WEBVTT - (Radio)

0:00:01.800 --> 0:00:04.360
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our globe look at

0:00:04.360 --> 0:00:06.240
<v Speaker 1>the top stories of the coming week from our day

0:00:06.240 --> 0:00:09.040
<v Speaker 1>Break anchors all around the world, and just the him

0:00:09.039 --> 0:00:12.320
<v Speaker 1>of the program. The Battle of the Retailers is on.

0:00:12.600 --> 0:00:15.200
<v Speaker 1>I'm John Tuckery in New York. I'm Stephen carl in London,

0:00:15.240 --> 0:00:17.759
<v Speaker 1>where the stakes are high for Chancellor Jeremy Hunt as

0:00:17.800 --> 0:00:20.599
<v Speaker 1>he unveils a budget that must pluck a massive fiscal

0:00:20.680 --> 0:00:24.000
<v Speaker 1>gap and calm market fears about the UK economy. I'm

0:00:24.000 --> 0:00:26.319
<v Speaker 1>Brian Curtis in Hong Kong. We look at the most

0:00:26.360 --> 0:00:29.960
<v Speaker 1>innovative ideas that the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in Singapore.

0:00:30.120 --> 0:00:32.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm Amy Morris in Washington. How the mid terms could

0:00:32.840 --> 0:00:37.480
<v Speaker 1>shape the presidential election. That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg

0:00:37.560 --> 0:00:42.960
<v Speaker 1>Daybreak Weekend on Bloomberg eleven three on New York, Bloomberg one, Washington,

0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:47.000
<v Speaker 1>d C, Bloomberg one oh six one, Boston, Bloomberg nine sixties,

0:00:47.040 --> 0:00:50.960
<v Speaker 1>San Francisco, d A B, Digital Radio, London, Sirius XM

0:00:51.000 --> 0:00:54.320
<v Speaker 1>one nineteen and around the world on Bloomberg Radio dot

0:00:54.320 --> 0:01:00.240
<v Speaker 1>Com and via the Bloomberg Business App. I did I'm

0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:04.080
<v Speaker 1>John Tucker, and let's start today's program with the retail segment.

0:01:04.120 --> 0:01:08.360
<v Speaker 1>The retailers sitting on massive amounts of inventory. They over

0:01:08.720 --> 0:01:13.440
<v Speaker 1>ordered this year after being traumatized by pandemic supply chain shortages,

0:01:13.600 --> 0:01:17.800
<v Speaker 1>and now, according to industry experts including Dana Kelsey, CEO

0:01:17.920 --> 0:01:22.000
<v Speaker 1>of Telsey Advisory Group, inventory is sky high. It's not

0:01:22.080 --> 0:01:27.640
<v Speaker 1>only up versus last year, it's up versus also most

0:01:27.720 --> 0:01:31.600
<v Speaker 1>companies are looking to reduce inventory levels and tells you

0:01:31.680 --> 0:01:34.560
<v Speaker 1>also tells us this massive blood of inventory comes just

0:01:34.720 --> 0:01:38.480
<v Speaker 1>as the economy appears to be hitting a rough patch.

0:01:38.640 --> 0:01:43.680
<v Speaker 1>Certainly the middle and lower income levels are definitely spending

0:01:43.680 --> 0:01:49.320
<v Speaker 1>more cautiously, and the stock market volatility real estate values

0:01:49.800 --> 0:01:53.480
<v Speaker 1>may also lead to some level of moderation in the

0:01:53.560 --> 0:01:56.960
<v Speaker 1>upper income areas. This could potentially put discount retailers in

0:01:57.000 --> 0:02:00.200
<v Speaker 1>the sweet spot, although we just heard Telsey say their

0:02:00.240 --> 0:02:03.200
<v Speaker 1>shoppers could be constrained. So joining us now to talk

0:02:03.440 --> 0:02:08.240
<v Speaker 1>about this punum coil seeing your retail analysts with Bloomberg Intelligence.

0:02:08.480 --> 0:02:10.800
<v Speaker 1>All right, what we just said, throw that into the blender,

0:02:11.120 --> 0:02:13.920
<v Speaker 1>turn alound high and what do we pour out? What's

0:02:14.040 --> 0:02:17.840
<v Speaker 1>what's what's the outlook here? The outlook is for the

0:02:17.880 --> 0:02:20.600
<v Speaker 1>shoppers they're going to get great deals with holiday UM

0:02:20.880 --> 0:02:24.799
<v Speaker 1>if they can afford it. I don't every money less

0:02:26.080 --> 0:02:28.480
<v Speaker 1>a deal of a deal. People still jump on deals UM,

0:02:28.800 --> 0:02:32.160
<v Speaker 1>but seriously, on a serious no UM. Holiday is going

0:02:32.240 --> 0:02:35.079
<v Speaker 1>to be challenging this year. UM. Retailers have a lot

0:02:35.120 --> 0:02:38.520
<v Speaker 1>to chew on. Clearly, consumers, they're strapped for cash. They

0:02:38.560 --> 0:02:40.600
<v Speaker 1>have a lot of inventory, which means that they'll be

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:45.680
<v Speaker 1>promotional across the board. They're still dealing with inflation higher costs,

0:02:46.000 --> 0:02:49.200
<v Speaker 1>so that's going to pressure margins. It won't be easy.

0:02:49.560 --> 0:02:52.360
<v Speaker 1>But we do see shoppers returning to stores, which is

0:02:52.360 --> 0:02:55.880
<v Speaker 1>a good thing, and online sales will still rise, but

0:02:55.960 --> 0:02:57.760
<v Speaker 1>you're not going to see the double digit gains that

0:02:57.800 --> 0:03:01.079
<v Speaker 1>you're used to seeing for the past many years. Specifically

0:03:01.160 --> 0:03:04.640
<v Speaker 1>to t J Max, they report quarterly results this coming week,

0:03:05.000 --> 0:03:08.520
<v Speaker 1>So is this their moment in the sun because they're

0:03:08.639 --> 0:03:11.919
<v Speaker 1>a discounter. Yeah, t J asked, you know, the one

0:03:11.960 --> 0:03:14.320
<v Speaker 1>thing inventory is bad for retail, but it's great for

0:03:14.360 --> 0:03:17.080
<v Speaker 1>t j X and the off spicers. When there's a

0:03:17.120 --> 0:03:19.920
<v Speaker 1>lot of inventory in the marketplace, they get to buy

0:03:19.919 --> 0:03:24.440
<v Speaker 1>it cheap and pass on those savings to their customers.

0:03:24.520 --> 0:03:27.040
<v Speaker 1>So it just means they'll be getting better products, they

0:03:27.040 --> 0:03:29.240
<v Speaker 1>save that product, they can put it out next year

0:03:29.600 --> 0:03:32.840
<v Speaker 1>and make better margin on it. So you will find

0:03:32.960 --> 0:03:35.200
<v Speaker 1>good stuff at t j X at a bargain, and

0:03:35.240 --> 0:03:38.160
<v Speaker 1>we're going to see shoppers appreciate that and to their store.

0:03:38.240 --> 0:03:40.680
<v Speaker 1>To keep in mind, their business is largely a store

0:03:40.720 --> 0:03:45.120
<v Speaker 1>based business with less than two or three percent done online. Okay,

0:03:45.120 --> 0:03:48.240
<v Speaker 1>this this just occurs to me now, just sort of tangentially.

0:03:48.320 --> 0:03:52.120
<v Speaker 1>Does the fact that they're high inventories mean that the

0:03:52.120 --> 0:03:56.560
<v Speaker 1>supply chain disruptions all that stuff is solved, it's all

0:03:56.600 --> 0:04:00.480
<v Speaker 1>behind us now, Yeah, I think it's a different hiccup

0:04:00.480 --> 0:04:02.960
<v Speaker 1>in the supply chain. So remember last year at this point,

0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:06.120
<v Speaker 1>we're talking about not getting enough inventory for the holidays.

0:04:06.520 --> 0:04:09.920
<v Speaker 1>So retailers had ordered in advance, they had ordered more

0:04:09.960 --> 0:04:14.200
<v Speaker 1>than they needed, and all that inventory is coming into

0:04:14.560 --> 0:04:18.360
<v Speaker 1>the stores and distribution centers as of spring summer this year.

