Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at
Speaker 1: noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Roun Auto
Speaker 1: with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Given it is Tuesday, that means we are now exactly
Speaker 2: ten weeks out until election Day, seventy days for those
Speaker 2: of you who are accounting, and we can bet the candidates,
Speaker 2: we'll be spending a significant chunk of these next seventy
Speaker 2: days on the campaign trail, specifically in the key battleground
Speaker 2: states that ultimately will decide the outcome of this election.
Speaker 2: We're already seeing that this week with Trump and Vance
Speaker 2: in Michigan. They'll have to Pennsylvania later on this week
Speaker 2: as well.
Speaker 3: Well.
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris and Tim Wallas are getting set to depart
Speaker 2: on a bus tour of Georgia that begins tomorrow. So
Speaker 2: let's get into all of this now with one of
Speaker 2: our reporters on the campaign trail who was actually here
Speaker 2: in Washington this week, or at least for these few days.
Speaker 2: Stephanieli covers politics for US at Bloomberg and is joining
Speaker 2: me in studio. So, Stephanie, I know it's only a
Speaker 2: matter of time before you're back out on the trail
Speaker 2: with these candidates, but it does feel like the pace
Speaker 2: is picking up. And we understand this is by design,
Speaker 2: at least on the Trump Vance campaign team, given all
Speaker 2: of the oxygen and energy present in the Harris campaign,
Speaker 2: they are starting to plan to spend more of their time.
Speaker 4: On the road.
Speaker 5: You're certainly right, And if we remember just two weeks ago,
Speaker 5: Trump had only spent maybe two days on the road,
Speaker 5: and so the pace that they're going is significantly more
Speaker 5: intense than they were just you know, earlier this month
Speaker 5: when it seemed like they were competing against Joe Biden
Speaker 5: for the presidency. And as you mentioned, of course, part
Speaker 5: of this is because of all the oxygen that Kamala
Speaker 5: Harrison her campaign is taking up, but also it's just,
Speaker 5: you know, it's ten weeks out until the election. We
Speaker 5: know that the Harris Walls ticket is going to be
Speaker 5: barnstorming day after day, and so it's just it's the
Speaker 5: name of the game really at this point.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it doesn't wait till after Labor Day, it seems
Speaker 2: in this cycle. It's getting going in this week before
Speaker 2: Labor Day. There's also the question though, of the resources
Speaker 2: to be able to keep this up over the next
Speaker 2: ten weeks. As we've talked a lot about the fundraising
Speaker 2: machine the Harris campaign has been to this point over
Speaker 2: half a billion dollars raised. How are we likely to
Speaker 2: see Trump advance events changing with finance financial considerations in mind,
Speaker 2: Perhaps not as many big rallies.
Speaker 5: We've actually seen that play out, at least in these
Speaker 5: last couple of weeks when he has been picking up
Speaker 5: more of his campaign schedule. There's a handful of events
Speaker 5: every week that tend to be a smaller audience, maybe
Speaker 5: you know, at a sheriff's department or in just a
Speaker 5: smaller arena really where he can still gather supporters, but
Speaker 5: it doesn't necessarily associate with the cost of buying out
Speaker 5: an entire arena, filling out an entire you know, stadium
Speaker 5: with supporters. But this allows him to have a more
Speaker 5: personalized experience with some of his voters in these key
Speaker 5: swing states well.
Speaker 2: And it also becomes a question of the message he's
Speaker 2: bringing and the ticket is bringing as a whole to
Speaker 2: these states. We have seen Donald Trump openly questioning the
Speaker 2: advice of his own team when it comes to focusing
Speaker 2: on policy and not personal attacks against Harris or others. Well,
Speaker 2: Jady Vance does seem like he is talking more about policy.
Speaker 2: He's supposed to talk about economic policy, specifically in Michigan
Speaker 2: today he was talking about abortion and to Meet the
Speaker 2: Press interview over this past weekend. Are we seeing for
Speaker 2: all of the talk about Jade Vance possibly being able
Speaker 2: to serve as the attack dog for Donald Trump with
Speaker 2: his selection as his running mate, that actually it's Trump
Speaker 2: who's still the attack dog and Jade Vance is the
Speaker 2: one who's actually articulating policy.
Speaker 5: I think it's a really great point. And part of
Speaker 5: that is because some of the appeal of Donald Trump
Speaker 5: is his personality, right, It's the personalized attacks that he
Speaker 5: makes on his opponents, and that's something that his supporters
Speaker 5: really admire and like of him because he doesn't come
Speaker 5: off as a politician. So the fact that he's able
Speaker 5: to still do that while his running mate takes on
Speaker 5: some of more of that policy discussion does seem to
Speaker 5: be playing out, you know exactly how you mentioned it.
