potential deal on the border. I was joking
Speaker 2: earlier with Kayley about the way the President may or
Speaker 2: may not handle this. Remember back in twenty twelve, Barack
Speaker 2: Obama had John Bayner over and he served hogies, he
Speaker 2: served sandwiches, and was supposed to be some huge insult
Speaker 2: that he didn't break out the the White House China.
Speaker 2: What's the reception. What's the strategy today from the White
Speaker 2: House is they try to get into the Speaker's head.
Speaker 2: The stakes around Ukraine.
Speaker 8: Well, this is a really complicated and interesting negotiation, both
Speaker 8: because the policies are immensely complicated. A foreign aid not
Speaker 8: so much, but coupling it with border security obviously a
Speaker 8: huge issue, one of the biggest issues in the country
Speaker 8: and not easy to solve, and they're really working on
Speaker 8: deep policy there. But also you have very complicated politics
Speaker 8: where many of the folks, including I believe, I've been
Speaker 8: told the Speaker does support a number of these aid packages,
Speaker 8: but they have to deal with some of their conference
Speaker 8: members who do not. I think if you let any
Speaker 8: of these things stand on their own, there'd be enough
Speaker 8: support to pass them, whether it's Israel, Ukraine, even the border,
Speaker 8: depending on what the specifics look like. And so it's
Speaker 8: a complicated sort of coalition of ideas and people to
Speaker 8: build here. I hope and I believe that they are
Speaker 8: working on building trust in this because each one of
Speaker 8: those leaders also has a very complicated constituency that they
Speaker 8: have to sell the deal to. But I think they're
Speaker 8: more unified and that would be good to get these
Speaker 8: things done. And again to show a little bit of optimism,
Speaker 8: I think they're going to I've said that to a
Speaker 8: number of groups of people and they've rolled their eyes
Speaker 8: at me. And it may be that the deal.
Speaker 4: Just implodes on its own weight, but.
Speaker 8: I believe there's enough support for all elements of the
Speaker 8: package that they will be able to get something done well.
Speaker 7: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell seems to be wanting to
Speaker 7: move forward. He's speaking to reporters right now and has
Speaker 7: just told them that he expects the Senate will act
Speaker 7: on the Ukraine supplemental next week. So I guess trying
Speaker 7: to set a bit of a timeline here as they
Speaker 7: try to come to a compromise. Obviously, what the Senate
Speaker 7: wants and what the House wants here maya probably a
Speaker 7: little bit different, as there are many in the House
Speaker 7: advocating for greater fiscal restraint would not like to see
Speaker 7: this kind of spending going to Ukraine. The thing is, though,
Speaker 7: in the actual appropriations process, as you have rightly pointed
Speaker 7: out to us many times, the pile of money we're
Speaker 7: talking about here, the actual programs that could be cut
Speaker 7: is a very very small part of the spending of
Speaker 7: the US government. Entitlements are a massive issue. And I
Speaker 7: bring this up because Joe Matthew is actually currently in
Speaker 7: a TV ad by the Trump administration because he talked
Speaker 7: to NICKI Haley about this months ago, and she said, yeah,
Speaker 7: we have to lift the retirement age above sixty five,
Speaker 7: and she's getting kind of crucified for it, Maya. So
Speaker 7: does this just indicate that that actual entitlement conversation, that
Speaker 7: huge line item when it comes to us spending is
Speaker 7: not going to be a ball that can be touched
Speaker 7: for this entire election year.
Speaker 8: Yeah, that is a great, great question, I think one
Speaker 8: of the most important in terms of how things play
Speaker 8: out out in this election. And so it is without
Speaker 8: question the truth that Social Security has to be reformed.
Speaker 8: This is a program that will become insolvent in roughly
Speaker 8: a decade and there will be across the board twenty
Speaker 8: three percent benefit cuts for everybody people who depend on
Speaker 8: the program. There are so many ways to fix this program.
Speaker 8: You can means test, you can cut benefits, you can
Speaker 8: raise the retirement age, you can raise the payroll tax
Speaker 8: cap or the payroll tax rate. There are so many
Speaker 8: different solutions. The one thing that we should not be
Speaker 8: arguing about is whether we have to make those changes.
Speaker 8: The truth is that we have waited for decades more
Speaker 8: than we should have. We could have made the changes
Speaker 8: in a much easier manner if we'd acted more quickly.
Speaker 8: And I think it's just the truth that when you
Speaker 8: have a candidate like Nikki Haley saying we need to
Speaker 8: look at raising and the retirement age down the road
Speaker 8: for much younger workers, that is somebody who is leveling
Speaker 8: with the American people about what kinds of choices there are.