0:04:18.400 --> 0:04:21.159
<v Speaker 1>So now all of a sudden, they have so much inventory, right,

0:04:21.160 --> 0:04:24.320
<v Speaker 1>it's almost a reverse problem, and um, they don't know

0:04:24.360 --> 0:04:25.919
<v Speaker 1>where to keep it, they don't know how to stock it,

0:04:25.960 --> 0:04:27.400
<v Speaker 1>they don't know how to sell that. Some of it

0:04:27.440 --> 0:04:30.839
<v Speaker 1>is not sellable anymore because it's not seasonal. Because some

0:04:30.920 --> 0:04:34.040
<v Speaker 1>of that inventory from Spring is coming in in the fall.

0:04:34.360 --> 0:04:35.680
<v Speaker 1>What do you do with that? You've got to write

0:04:35.680 --> 0:04:39.760
<v Speaker 1>it down. Okay, Um, let's move on to Amazon. You

0:04:39.800 --> 0:04:43.159
<v Speaker 1>also cover Amazon. What's the story there? Yeah, you know,

0:04:43.240 --> 0:04:46.520
<v Speaker 1>Amazon is a company that we still like very much.

0:04:46.560 --> 0:04:49.640
<v Speaker 1>They clearly are going through some issues right now, especially

0:04:49.640 --> 0:04:53.480
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to rising costs and enterprises cutting back

0:04:53.520 --> 0:04:58.359
<v Speaker 1>on fund So they have multiple businesses online clearly the

0:04:58.400 --> 0:05:01.760
<v Speaker 1>biggest business, but the most profitable, is their cloud business

0:05:01.760 --> 0:05:05.160
<v Speaker 1>a WS. What you saw last quarter was a function

0:05:05.160 --> 0:05:07.040
<v Speaker 1>of what happened at a w S, which is why

0:05:07.080 --> 0:05:11.360
<v Speaker 1>the stock took a beating. Um. But from the online perspective,

0:05:11.680 --> 0:05:14.400
<v Speaker 1>we do things that sales have bounced back from the

0:05:14.480 --> 0:05:16.480
<v Speaker 1>first half, so they're much better than they were in

0:05:16.560 --> 0:05:20.480
<v Speaker 1>one age. And while there will be more discounting in

0:05:20.839 --> 0:05:23.640
<v Speaker 1>the fourth quarter, we do think Amazon for the long

0:05:23.760 --> 0:05:27.880
<v Speaker 1>run still stands to be in the best position to

0:05:28.040 --> 0:05:30.640
<v Speaker 1>take online share, as a shift from brick and mortar

0:05:30.680 --> 0:05:34.640
<v Speaker 1>to online is still very much on the table. Okay.

0:05:35.000 --> 0:05:38.560
<v Speaker 1>We also have Macy's gap Walmart reporting this coming week.

0:05:38.680 --> 0:05:42.040
<v Speaker 1>You said this earlier. The consumer doesn't have money to spend, right,

0:05:42.080 --> 0:05:44.359
<v Speaker 1>they have to find the money to spend. They're worried

0:05:44.360 --> 0:05:48.120
<v Speaker 1>about cost rising, so promotions will be key, and how

0:05:48.160 --> 0:05:51.400
<v Speaker 1>they discount on the inventory that they bring forward will

0:05:51.440 --> 0:05:53.839
<v Speaker 1>really determine their top line in margins at the end

0:05:53.839 --> 0:05:57.560
<v Speaker 1>of the quarter. Walmart of value play, but it does

0:05:57.680 --> 0:06:01.440
<v Speaker 1>target the low end consumer, so the consumers that's probably

0:06:01.480 --> 0:06:05.920
<v Speaker 1>most trapped for cash and inflation will hurt their spending.

0:06:06.320 --> 0:06:08.880
<v Speaker 1>Where Macy's is struggling with being a department store. Right,

0:06:08.920 --> 0:06:12.159
<v Speaker 1>We've talked about department stores in the past, and it's

0:06:12.200 --> 0:06:14.880
<v Speaker 1>it's a place where consumers are going less today than

0:06:14.920 --> 0:06:17.640
<v Speaker 1>they did years ago, so they're still challenged with those

0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:23.000
<v Speaker 1>structural or structural shopping challenges that consumers are shifting away from. Okay,

0:06:23.080 --> 0:06:25.599
<v Speaker 1>before you go, I gotta I asked this question every

0:06:25.680 --> 0:06:29.479
<v Speaker 1>year review what's the what's the to get item this year?

0:06:29.520 --> 0:06:31.359
<v Speaker 1>What's the one item I have to buy for the

0:06:31.360 --> 0:06:34.320
<v Speaker 1>holiday shopping season? The PS five is still on a

0:06:34.320 --> 0:06:37.400
<v Speaker 1>lot of shoppers which lost so I think it's electronics

0:06:37.400 --> 0:06:40.760
<v Speaker 1>and toys. Electronics or toys are still at the top

0:06:40.800 --> 0:06:44.039
<v Speaker 1>of which lift and gift cards. People want gift cards,

0:06:44.520 --> 0:06:47.320
<v Speaker 1>That's what I'll get you then put them always a pleasure.

0:06:47.360 --> 0:06:49.960
<v Speaker 1>I appreciate it. Put them gals, senior retail analysts with

0:06:50.279 --> 0:06:54.240
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Intelligence and just to hand. On Bloomberg Daybreak weekend,

0:06:54.279 --> 0:06:59.240
<v Speaker 1>Britain's Finance minister will finally officially on Bailer's bunchet. I'm

0:06:59.320 --> 0:07:08.640
<v Speaker 1>John Tucker, DNCY is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg Daybreaking weekend.

0:07:08.720 --> 0:07:11.080
<v Speaker 1>Are global looking ahead of the tom stories for investors

0:07:11.080 --> 0:07:13.400
<v Speaker 1>in the coming week. I'm John Tucker in New York.

0:07:13.920 --> 0:07:16.520
<v Speaker 1>Up later in the program busy time in Asia as

0:07:16.560 --> 0:07:20.400
<v Speaker 1>we gear up for the Bloomberg New Economy Forum. But first,

0:07:20.440 --> 0:07:23.760
<v Speaker 1>almost three weeks later than planned, Britain's Finance minister will

0:07:23.800 --> 0:07:28.040
<v Speaker 1>finally unveil he his budget on Thursday. Jeremy Hunt, along

0:07:28.040 --> 0:07:30.840
<v Speaker 1>with the Prime Minister Rishi Sunac, need to balance the

0:07:30.880 --> 0:07:33.840
<v Speaker 1>books and convince markets there won't be a repeat of

0:07:33.880 --> 0:07:37.960
<v Speaker 1>the previous government's mistakes that sent guilt markets into meltdown.

0:07:38.840 --> 0:07:42.440
<v Speaker 1>From Warlet's into London bringing Bloomberg Daybreak Europe anchor Steven

0:07:42.520 --> 0:07:45.840
<v Speaker 1>Carol John Jeremy Hunt might have been spooked by the

0:07:45.880 --> 0:07:48.840
<v Speaker 1>Halloween date his budget was originally set for, but in

0:07:48.880 --> 0:07:50.640
<v Speaker 1>the coming days he might get a chance to scare

0:07:50.720 --> 0:07:53.040
<v Speaker 1>us all anyway. With the gloomy economic outlook that the

0:07:53.120 --> 0:07:57.080
<v Speaker 1>UK is facing. We've been well warned the situation is grim.

0:07:57.160 --> 0:08:00.120
<v Speaker 1>The Bank of England's forecasting eighteen months of recession and

0:08:00.160 --> 0:08:02.920
<v Speaker 1>the fiscal gap that needs to be plugged in this

0:08:03.040 --> 0:08:06.440
<v Speaker 1>budget has estimated at more than thirty billion pounds. To

0:08:06.480 --> 0:08:08.800
<v Speaker 1>look ahead to Watson Store, I'm joined by our UK

0:08:08.800 --> 0:08:11.440
<v Speaker 1>correspondent Lizzie Burden. Lizzie set the scene for us. It's

0:08:11.560 --> 0:08:13.520
<v Speaker 1>it's been called an artem statement, but it's a pretty

0:08:13.520 --> 0:08:18.000
<v Speaker 1>wintry backdrop. Our colleague Katherine Griffiths has reported that the

0:08:18.080 --> 0:08:21.240
<v Speaker 1>Chancellor told a group of senior business people that this

0:08:21.280 --> 0:08:24.720
<v Speaker 1>would be really interesting bleep if he wasn't in the

0:08:24.720 --> 0:08:28.679
<v Speaker 1>middle of it. You've got double digit inflation strikes across

0:08:28.680 --> 0:08:31.760
<v Speaker 1>sectors and the Bank of England forecasting a recession, though

0:08:32.000 --> 0:08:33.720
<v Speaker 1>how deep it's going to be is going to depend

0:08:33.760 --> 0:08:36.880
<v Speaker 1>on how high interest rates will rise. Now the Chancellor,

0:08:36.920 --> 0:08:39.360
<v Speaker 1>Jeremy Hunt and the Prime Minister Richie Snack have made

0:08:39.440 --> 0:08:43.600
<v Speaker 1>very clear there are eyewatering ly difficult decisions ahead if

0:08:43.600 --> 0:08:46.440
<v Speaker 1>they want to plug this hole in the public finances.