Speaker 2: Well, speaking of how things are playing out, we of
Speaker 2: course saw a very energetic convention in Chicago last week
Speaker 2: for the Democrats culminating, and that's acceptance speech from Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2: Haven't seen much of her since then. She's not getting
Speaker 2: back out on the trail in physical form at least
Speaker 2: until tomorrow, and we still don't know if she's sitting
Speaker 2: down for that big interview she said she wanted to
Speaker 2: schedule before the month of August is out. There's only
Speaker 2: four days left there in August, Stephanie. When are we
Speaker 2: going to start seeing more from her?
Speaker 5: I mean, so part of that is that they said
Speaker 5: they would have its scheduled by the end of the month,
Speaker 5: so that might not necessarily mean that she does the
Speaker 5: sit down interview before then. But I think that you're
Speaker 5: right in that she hasn't been as out there. She
Speaker 5: hasn't been as accessible to the press as Donald Trump
Speaker 5: has been, and that's exactly what their campaign is focusing
Speaker 5: on the fact that she's you know, quote unquote hiding
Speaker 5: behind her advisors and not necessarily getting her message out there.
Speaker 5: And there's still a lot of questions about what policies
Speaker 5: she's standing behind, how to actually see them through, and
Speaker 5: so that's really what we're looking for you know, as
Speaker 5: we get into these last ten weeks of this election cycle.
Speaker 5: But time will tell, but it does seem like they
Speaker 5: are picking up their campaign schedule quite a bit.
Speaker 2: So beginning with the bus tour in Georgia tomorrow and
Speaker 2: then assuming they might have a pace similar to the
Speaker 2: Trump Vance ticket beyond that after Labor Day.
Speaker 5: It certainly looks like that would be the case. I mean,
Speaker 5: especially with the fact that there is only seventy or
Speaker 5: so days left. That really is the only way to
Speaker 5: get your name out there to voters.
Speaker 2: Well, and of course it's not just about getting your
Speaker 2: name out there, it's about getting people to give you
Speaker 2: money as well. We talked about the kind of money
Speaker 2: that Harris has been bringing in, but Jadie Vance is
Speaker 2: starting to pull some money into given his ties to
Speaker 2: Silicon Valley. We understand some big named donors are organizing
Speaker 2: events for him both in New York and California in
Speaker 2: the coming weeks.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so one of the main reasons why Jade Vance
Speaker 5: was picked as the renting mate was just because of
Speaker 5: the ties that he has two really wealthy donors and
Speaker 5: the peal that he has with these folks. And so
Speaker 5: in the next two or three weeks. He has a
Speaker 5: couple fundraisers lined up, one of which in Los Angeles, California,
Speaker 5: with David Sachs, and another in New York with Jacob
Speaker 5: helperg who runs Pallenteer is a co founder, and so
Speaker 5: you know, just these names really signal that there is
Speaker 5: a shift among you know, big tech, you know, big
Speaker 5: Wall Street money coming in to support Trump. And that's
Speaker 5: something that their campaign has been really highlighting in the
Speaker 5: last couple of weeks, all.
Speaker 2: Right, and of course over the last couple of weeks
Speaker 2: and this entire cycle thus far, Stephanie Lai has been
Speaker 2: covering the campaigns for US. Great to see you here
Speaker 2: in Washington. Thank you so much for joining me. Now,
Speaker 2: as we continue to talk about the messaging coming out
Speaker 2: of these campaigns and the way in which they are
Speaker 2: spending the money that they're raising, we know that Kamala
Speaker 2: Harris has a big ad buy that's going to be
Speaker 2: running through Labor Day and of course even more ad
Speaker 2: buys coming after Labor Day. One launching today though in
Speaker 2: some of these key swing states, is specifically about the economy.
Speaker 2: It's titled every Day, and its cites some of the
Speaker 2: things she said in her speech in North Carolina earlier
Speaker 2: this month, when she outlined policy proposals when it comes
Speaker 2: to affordable housing or price gouging. For example, here's a
Speaker 2: little taste.
Speaker 6: I will be laser focused on creating opportunity for the
Speaker 6: middle class that advance their economic security, stability, and dignity.
Speaker 6: If you want to know someone cares about, look who
Speaker 6: they fight for. I'll try fights for bllionaires and large corporations.