Speaker 8: There's no one option. We can disagree on what they
Speaker 8: should be, but anybody who's saying I'm not going to
Speaker 8: touch that program is doing a huge disservice to voters
Speaker 8: and not telling people. And the reason I kind of
Speaker 8: want to be so strong in US and I'm a
Speaker 8: political independent and we're more nonpartisan, but it is really
Speaker 8: easy to pretend that you will do nothing and that
Speaker 8: that is protecting people when it comes to Social security,
Speaker 8: that's just not true. We need actual answers, and we
Speaker 8: need leaders who are willing to talk about what changes
Speaker 8: they support in order to fix the program. I just
Speaker 8: I think social security right now is the political issue
Speaker 8: that both parties are trying to pretend the other party
Speaker 8: is going to you know, slash benefits, trying to scare people,
Speaker 8: and it's really a short term political strategy that's reckless
Speaker 8: in terms of protecting the program, and it deeply concerns
Speaker 8: me that we're so caught up in those politics.
Speaker 7: All right, Maya, thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 7: That's Maya McGinnis there. She's president of the Committee for
Speaker 7: a Responsible Federal Budget. She thinks this is an issue
Speaker 7: that needs to be talked about. But I'm not sure
Speaker 7: how much Joe Nicki Hayley's going to wanting to talk
Speaker 7: about this issue in the next few days as she
Speaker 7: is running the sprint toward the finish line of that
Speaker 7: New Hampshire primary.
Speaker 2: That's right, And I've noticed by the way they're doing
Speaker 2: local news stories on that ad and I guess and
Speaker 2: we're going to see that a lot while we're up there.
Speaker 2: This may be something we can't touch till after the election.
Speaker 1: You're listening to The Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch the
Speaker 1: program live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the
Speaker 1: tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station. Just say Alexa, play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: Enter the Kaibar Breaker. Kyley, have you seen this?
Speaker 7: I have it's a precision guided missile basically, and it
Speaker 7: can go a really long distance. Joe. That is the
Speaker 7: crux of the matter here. It was sent from Iran
Speaker 7: into Syria and strike on Isis That's about thirteen hundred
Speaker 7: kilometers eight hundred miles, and Iran says it can go
Speaker 7: even further than that fourteen hundred and fifty kilometer maximum range,
Speaker 7: and that maybe gives Israel a pretty big reason to
Speaker 7: be nervous.
Speaker 2: Incredible to learn that Iran could in fact hit Israel directly,
Speaker 2: and after we saw what they did in Syria and
Speaker 2: Iraq for that matter. Kayley, this is pretty scary stuff.
Speaker 2: It's an incredible piece of reporting, and it sounds scary.
Speaker 2: I don't know what the Kaibar breaker means exactly, but
Speaker 2: this would make it the farthest such attack in the
Speaker 2: IRGC's history, what we saw in Syria. Peter Martin's with
Speaker 2: you in Washington. We know when we bring in Peter,
Speaker 2: it's serious.
Speaker 7: Yeah, absolutely right, he's here. I'm here. Joe still isn't here, Peter.
Speaker 7: But wherever you are, you probably pay attention to a
Speaker 7: story like this. Is there are these heightened concerns around
Speaker 7: escalating tensions in the Middle East and the potential for
Speaker 7: this to turn into a substantial regional conflict. How nervous
Speaker 7: is the US about not the Iranian proxies, but about
Speaker 7: Iran specifically directly involving itself in some of this activity.
Speaker 9: Well, I think that's a concern for US official that's
Speaker 9: kind of been running throughout this whole process. It's one
Speaker 9: thing to deter proxies, whether it's Hezbla in northern Israel
Speaker 9: or proxies in Iraqan Syria. It's another thing to think
Speaker 9: about direct war between Israel in Iran or maybe even
Speaker 9: the US in Iran. I think for the moment, US
Speaker 9: officials feel like they have kind of deterred that from happening.
Speaker 9: But certainly this latest show of Iranian military force demonstrates
Speaker 9: why officials in Israel and indeed Washington are worried.
Speaker 2: Peter, as you covered the Pentagon. Are we just learning
Speaker 2: about this or is everyone just learning about it? Did
Speaker 2: Israel did know about this? Did the US know this existed?
Speaker 9: I mean, I'm not entirely clear on this. I think
Speaker 9: there has been a widespread assumption that Israel is capable
Speaker 9: of hitting, that Iran is capable of hitting Israel if
Speaker 9: it needs to, And certainly that's been a concern running
Speaker 9: through you know, Iran has been able to set up
Speaker 9: a network of proxy actors throughout the Middle East, stretching
Speaker 9: all the way to Israel's borders. Of course, her mass
Speaker 9: is backed by Iran, and so is Hezbala, and so
Speaker 9: that kind of near and present threat has been something
Speaker 9: that's been there for a little while. But of course
Speaker 9: these new missiles will will just add to that.
Speaker 7: Would it change anything about the composition of the aid
Speaker 7: of the weaponry the US would provide to Israel or
Speaker 7: is it still just continues supplying the Iron Dome some
Speaker 7: of these similar questions. And I just asked this knowing
Speaker 7: that at that White House meeting Joe is alluding to
Speaker 7: that's going to take place between congressional leaders and the President.
Speaker 7: The supplemental we're talking about isn't just aid for Ukraine,
Speaker 7: it is also aid for Israel. And I wonder how
Speaker 7: the US is thinking about what Israel needs when you
Speaker 7: know there's threats like this out there.