0:08:46.480 --> 0:08:48.920
<v Speaker 1>Some would say that hole isn't real, it doesn't have

0:08:49.040 --> 0:08:51.880
<v Speaker 1>to be plugged, but you'll remember the market turmoil that

0:08:51.920 --> 0:08:55.400
<v Speaker 1>followed Liz trust Is mini budget in September, in large

0:08:55.440 --> 0:08:58.360
<v Speaker 1>part due to the raft of unfunded tax cuts that

0:08:58.480 --> 0:09:02.440
<v Speaker 1>she and her chancellor, then Quasi Quarsteng proposed. But the

0:09:02.480 --> 0:09:05.600
<v Speaker 1>bottom line is they need to boost growth, help the

0:09:05.640 --> 0:09:08.959
<v Speaker 1>most vulnerable people through the cost of living crisis without

0:09:09.000 --> 0:09:11.480
<v Speaker 1>adding to inflation. I want to tackle this idea of

0:09:11.520 --> 0:09:14.040
<v Speaker 1>how much information we're getting in advance of the budget

0:09:14.080 --> 0:09:17.040
<v Speaker 1>as well and the run up to Thursday's announcement, there

0:09:17.040 --> 0:09:18.920
<v Speaker 1>has been a plethora of reports in the media about

0:09:18.920 --> 0:09:21.120
<v Speaker 1>what sorts of measures we might be getting. This is

0:09:21.120 --> 0:09:23.080
<v Speaker 1>something they see that you and I discussed what pamer.

0:09:23.120 --> 0:09:26.600
<v Speaker 1>Gordon's chief economists Simon French, He's very against the way

0:09:26.640 --> 0:09:28.480
<v Speaker 1>these leaks are happening and says that it has a

0:09:28.600 --> 0:09:33.240
<v Speaker 1>visible chilling effect on UK economic activity. There are areas

0:09:33.280 --> 0:09:37.360
<v Speaker 1>that are sensitive to changing tax rates, changing funding for

0:09:37.480 --> 0:09:42.360
<v Speaker 1>infrastructure projects. This run up to every fiscal event does

0:09:42.480 --> 0:09:45.080
<v Speaker 1>move activity to the right. Now, you could say that

0:09:45.200 --> 0:09:48.320
<v Speaker 1>only for a couple of weeks, but this stuff is

0:09:48.600 --> 0:09:51.120
<v Speaker 1>I feel like symptomatic of a broader malaise that has

0:09:51.200 --> 0:09:55.520
<v Speaker 1>overtaken UK politics in my view, which is this rotating

0:09:55.600 --> 0:09:59.400
<v Speaker 1>door between the special advisor community and the journalist community,

0:10:00.080 --> 0:10:03.240
<v Speaker 1>and they're all trying to keep each other happy by

0:10:03.480 --> 0:10:08.200
<v Speaker 1>leaking stories. This leak culture up at a hair up

0:10:08.200 --> 0:10:11.600
<v Speaker 1>ahead of a fiscal event has real world implications that

0:10:11.679 --> 0:10:14.079
<v Speaker 1>I do think if you're in the Westminster bubble, it's

0:10:14.160 --> 0:10:16.480
<v Speaker 1>you sometimes lose sight of Okay. So that's the view

0:10:16.480 --> 0:10:18.559
<v Speaker 1>of Simon French from Pioneer Gordon when he spoke to

0:10:18.640 --> 0:10:21.319
<v Speaker 1>us a couple of days ago, Lizzie, that's Simon's point

0:10:21.360 --> 0:10:23.360
<v Speaker 1>of view on that issue. Of course, we're very keen

0:10:23.400 --> 0:10:25.640
<v Speaker 1>to see what sort of things are being floated, what

0:10:25.720 --> 0:10:28.080
<v Speaker 1>are the controversial ideas that are being battered around at

0:10:28.080 --> 0:10:31.000
<v Speaker 1>the moment. Well, first off, Simon's not wrong. Business leaders

0:10:31.080 --> 0:10:34.960
<v Speaker 1>are frustrated by all the leaks, especially about potential tax

0:10:35.080 --> 0:10:38.280
<v Speaker 1>rises on dividends and capital gains, because they do have

0:10:38.400 --> 0:10:43.040
<v Speaker 1>real world consequences for investment in cash hungry startups. The

0:10:43.040 --> 0:10:46.840
<v Speaker 1>way the former Pizza Express boss put it, Hugh Osmond,

0:10:47.360 --> 0:10:49.920
<v Speaker 1>was it's as if every day they set a new

0:10:49.920 --> 0:10:54.200
<v Speaker 1>hair running. He said, it's lazy, it's laden with unintended consequences.

0:10:54.559 --> 0:10:56.880
<v Speaker 1>So that's the comms in terms of the meat of

0:10:56.960 --> 0:10:59.640
<v Speaker 1>the budget some measures that you could see would be

0:10:59.679 --> 0:11:03.600
<v Speaker 1>an increased windfall tax on energy profits, which would be

0:11:03.679 --> 0:11:09.840
<v Speaker 1>extended in terms of time from and expanded to include

0:11:10.120 --> 0:11:14.600
<v Speaker 1>energy generators. That would expect upset Tories who think that

0:11:14.640 --> 0:11:18.200
<v Speaker 1>the state shouldn't punish business for success. You could also

0:11:18.240 --> 0:11:20.640
<v Speaker 1>see a freeze on the foreign aid budget. That's going

0:11:20.679 --> 0:11:24.120
<v Speaker 1>to invite criticism that the UK is abandoning its ambitions

0:11:24.120 --> 0:11:27.160
<v Speaker 1>as a world leader. And then there's the thorny issue

0:11:27.280 --> 0:11:30.679
<v Speaker 1>of whether to raise pensions and benefits in line with inflation.

0:11:30.840 --> 0:11:33.520
<v Speaker 1>But if you look at who Rishi Sonacs appointed as

0:11:33.520 --> 0:11:37.920
<v Speaker 1>Work and Pension Secretary male Stride, he's expressed that he

0:11:38.040 --> 0:11:40.760
<v Speaker 1>thinks they should rise in line with inflation and he's

0:11:40.800 --> 0:11:43.800
<v Speaker 1>a key sooner and lots of difficult decisions being made

0:11:43.800 --> 0:11:45.840
<v Speaker 1>as well. That this statement will also be a chance

0:11:45.840 --> 0:11:47.839
<v Speaker 1>for Issy Snacs government to set out some of its

0:11:47.880 --> 0:11:51.439
<v Speaker 1>priorities for the economy. Plenty of industry is very interested

0:11:51.440 --> 0:11:53.280
<v Speaker 1>in what's going to be said. One that will be

0:11:53.280 --> 0:11:55.520
<v Speaker 1>listening closely is the financial sector, very key to the

0:11:55.520 --> 0:11:58.520
<v Speaker 1>City of London. We've been talking to Miles Selleck about this.

0:11:58.600 --> 0:12:01.480
<v Speaker 1>He's from the industry Group the City UK. Reflecting the

0:12:01.520 --> 0:12:06.000
<v Speaker 1>conversations that we've had with international counterparts and other potential

0:12:06.080 --> 0:12:08.960
<v Speaker 1>investors in the UK. What people are looking for is stability,

0:12:09.000 --> 0:12:11.800
<v Speaker 1>They're looking for predictability. I think the UK has been

0:12:11.840 --> 0:12:14.840
<v Speaker 1>seen from a political perspective is just a little bit

0:12:14.840 --> 0:12:19.440
<v Speaker 1>too exciting, certainly since six and the Brexit vote and

0:12:19.480 --> 0:12:21.400
<v Speaker 1>the sort of consequences that have flowed from that, and

0:12:21.520 --> 0:12:25.960
<v Speaker 1>arguably from fourteen and the Scottish independence referendum. So I

0:12:26.000 --> 0:12:28.280
<v Speaker 1>think there would be there will be a strong sense

0:12:28.280 --> 0:12:32.160
<v Speaker 1>of welcome for being able to know the direction of travel.

0:12:32.280 --> 0:12:35.160
<v Speaker 1>On regulation, what that looks like now that the UK

0:12:35.520 --> 0:12:38.720
<v Speaker 1>is out of the European Union. What's the vision for

0:12:38.960 --> 0:12:42.840
<v Speaker 1>financial and related professional services? Something Richie Sunac set out

0:12:42.920 --> 0:12:46.120
<v Speaker 1>quite compellingly in his mention how speech last year? How

0:12:46.120 --> 0:12:47.920
<v Speaker 1>will that be built on and what are we going

0:12:47.960 --> 0:12:51.080
<v Speaker 1>to see as we move forward? Also in terms of

0:12:51.440 --> 0:12:54.920
<v Speaker 1>potential new deals with other markets. Okay, so that's males

0:12:54.920 --> 0:12:58.160
<v Speaker 1>select from the city UK. That's one form of perhaps

0:12:58.200 --> 0:13:01.720
<v Speaker 1>pressure that the government will be feeling. It hasn't been

0:13:01.760 --> 0:13:04.760
<v Speaker 1>a very easy start to Richie Suonac's premiership either, in

0:13:04.800 --> 0:13:08.120
<v Speaker 1>this could potentially be an important moment politically as well.

0:13:08.160 --> 0:13:09.800
<v Speaker 1>Talk to us about the politics. Could this be a

0:13:09.840 --> 0:13:12.720
<v Speaker 1>reset moment perhaps for the new government. I'm sure Richie

0:13:12.760 --> 0:13:16.000
<v Speaker 1>Sunac would hope to draw a line between himself and

0:13:16.320 --> 0:13:20.560
<v Speaker 1>Liz Trust given that he spent the whole summer warning

0:13:20.880 --> 0:13:25.280
<v Speaker 1>what would happen if tax cuts were launched too soon

0:13:25.440 --> 0:13:29.840
<v Speaker 1>without dealing with the immediate problem of inflation. He too

0:13:29.920 --> 0:13:31.720
<v Speaker 1>is going to need to boost growth in the medium

0:13:31.760 --> 0:13:33.800
<v Speaker 1>to long term if he wants to be re elected,

0:13:35.280 --> 0:13:37.720
<v Speaker 1>but he needs to do that without adding to inflation.

0:13:38.400 --> 0:13:40.520
<v Speaker 1>In fact, the Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, has said that he

0:13:40.600 --> 0:13:43.600
<v Speaker 1>wants to help bring down inflation so that the Bank

0:13:43.640 --> 0:13:46.200
<v Speaker 1>of England can raise rates as little as possible to

0:13:46.400 --> 0:13:51.120
<v Speaker 1>minimize the recession the UK faces. Now Hunt and Sunac

0:13:51.160 --> 0:13:56.040
<v Speaker 1>are being accused of managing Britain's decline, being too pessimistic

0:13:56.440 --> 0:13:58.600
<v Speaker 1>about UK growth, and you could say that the Bank

0:13:58.640 --> 0:14:02.240
<v Speaker 1>of England's messaging has been in too excessively gloomy. The

0:14:02.280 --> 0:14:06.920
<v Speaker 1>banks forecast this long recession if rates follow market expectations,

0:14:07.240 --> 0:14:10.839
<v Speaker 1>but that nuance was seemingly lost on most of the

0:14:10.920 --> 0:14:13.640
<v Speaker 1>national newspapers. So you have to ask whether the man

0:14:13.679 --> 0:14:17.600
<v Speaker 1>in the street is going to be too gloomy as

0:14:17.600 --> 0:14:20.240
<v Speaker 1>a result. Of the messaging outside the Bank of England. Likewise,

0:14:20.240 --> 0:14:23.400
<v Speaker 1>with the Treasury, economists are asking whether the Treasury is

0:14:23.440 --> 0:14:27.440
<v Speaker 1>going to raise taxes and cut spending too much in

0:14:27.560 --> 0:14:31.640
<v Speaker 1>order to leave itself headroom in case growth underwhelms so

0:14:31.680 --> 0:14:34.200
<v Speaker 1>that it has enough left in the kitty for pre

0:14:34.280 --> 0:14:37.800
<v Speaker 1>election giveaways. And the question really is is the Treasury

0:14:37.840 --> 0:14:41.360
<v Speaker 1>creating unnecessary pain? One of the many many questions will

0:14:41.360 --> 0:14:44.040
<v Speaker 1>be hoping to get answers to on Thursday when the Chancellor,

0:14:44.080 --> 0:14:46.760
<v Speaker 1>Jeremy Hunter takes to his feet to deliver the autumn statements.

0:14:46.800 --> 0:14:50.000
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for our correspondent and Lizzie Burden forward those insights.

0:14:50.200 --> 0:14:52.720
<v Speaker 1>I'm Stephen Carroll in London. You can catch us every

0:14:52.720 --> 0:14:55.720
<v Speaker 1>weekday morning here for Bloomberg Daybreak Europe, beginning at six

0:14:55.760 --> 0:14:59.680
<v Speaker 1>am in London and one am on Wall Street. John Stephen,

0:14:59.720 --> 0:15:02.800
<v Speaker 1>Thanks live just ahead on Bloomberg day Break weekend Global

0:15:02.920 --> 0:15:07.600
<v Speaker 1>leaders gathering in Asia for the Bloomberg New Economy Forum.

0:15:07.640 --> 0:15:16.080
<v Speaker 1>I'm John Tucker. This is Bloomberg broadcasting live from the

0:15:16.160 --> 0:15:20.360
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Interactive Broker Studio in New York. Bloomberg eleven three

0:15:20.360 --> 0:15:24.760
<v Speaker 1>oh to Washington, d C. Bloomberg to Boston, Bloomberg one

0:15:24.760 --> 0:15:27.960
<v Speaker 1>O six one to San Francisco, Bloomberg nine sixty to

0:15:28.080 --> 0:15:31.480
<v Speaker 1>the country, Sirius XM Channel one nineteen to London, d

0:15:31.640 --> 0:15:34.720
<v Speaker 1>A B Digital Radio, and around the globe the Bloomberg

0:15:34.760 --> 0:15:38.680
<v Speaker 1>Business Act and Bloomberg Radio dot Com. This is Bloomberg

0:15:38.720 --> 0:15:47.360
<v Speaker 1>day Break Weekend. I'm John Tucker in New York with

0:15:47.400 --> 0:15:49.960
<v Speaker 1>your global look ahead of the top stories for investors

0:15:50.000 --> 0:15:53.080
<v Speaker 1>in the coming week. Movers and shakers gathering in Asia.

0:15:53.480 --> 0:15:55.600
<v Speaker 1>We have the Guy Getting taking place in the coming

0:15:55.680 --> 0:15:59.520
<v Speaker 1>days in Bali, Indonesia, and US China relations also in

0:15:59.600 --> 0:16:02.520
<v Speaker 1>focus there. We also have another big gathering in Asia

0:16:02.720 --> 0:16:05.240
<v Speaker 1>just about underway, and for more on that, let's go

0:16:05.280 --> 0:16:08.360
<v Speaker 1>to Hong Kong and Bloomberg Daybreak Asia host Brian Curtis

0:16:08.720 --> 0:16:12.520
<v Speaker 1>and his colleague Doug Prisner. John. The fifth annual Bloomberg

0:16:12.600 --> 0:16:16.000
<v Speaker 1>New Economy Forum gets underway in the coming week in Singapore.

0:16:16.400 --> 0:16:19.000
<v Speaker 1>It comes at a delicate time for the global economy.

0:16:19.080 --> 0:16:21.840
<v Speaker 1>Inflation is at a forty year high in many countries.