Speaker 9: I mean, I think my impression is that Israel has
Speaker 9: a pretty strong shelf of capabilities when it comes to
Speaker 9: hitting back against Iranian conventional threats. The question here would
Speaker 9: be can the US help to dampen tensions in a
Speaker 9: way that would make war less likely overall, you know,
Speaker 9: getting to a point where Israel doesn't need to use
Speaker 9: those capabilities.
Speaker 2: Pretty incredible to read, as all Ran also hit Pakistan
Speaker 2: with missiles on Tuesday. Peter, where's the Pentagon on concerns
Speaker 2: over a wider conflict?
Speaker 9: I mean, I would say from the White House, through
Speaker 9: the Pentagon to the State Department, US officials have been
Speaker 9: very concerned about the risks of a of a widening
Speaker 9: conflict for the whole time.
Speaker 3: Here.
Speaker 9: The latest strikes inside Pakistan and indeed some additional strikes
Speaker 9: inside Iraq just kind of hit that home. It's something
Speaker 9: that the Iraqi government has responded to in a kind
Speaker 9: of rare public rebuke of Iran, and it's something where
Speaker 9: Pakistan has responded too strongly as well, even recalling its
Speaker 9: ambassador from Tehran.
Speaker 7: Of course, as we talk about Iran and the Iranian proxies,
Speaker 7: the US has taken direct action against one of the
Speaker 7: proxy groups, the Huthis, with multiple strikes trying to take
Speaker 7: out their capability as they continue to threaten and attack
Speaker 7: vessels in the Red Sea. Do we have a sense
Speaker 7: of to what degree those direct strikes are going to continue,
Speaker 7: how many more offensive maneuvers we could see coming from
Speaker 7: the US military?
Speaker 9: Yeah, I mean the Pentagon's quite cagy about putting numbers
Speaker 9: on that kind of thing. They like to use the
Speaker 9: sort of generic language about we will strike at a
Speaker 9: time of our own choosing. But I think the expectation
Speaker 9: is that there is more military action to come, simply
Speaker 9: because there are very few signs that the Houthis have
Speaker 9: yet been deterred. And of course the reason for that,
Speaker 9: I think US officials and everyone else would recognizes that
Speaker 9: the Huthis are not acting on their own, They're acting
Speaker 9: in accordance with the of Tehran.
Speaker 2: Peter Martin, we understand the Secretary of Defenses back home,
Speaker 2: or at least he's out of the hospital and he's
Speaker 2: quote unquote working from home. To what extent do we
Speaker 2: know anything about his condition at this point or is
Speaker 2: this still shrouded in mystery?
Speaker 9: I mean, beyond the disclosures we saw last week about
Speaker 9: his diagnosis of prostate cancer is the initial cause of this,
Speaker 9: we don't have much more information. Pentagon officials were very
Speaker 9: keen distress that Secretary Austin was conducting his full duties
Speaker 9: from his hospital room, including the use of secure communications,
Speaker 9: which they said they had set up there for him,
Speaker 9: and I'm sure that that would always have been the
Speaker 9: case at his home.
Speaker 4: All right.
Speaker 7: Peter Martin, who covers the Pentagon for us here at Bloomberg,
Speaker 7: from drama around personnel to what's happening in the Middle East,
Speaker 7: thank you so much for thank you for joining us
Speaker 7: and Joe. That Lloyd Austin story, I think is one
Speaker 7: that isn't going to go away anytime soon, even if
Speaker 7: his hospital stay has come to an end. Of the
Speaker 7: questions around it. The communication failures that we saw happen,
Speaker 7: the inquiries into that I think are really just getting started.
Speaker 2: Did you see Kaylee audio from the phone call.
Speaker 7: That his security detail on.
Speaker 2: Fairfax County Dispatch. This is remarkable. They deserve credit. The
Speaker 2: Daily Beast got this through a foyer request and you
Speaker 2: could hear the staffer asking them to remain subtle, no
Speaker 2: sirens or lights as they came to get the Secretary
Speaker 2: at home.
Speaker 7: They're trying to do this in an subtle way. I
Speaker 7: think was the quote on the phone call, which just
Speaker 7: speaks again to the perhaps privacy concerns that the Secretary
Speaker 7: had surrounding his own medical issues. But again, when you're
Speaker 7: the Secretary of Defense, that privacy may not be as
Speaker 7: robust as you would like to think.
Speaker 2: We're still talking about this though. The things we don't
Speaker 2: know to your point, and how's this going with him
Speaker 2: at home is see on zoom like we're in a bathrobe.
Speaker 2: I don't want to understand. We'll have more on Austin
Speaker 2: as we learn it with Kaylee Lines. I'm Joe Matthew.
Speaker 2: This is Bloomberg. Thanks for listening to the Sound On podcast.
Speaker 2: Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: and anywhere else you get your podcasts. And you can
Speaker 2: find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at one
Speaker 2: pm Eastern Time at Bloomberg dot com.