0:16:21.880 --> 0:16:25.480
<v Speaker 1>We know that war continues to rage in Ukraine and

0:16:25.560 --> 0:16:29.040
<v Speaker 1>food security is very much in question. It's in question

0:16:29.080 --> 0:16:34.000
<v Speaker 1>because food supplies are dwindling and costs are skyrocketing. Supply

0:16:34.080 --> 0:16:37.080
<v Speaker 1>chains have been broken and output has been crippled by

0:16:37.160 --> 0:16:42.240
<v Speaker 1>labor shortages. Policymakers and investors are looking for innovative ideas

0:16:42.320 --> 0:16:44.600
<v Speaker 1>to break the chain, and as such the forum comes

0:16:44.600 --> 0:16:48.560
<v Speaker 1>at a very opportune time. Joining us now Bloomberg's Eric Shatzker,

0:16:48.640 --> 0:16:52.160
<v Speaker 1>who is in Singapore for the forum. Eric, always a pleasure,

0:16:52.160 --> 0:16:54.160
<v Speaker 1>Thanks so much for helping us set the stage for

0:16:54.200 --> 0:16:58.160
<v Speaker 1>this year's any f Let's begin with a view from

0:16:58.160 --> 0:17:01.480
<v Speaker 1>thirty thousand feet, so to speak. New economy, big picture,

0:17:01.560 --> 0:17:03.960
<v Speaker 1>no doubt, and I imagine that a lot of this

0:17:04.080 --> 0:17:07.480
<v Speaker 1>is going to focus on the intersection between government and

0:17:07.520 --> 0:17:09.679
<v Speaker 1>the private sector. Can you touch upon some of the

0:17:09.760 --> 0:17:12.840
<v Speaker 1>key themes up for discussion? I would say that one

0:17:12.920 --> 0:17:18.200
<v Speaker 1>theme we will be tackling in earnest and absolutely cannot ignore,

0:17:18.640 --> 0:17:23.400
<v Speaker 1>is the rising tension level between the United States and China.

0:17:23.520 --> 0:17:25.959
<v Speaker 1>And of course this isn't a new story. The tension

0:17:26.040 --> 0:17:29.200
<v Speaker 1>level has been rising for some time. But with President

0:17:29.320 --> 0:17:33.159
<v Speaker 1>she having cemented control over the Chinese Communist Party at

0:17:33.200 --> 0:17:38.080
<v Speaker 1>the recent Congress and the Biden administration having imposed new

0:17:38.160 --> 0:17:42.600
<v Speaker 1>controls on the export of advanced technology to China, UH,

0:17:42.640 --> 0:17:47.480
<v Speaker 1>this situation has been thrown into perhaps sharper relief. Then

0:17:47.520 --> 0:17:50.919
<v Speaker 1>we've seen it in maybe since the early nineteen seventies,

0:17:51.160 --> 0:17:55.000
<v Speaker 1>because it casts a shadow over everything in this part

0:17:55.000 --> 0:17:59.159
<v Speaker 1>of the world, and it's just something impossible to ignore.

0:17:59.520 --> 0:18:02.000
<v Speaker 1>You're right. And it's interesting that you mentioned that has

0:18:02.000 --> 0:18:04.240
<v Speaker 1>been with us because you remember even the first one.

0:18:04.560 --> 0:18:07.040
<v Speaker 1>We were supposed to do the first an F in

0:18:07.080 --> 0:18:10.399
<v Speaker 1>Beijing and it had to get switched to Singapore, and

0:18:10.440 --> 0:18:12.840
<v Speaker 1>we went to Singapore for that first one. So US

0:18:12.920 --> 0:18:17.480
<v Speaker 1>China relations has tended to intervene really even back in

0:18:17.520 --> 0:18:21.159
<v Speaker 1>that time where when Donald Trump was was waging his

0:18:21.440 --> 0:18:24.959
<v Speaker 1>uh sort of trade war with China. But there's some

0:18:25.000 --> 0:18:27.880
<v Speaker 1>other big issues that weigh in as well. Inflation. I'm

0:18:27.880 --> 0:18:31.080
<v Speaker 1>thinking that inflation could be having a big impact as

0:18:31.119 --> 0:18:35.680
<v Speaker 1>well on companies trying to deal with, say setting targets

0:18:35.720 --> 0:18:39.399
<v Speaker 1>for carbon reduction and for spending and green technologies and

0:18:39.440 --> 0:18:42.080
<v Speaker 1>such uh and and this is this makes it a

0:18:42.160 --> 0:18:44.879
<v Speaker 1>very difficult time to outlay a lot of capital. Oh,

0:18:44.920 --> 0:18:47.560
<v Speaker 1>it certainly does. It's a very delicate time. It's one

0:18:47.560 --> 0:18:49.119
<v Speaker 1>of the themes that we will be exploring at the

0:18:49.160 --> 0:18:51.840
<v Speaker 1>New Economy Forum with some of the world's largest and

0:18:51.880 --> 0:18:54.520
<v Speaker 1>most powerful investors I would name among them cal doon

0:18:54.560 --> 0:18:58.120
<v Speaker 1>A Lebark from Mubatla, which is of course the Emirati

0:18:58.520 --> 0:19:02.520
<v Speaker 1>Sovereign Wealth Fund. We also have Neil Sheen who who

0:19:02.640 --> 0:19:05.800
<v Speaker 1>is the founder and CEO effectively of Sequoia, the man

0:19:06.040 --> 0:19:08.359
<v Speaker 1>managing partner excuse me of Sequoia China, one of the

0:19:08.359 --> 0:19:12.480
<v Speaker 1>world's foremost venture capital investors. We have Limb chow Kat

0:19:12.480 --> 0:19:14.720
<v Speaker 1>who is the CEO of g I C which is

0:19:14.760 --> 0:19:18.399
<v Speaker 1>the Singaporean one of the two Singaporean sovereign wealth funds.

0:19:18.480 --> 0:19:22.720
<v Speaker 1>John Graham from the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, Raphael

0:19:22.760 --> 0:19:25.400
<v Speaker 1>Aren't from the Future Fund of Australia, yet another sovereign

0:19:25.400 --> 0:19:29.240
<v Speaker 1>wealth fund. These are the capital pools that have to

0:19:29.240 --> 0:19:32.520
<v Speaker 1>make decisions right now about how much they're willing to

0:19:32.640 --> 0:19:37.520
<v Speaker 1>plow into renewable energy and sustainability, and the pressures uh

0:19:37.600 --> 0:19:41.280
<v Speaker 1>that inflation is creating for the rest of the world

0:19:41.640 --> 0:19:45.159
<v Speaker 1>is having a real consequences for those investment decisions. What

0:19:45.200 --> 0:19:48.080
<v Speaker 1>we're hoping to find out at the New Economy Form

0:19:48.320 --> 0:19:51.880
<v Speaker 1>is that some of these sovereign wealth pools remain committed

0:19:52.400 --> 0:19:56.600
<v Speaker 1>to making investments in carbon reduction, for example, and renewable

0:19:56.680 --> 0:19:59.720
<v Speaker 1>energy because if they falter, then there's there's there's a

0:19:59.720 --> 0:20:02.240
<v Speaker 1>good chants that we could throw net zero by out

0:20:02.240 --> 0:20:04.399
<v Speaker 1>the window. Well, the timing of the n e F

0:20:04.560 --> 0:20:07.879
<v Speaker 1>is such that it's so closely follows Cop seven. And

0:20:08.119 --> 0:20:10.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm curious to hear about the momentum that may be

0:20:11.000 --> 0:20:13.639
<v Speaker 1>building in the community that you just described here. Is

0:20:13.680 --> 0:20:17.720
<v Speaker 1>there greater appetite in the investment community for opportunities in

0:20:17.760 --> 0:20:20.760
<v Speaker 1>the green space now? Is there some enthusiasm building? You know?

0:20:20.800 --> 0:20:23.600
<v Speaker 1>I would say, Doug that yes, Uh, it's it's It's

0:20:23.680 --> 0:20:27.520
<v Speaker 1>as much of an imperative as ever before, but it's

0:20:27.520 --> 0:20:29.919
<v Speaker 1>a much more complicated and challenging picture because of the

0:20:29.920 --> 0:20:33.160
<v Speaker 1>macroeconomic headwinds And it's not just inflation. That's the consequences

0:20:33.200 --> 0:20:38.200
<v Speaker 1>of inflation, not just rising prices, but higher the hurdle.

0:20:38.280 --> 0:20:40.919
<v Speaker 1>The hurdle is so much higher now. A lot of

0:20:40.960 --> 0:20:44.679
<v Speaker 1>fodder for interesting conversation, no doubt. Eric, thank you so

0:20:44.760 --> 0:20:46.879
<v Speaker 1>much for being with us and helping us set the

0:20:46.920 --> 0:20:50.480
<v Speaker 1>stage for the fifth annual Bloomberg New Economy Forum. Bloomberg's

0:20:50.560 --> 0:20:54.200
<v Speaker 1>Eric Shatzker joining us from Singapore. I'm Doug Krisner along

0:20:54.240 --> 0:20:56.800
<v Speaker 1>with Brian Curtis in Hong Kong. You can catch us

0:20:56.840 --> 0:21:00.880
<v Speaker 1>weekdays here for Bloomberg Daybreak Aisia, beginning at seven am

0:21:01.000 --> 0:21:05.160
<v Speaker 1>in Hong Kong, six pm on Wall Street, John Brian

0:21:05.240 --> 0:21:08.120
<v Speaker 1>and Doc thanks a lot. Just ahead on Bloomberg Daybreak weekend.

0:21:08.480 --> 0:21:10.879
<v Speaker 1>What to watch for in the coming week and weeks

0:21:11.000 --> 0:21:16.240
<v Speaker 1>as we moved closer to the presidential campaigns. I'm John Tucker.

0:21:16.560 --> 0:21:27.200
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend. Are global

0:21:27.200 --> 0:21:29.320
<v Speaker 1>look ahead at the top stories for investors in the

0:21:29.320 --> 0:21:32.320
<v Speaker 1>coming week. I'm John Tucker in New York. Lots of

0:21:32.320 --> 0:21:35.399
<v Speaker 1>surprises in the mid terms and some rancor between former

0:21:35.440 --> 0:21:38.960
<v Speaker 1>President Trump and Florida Governor Ron De Santis to Trump

0:21:39.040 --> 0:21:42.240
<v Speaker 1>last week lashing out and his potential competitors in the

0:21:43.400 --> 0:21:51.000
<v Speaker 1>presidential race. Trump at seventy one, Rond sanctimonious at Mike

0:21:51.040 --> 0:21:53.520
<v Speaker 1>Pence at seven. Mike's doing better than I thought. That's

0:21:53.520 --> 0:21:56.119
<v Speaker 1>sort of the stage center movedwise when it comes to

0:21:56.160 --> 0:21:59.720
<v Speaker 1>Republicans in the post mid term world. For more about

0:21:59.800 --> 0:22:01.960
<v Speaker 1>all of it, including how things are stacking up for

0:22:02.119 --> 0:22:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Democrats in four as well, let'stend to our Bloomberg newsroom

0:22:07.160 --> 0:22:11.480
<v Speaker 1>in Washington and Amy Morris, Amy all right, thank you, John,

0:22:11.480 --> 0:22:15.960
<v Speaker 1>and joining me now Bloomberg Government Senior Elections reporter Greg Jero. Greg,

0:22:15.960 --> 0:22:19.800
<v Speaker 1>You've been following this very closely with momentum for President Biden,

0:22:20.200 --> 0:22:24.160
<v Speaker 1>and he's talking now a little more about there's also

0:22:24.280 --> 0:22:28.240
<v Speaker 1>been some disarray among Republicans. They say they'll be able

0:22:28.240 --> 0:22:30.199
<v Speaker 1>to work some of it out. Let's start from the

0:22:30.280 --> 0:22:34.080
<v Speaker 1>very beginning, Rondo Santis claiming this huge victory in the

0:22:34.080 --> 0:22:37.240
<v Speaker 1>gubernatorial race down in Florida. Let's hear what he had

0:22:37.280 --> 0:22:39.000
<v Speaker 1>to say, and we'll talk about it. On the other side,

0:22:39.280 --> 0:22:42.840
<v Speaker 1>we offer a ray of hope that better days still

0:22:43.160 --> 0:22:47.080
<v Speaker 1>lie ahead. All right, So Rondo Santa's talking about some

0:22:47.160 --> 0:22:49.840
<v Speaker 1>of the traction that he's got. How much does he

0:22:49.920 --> 0:22:51.919
<v Speaker 1>really have to play with here? Well, he was a

0:22:51.920 --> 0:22:55.800
<v Speaker 1>big winner from Tuesday and was otherwise a good overperformance

0:22:55.840 --> 0:22:59.840
<v Speaker 1>by Democrats and underperformance by Republicans around the country. To

0:23:00.000 --> 0:23:02.840
<v Speaker 1>Santis was re elected by nineteen percentage points in Florida,

0:23:02.880 --> 0:23:05.760
<v Speaker 1>which is a very stunning margin in a state that

0:23:05.840 --> 0:23:08.880
<v Speaker 1>not too long ago was seen as the quintessential swing state.

0:23:08.960 --> 0:23:11.880
<v Speaker 1>Was the biggest win by a Florida gubernatorial candidate since

0:23:13.320 --> 0:23:17.240
<v Speaker 1>Santis was winning areas like Miami Dade County in South Florida,

0:23:17.280 --> 0:23:20.200
<v Speaker 1>heavily Hispanic area. He was winning Palm Beach County, a

0:23:20.280 --> 0:23:23.040
<v Speaker 1>very Democratic leaning county. So this is a big win

0:23:23.080 --> 0:23:26.280
<v Speaker 1>for De Santis. And given that he's a Republican governor

0:23:26.280 --> 0:23:29.639
<v Speaker 1>in a state that will have thirty electoral votes in

0:23:29.680 --> 0:23:33.879
<v Speaker 1>the election, if he can help lockdown Florida for Republicans,

0:23:33.880 --> 0:23:36.840
<v Speaker 1>he'll be at the top, if not near the top

0:23:36.920 --> 0:23:43.160
<v Speaker 1>of Republican Republican preference voters for the election if one

0:23:43.240 --> 0:23:45.959
<v Speaker 1>Donald J. Trump does not run well. That was what

0:23:46.000 --> 0:23:48.119
<v Speaker 1>I was going to ask about, because it almost sounds

0:23:48.160 --> 0:23:51.159
<v Speaker 1>as though De Santis could be dethroning Donald Trump, at

0:23:51.200 --> 0:23:53.560
<v Speaker 1>least when it comes to who is the kingmaker in

0:23:53.640 --> 0:23:57.879
<v Speaker 1>the GOP, because there were plenty of Trump backed candidates

0:23:58.000 --> 0:24:00.840
<v Speaker 1>on Tuesday who did not win. That's right. Trump did

0:24:00.840 --> 0:24:03.320
<v Speaker 1>not have a good election night on Tuesday. Uh mem

0:24:03.440 --> 0:24:06.040
<v Speaker 1>and Oz in Pennsylvania lost a key Senate race to

0:24:06.119 --> 0:24:09.000
<v Speaker 1>John Fetterman, and in some key house races, some Trump

0:24:09.000 --> 0:24:13.680
<v Speaker 1>alligned candidates lost districts that maybe other Republican candidates would

0:24:13.680 --> 0:24:16.040
<v Speaker 1>have held. So Trump does not look good coming out

0:24:16.040 --> 0:24:18.560
<v Speaker 1>of this election, although he is it seems clear he's

0:24:18.640 --> 0:24:21.240
<v Speaker 1>likely to run for a third time for president. The

0:24:21.280 --> 0:24:24.560
<v Speaker 1>big question will be does Rhonda Santis run against him

0:24:24.560 --> 0:24:28.520
<v Speaker 1>in the Republican primary. If you look at Republican preference polls,

0:24:28.560 --> 0:24:30.440
<v Speaker 1>it's Trump and to Santis, and then there's a big

0:24:30.480 --> 0:24:33.080
<v Speaker 1>fall off with everyone else. We didn't see a one

0:24:33.119 --> 0:24:35.840
<v Speaker 1>on one race against Trump in twenty sixteen. He benefited

0:24:36.200 --> 0:24:40.520
<v Speaker 1>somewhat by the divided Republican opposition. But will we see

0:24:40.560 --> 0:24:42.639
<v Speaker 1>a one on one race between Trump and de Santis.

0:24:43.040 --> 0:24:45.600
<v Speaker 1>We'll probably find out not too long from now. I'm

0:24:45.600 --> 0:24:49.639
<v Speaker 1>wondering if this also helps to embolden other Republican candidates

0:24:49.640 --> 0:24:51.960
<v Speaker 1>who might be looking at the White House. I'm thinking

0:24:51.960 --> 0:24:55.240
<v Speaker 1>of Maryland Governor Larry Hogan. He is, of course the

0:24:55.280 --> 0:24:59.000
<v Speaker 1>outgoing governor of Maryland, but he is also indicated, Hey,

0:24:59.040 --> 0:25:01.880
<v Speaker 1>look at how these terms turned out. It seems as

0:25:01.920 --> 0:25:04.240
<v Speaker 1>though there might be some room for me in the

0:25:04.280 --> 0:25:07.200
<v Speaker 1>Republican Party. Yes, it will be interesting to see which

0:25:07.359 --> 0:25:10.439
<v Speaker 1>Republicans who have wanted to be president or considered becoming president,

0:25:10.480 --> 0:25:13.560
<v Speaker 1>or at least running for that office, will uh decide

0:25:13.600 --> 0:25:16.960
<v Speaker 1>to at least do the early spadework that candidates often do,

0:25:17.080 --> 0:25:20.240
<v Speaker 1>like traveling to Ohio and New Hampshire and contributing to candidates.

0:25:20.440 --> 0:25:22.879
<v Speaker 1>One critic of Trump who has run for president before

0:25:23.119 --> 0:25:25.679
<v Speaker 1>and who's been who donated to Republican candidates late in

0:25:25.680 --> 0:25:28.720
<v Speaker 1>the campaign I noticed was former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

0:25:28.760 --> 0:25:32.280
<v Speaker 1>He was very critical of Trump after Tuesday's election results.

0:25:32.560 --> 0:25:34.840
<v Speaker 1>So if Trump doesn't run, I think all bets are

0:25:34.840 --> 0:25:36.399
<v Speaker 1>off about who gets in. I think it'd be a

0:25:36.720 --> 0:25:39.280
<v Speaker 1>free for all. But I think I am also wondering

0:25:40.040 --> 0:25:44.399
<v Speaker 1>who other Republicans besides Rhoda Santis, who's mentioned frequently the

0:25:44.400 --> 0:25:48.520
<v Speaker 1>presidential sweepstakes, what other Republicans would decide to run against Trump?

0:25:48.800 --> 0:25:52.119
<v Speaker 1>Should the the ex president make that third bid for president,

0:25:52.240 --> 0:25:54.720
<v Speaker 1>as he seems likely to do. Yeah, I'm wondering about

0:25:54.760 --> 0:25:57.040
<v Speaker 1>that too. If this indicates that perhaps he would not

0:25:57.320 --> 0:26:01.320
<v Speaker 1>be the choice for the GOP to run for the

0:26:01.320 --> 0:26:03.960
<v Speaker 1>White House. At the same time, would this be an

0:26:04.000 --> 0:26:06.880
<v Speaker 1>opportunity for people to sort of hang onto those coattails,

0:26:06.920 --> 0:26:10.560
<v Speaker 1>maybe a vice presidential bid because he has also indicated

0:26:10.880 --> 0:26:13.720
<v Speaker 1>that Pence won't be his running mate. Pence certainly won't

0:26:13.720 --> 0:26:15.960
<v Speaker 1>be his running mate, and you want to look for

0:26:16.000 --> 0:26:19.600
<v Speaker 1>maybe the next generation of Republican leaders so we'll see

0:26:19.600 --> 0:26:23.320
<v Speaker 1>who that when when the when the smoke clears um

0:26:23.359 --> 0:26:27.000
<v Speaker 1>After that, we got final results from the election, who

0:26:27.080 --> 0:26:30.840
<v Speaker 1>might be in the running for president and vice president,

0:26:31.760 --> 0:26:34.080
<v Speaker 1>and we are talking about how the midterms may have

0:26:34.160 --> 0:26:37.000
<v Speaker 1>shaped the general election. We are talking with Bloomberg Government

0:26:37.080 --> 0:26:40.600
<v Speaker 1>senior elections reporter Greg Jarol. Want to shift over Greg

0:26:40.640 --> 0:26:44.040
<v Speaker 1>to the Democratic side, turning our attention now to California

0:26:44.080 --> 0:26:48.240
<v Speaker 1>Governor Gavin Newsom. After the polls closed on election night,

0:26:48.560 --> 0:26:51.440
<v Speaker 1>he spoke at a watch party at the Citizen Hotel

0:26:51.840 --> 0:26:56.040
<v Speaker 1>in Sacramento. We have a responsibility as California's to do

0:26:56.080 --> 0:26:59.720
<v Speaker 1>more about what we did tonight, to continue to assert

0:27:00.119 --> 0:27:02.920
<v Speaker 1>our values, which we hold dear We believe their Americans

0:27:02.960 --> 0:27:06.800
<v Speaker 1>is certainly California values. Now, does he Greg have a

0:27:06.840 --> 0:27:10.440
<v Speaker 1>clearer path to the Democratic presidential nomination than maybe de

0:27:10.600 --> 0:27:13.400
<v Speaker 1>Santist does on the Republican side? Like, how does that breakdown?

0:27:13.800 --> 0:27:16.040
<v Speaker 1>I don't think he has a clearer path than the Santists,

0:27:16.080 --> 0:27:18.199
<v Speaker 1>if only because I think Joe Biden is clearly going

0:27:18.240 --> 0:27:21.840
<v Speaker 1>to run for re election again and maybe the overperformance

0:27:21.880 --> 0:27:25.199
<v Speaker 1>by Democrats in the midterm election may tamp down whatever

0:27:25.440 --> 0:27:28.000
<v Speaker 1>chatter that may be out there floating out there about

0:27:28.280 --> 0:27:30.679
<v Speaker 1>would Biden run again or not, or he would be

0:27:30.760 --> 0:27:33.399
<v Speaker 1>challenged in the primary. I don't expect Gavin Newsom to

0:27:33.480 --> 0:27:38.280
<v Speaker 1>challenge Joe Biden the Democratic primaries in UM. But you know,

0:27:38.320 --> 0:27:40.960
<v Speaker 1>Gavin Newsom is the governor of what would be the

0:27:41.040 --> 0:27:44.760
<v Speaker 1>fourth largest economy in the world, about the size of Germany,

0:27:44.800 --> 0:27:47.000
<v Speaker 1>and so just like the governor of Florida, you think

0:27:47.000 --> 0:27:49.800
<v Speaker 1>the governor of a large state like California, just being

0:27:49.840 --> 0:27:52.480
<v Speaker 1>the chief executive of a huge state, but the huge

0:27:52.480 --> 0:27:56.560
<v Speaker 1>economy would be automatically mentioned in presidential sweepstakes. It's been

0:27:56.560 --> 0:27:59.720
<v Speaker 1>a while since we've had the California governor mentioned as

0:27:59.760 --> 0:28:03.919
<v Speaker 1>a possible presidential candidate. UM. You know, Jerry Brown had

0:28:03.920 --> 0:28:06.800
<v Speaker 1>already run what three times when he was governor for

0:28:06.840 --> 0:28:10.359
<v Speaker 1>the second time, Arnold Schwarzenegger was ineligible to run, Gray

0:28:10.400 --> 0:28:13.560
<v Speaker 1>Davis was too unpopular, Pete Wilson probably too moderate to

0:28:13.560 --> 0:28:16.440
<v Speaker 1>win the Republican presidential nomination. And you know, not too

0:28:16.480 --> 0:28:18.320
<v Speaker 1>long before that, you had Ronald Reagan who used the

0:28:18.320 --> 0:28:21.359
<v Speaker 1>governor California governorship to launch himself to the presidency. So

0:28:21.640 --> 0:28:24.400
<v Speaker 1>Gavin Newsom, I think, is going to be mentioned as

0:28:24.440 --> 0:28:29.080
<v Speaker 1>a potential presidential candidate, if not four maybe, if only

0:28:29.160 --> 0:28:32.120
<v Speaker 1>because he is the chief executive of what would be

0:28:32.440 --> 0:28:34.720
<v Speaker 1>the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world, a

0:28:34.840 --> 0:28:38.800
<v Speaker 1>three point five trillion dollar economy. Is that, though, Gregg,

0:28:38.920 --> 0:28:42.560
<v Speaker 1>one of the issues that faces the Democratic Party right now.

0:28:42.640 --> 0:28:45.560
<v Speaker 1>You have someone like Joe Biden, that all, not all

0:28:45.640 --> 0:28:49.000
<v Speaker 1>Democrats are a percent in love with having Joe Biden

0:28:49.080 --> 0:28:52.120
<v Speaker 1>run again. And at the same time, the next guy

0:28:52.240 --> 0:28:55.000
<v Speaker 1>who maybe in line, the next sort of air apparent

0:28:55.080 --> 0:28:58.560
<v Speaker 1>and I'm using air quotes here, would be Gavin Newsom,

0:28:58.600 --> 0:29:01.840
<v Speaker 1>who doesn't really have a shot against somebody like Joe Biden.

0:29:02.000 --> 0:29:04.400
<v Speaker 1>Is that is that the issue that they're looking for

0:29:04.440 --> 0:29:06.800
<v Speaker 1>the leadership that they haven't quite found yet. They don't

0:29:06.840 --> 0:29:10.600
<v Speaker 1>have a Bill Clinton, they don't have a Barack Obama, right.

0:29:10.640 --> 0:29:13.240
<v Speaker 1>I think in the Democratic circles and the Democratic Party

0:29:13.280 --> 0:29:15.800
<v Speaker 1>certainly with when it comes to the presidency and also

0:29:15.840 --> 0:29:19.040
<v Speaker 1>for congressional leadership, you have, you know, Joe Biden, you

0:29:19.040 --> 0:29:22.320
<v Speaker 1>have Nancy Pelosi, Stenny Hoyer, James Kleiburne who have been

0:29:22.360 --> 0:29:24.360
<v Speaker 1>around for some time, and there's clearly a lot of

0:29:24.680 --> 0:29:27.600
<v Speaker 1>pent up ambition in Democratic circles about who is going

0:29:27.640 --> 0:29:30.800
<v Speaker 1>to be in that next vanguard of Democratic Party leadership,

0:29:30.880 --> 0:29:34.160
<v Speaker 1>so not just for Congress, but the presidency as well. Um. Yes,

0:29:34.240 --> 0:29:36.200
<v Speaker 1>I mean, we can't escape the fact that Joe Biden

0:29:36.200 --> 0:29:38.400
<v Speaker 1>will be almost eighty two years old by the time

0:29:38.400 --> 0:29:42.720
<v Speaker 1>of the election, but I think Democrats would welcome a

0:29:42.800 --> 0:29:45.960
<v Speaker 1>rematch between Biden and Donald Trump. If Trump decides to

0:29:46.040 --> 0:29:49.120
<v Speaker 1>run again, as it looks like he will, then I

0:29:49.160 --> 0:29:50.800
<v Speaker 1>think you know who's going to be in the next

0:29:50.920 --> 0:29:55.120
<v Speaker 1>um uh next kind of a group of future Democratic

0:29:55.200 --> 0:29:57.600
<v Speaker 1>leaders who would run for president. I think maybe you

0:29:57.640 --> 0:30:00.960
<v Speaker 1>look at the two midterm elections, you look at which

0:30:01.560 --> 0:30:04.280
<v Speaker 1>governors were elected for the Democrats. Gretchen Whitmer was re

0:30:04.360 --> 0:30:07.680
<v Speaker 1>elected in Michigan, a key swing state, so I think

0:30:07.680 --> 0:30:11.000
<v Speaker 1>you probably look there at who who won key governorships

0:30:11.000 --> 0:30:14.720
<v Speaker 1>and maybe even key U. S. Senate races. Ino, let

0:30:14.720 --> 0:30:16.760
<v Speaker 1>me ask you about some of the strategy. I want

0:30:16.760 --> 0:30:20.320
<v Speaker 1>to pick your brain if if you were a political strategist, Greg,

0:30:20.920 --> 0:30:26.240
<v Speaker 1>would you recommend to former President Trump to not make

0:30:26.320 --> 0:30:28.480
<v Speaker 1>that announcement that he will be running again. You know,

0:30:28.520 --> 0:30:31.120
<v Speaker 1>he's been teasing for a while now that he's going

0:30:31.160 --> 0:30:33.520
<v Speaker 1>to make this big announcement on November fifte but that

0:30:33.640 --> 0:30:36.720
<v Speaker 1>was before there was going to be this runoff for

0:30:36.960 --> 0:30:39.800
<v Speaker 1>the Senate in Georgia, and there may be some concern

0:30:39.840 --> 0:30:41.560
<v Speaker 1>about sort of sucking all the air out of the

0:30:41.640 --> 0:30:44.480
<v Speaker 1>room if he makes that announcement while that's going on.

0:30:44.520 --> 0:30:47.040
<v Speaker 1>What would you recommend, here's a political strategist. If I

0:30:47.080 --> 0:30:49.720
<v Speaker 1>were aligned with Trump, I might recommend the ex president

0:30:49.760 --> 0:30:52.000
<v Speaker 1>to hold off. Before I let you go, I want

0:30:52.000 --> 0:30:53.840
<v Speaker 1>to talk to you a little bit about the historical

0:30:53.880 --> 0:30:56.560
<v Speaker 1>implications and what we saw over this past week with

0:30:56.600 --> 0:31:00.400
<v Speaker 1>the mid terms. To me, just somebody who's here this

0:31:01.000 --> 0:31:05.240
<v Speaker 1>sort of on a superficial level for decades, this seems

0:31:05.280 --> 0:31:11.400
<v Speaker 1>like a really unusually intense and um raucous mid term.

0:31:11.440 --> 0:31:13.240
<v Speaker 1>I want to know what you think about it and

0:31:13.280 --> 0:31:16.680
<v Speaker 1>why is it in this place in history. Well, this

0:31:16.840 --> 0:31:19.160
<v Speaker 1>mid term was really extraordinary. It was actually a pretty

0:31:19.160 --> 0:31:22.320
<v Speaker 1>good over performance by the White Houses Party. In mid

0:31:22.440 --> 0:31:25.680
<v Speaker 1>term elections, you have more of the energy and enthusiasm

0:31:25.760 --> 0:31:28.600
<v Speaker 1>tends to lie with the opposition party, And in mid

0:31:28.680 --> 0:31:30.680
<v Speaker 1>term elections since the end of World War Two, the

0:31:30.720 --> 0:31:33.560
<v Speaker 1>average result has been the White Houses Party losing an

0:31:33.560 --> 0:31:36.520
<v Speaker 1>average of twenty six seats in the House. It's going

0:31:36.560 --> 0:31:39.520
<v Speaker 1>to be one of the close most closely divided US

0:31:39.600 --> 0:31:45.000
<v Speaker 1>houses in in history, in American history. Yes, alright, Greg,

0:31:45.000 --> 0:31:46.760
<v Speaker 1>thank you so much for bringing us up to speed

0:31:46.760 --> 0:31:50.040
<v Speaker 1>on this. We appreciate it. Thank you. Bloomberg Government Senior

0:31:50.040 --> 0:31:52.800
<v Speaker 1>Elections Reporter Greg Darau. That's what's going on in the

0:31:52.880 --> 0:31:55.920
<v Speaker 1>nation's capital. For more of our political news coverage, tune

0:31:55.960 --> 0:31:59.040
<v Speaker 1>into Balance of Power with David Weston weekdays at noon

0:31:59.080 --> 0:32:02.200
<v Speaker 1>Wall Street Time, and Sound On with Joe Matthew weekdays

0:32:02.200 --> 0:32:05.800
<v Speaker 1>at five pm Wall Street Time. Right here on Bloomberg Radio,

0:32:06.160 --> 0:32:10.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm Amy Morris and this is Bloomberg John. Amy Morris

0:32:10.880 --> 0:32:15.280
<v Speaker 1>reporting from our bloombergs room in Washington. Amy, thanks a lot,

0:32:15.840 --> 0:32:18.160
<v Speaker 1>and that does it for this edition of Bloomberg day

0:32:18.160 --> 0:32:20.880
<v Speaker 1>Break Weekend. Join us again Monday morning at five am

0:32:20.880 --> 0:32:24.320
<v Speaker 1>Wall Street Time for the latest on markets overseas and

0:32:24.400 --> 0:32:27.280
<v Speaker 1>the news you need to start your day. I'm John Tucker,

0:32:27.400 --> 0:32:28.840
<v Speaker 1>and this is Bloomberg