Speaker 6: I will fight to give money back to working in
Speaker 6: middle class Americans.
Speaker 2: But how is that kind of messaging resonating with voters,
Speaker 2: especially when she's part of this Biden administration. In the
Speaker 2: economy under Biden is something that a lot of voters
Speaker 2: don't feel thrilled about. So to get into this conversation.
Speaker 2: Now joining me in studio is Cliff Young. He is
Speaker 2: US Public Affairs President at ipso's polling and of course
Speaker 2: has been looking into the economy issue and other issues
Speaker 2: throughout this entire cycle. So you put out a piece
Speaker 2: last week, Cliff, and it's good to see you here
Speaker 2: in studio about Biden's inflation orphans. Does Kamala Harris easily
Speaker 2: adopt those inflation orphans? Are we seeing signs that she's
Speaker 2: having some success, more so with the economy question than
Speaker 2: Biden was.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, first and foremost, the primary issue is inflation
Speaker 3: in the economy. Inflation, inflation, inflation, and that was Biden's
Speaker 3: primary problem. He was weak in the polls. His numbers
Speaker 3: were weak because of that. And what we can say
Speaker 3: is we still don't know. I think we need to
Speaker 3: wait a bit to see how Harris does. But part
Speaker 3: of her jump in the polls is a function of
Speaker 3: these very constituencies being more enthusiastic towards her in respect
Speaker 3: to the inflation. So some effect in the short term
Speaker 3: right now, whether it's a long term effect, we don't know.
Speaker 3: What we can say definitively is that Harris and the
Speaker 3: campaign are on message well.
Speaker 2: And some of the things that they're saying are still
Speaker 2: rather vague policy ideas, but specific enough that you have
Speaker 2: folks here on Bloomberg, for example, questioning whether or all
Speaker 2: these are things that actually work in reality, like when
Speaker 2: it comes to price gouging or no tax on tips,
Speaker 2: which is something Donald Trump is floating as well, that
Speaker 2: many who are deficit wary say that could actually create
Speaker 2: a bigger fiscal issue, But how does it actually resonate
Speaker 2: with voters who may not be prioritizing those considerations, thinking
Speaker 2: more about their own kitchen table.
Speaker 3: These are populous measures. These are measures designed to win
Speaker 3: the election. What she's doing, what Harris is doing in
Speaker 3: the campaign, is doing, is showing the American populace, showing
Speaker 3: these orphans that they're empathetic towards them, that they're worried
Speaker 3: about those issues. And as I said before, part of
Speaker 3: or in part the jump in the numbers are a
Speaker 3: function of her reaching these constituencies.
Speaker 2: Well, speaking of a jump in the numbers, we got
Speaker 2: consumer confidence data today, obviously, something we watch very closely
Speaker 2: here at Bloomberg six month high in August, in part
Speaker 2: because of more optimism around inflation, in this idea that
Speaker 2: interest rates could becoming lower as well. Is there a
Speaker 2: historical relationship between where consumer confidences and the way in
Speaker 2: which effective and Harris is part of this administration perform
Speaker 2: in election cycles.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's a correlation. It's difficult to kind of line
Speaker 3: it up as a one to one relationship. But the
Speaker 3: more people feel optimistic, the more likely they are to
Speaker 3: support the party in power. The more pessimistic they are,
Speaker 3: the more likely they are to not support the party
Speaker 3: in power to support the opposition. And this is good
Speaker 3: for the Hairs campaign. Now, is it too little too late?
Speaker 3: We will see, But at least directionally speaking, it's good
Speaker 3: for the Hair aside, not as much for the Trump side.
Speaker 2: Well, on this idea of incumbency, there was an op
Speaker 2: ed published in the Washington Postmark This and Today that
Speaker 2: talked about how in one hundred and eighty eight years,
Speaker 2: we've only seen one current sitting vice president actually win
Speaker 2: the presidency. It was George H. W. Bush, And in
Speaker 2: this op ed, he says Bush succeeded where other modern
Speaker 2: vice presidents failed for one simple reason. Americans wanted a
Speaker 2: third Reagan term. Today, no one wants another Biden term,
Speaker 2: pointing out that Ronald Reagan left office with sixty three
Speaker 2: percent approval and Biden has fifty seven percent disapproval. The
Speaker 2: suggestion here is if voters wanted another Biden term, he
Speaker 2: would still be the Democratic nominee. How do you think
Speaker 2: about that? Is there a point there?
Speaker 3: Yeah, there is a point. I think it's a great point.
Speaker 3: And indeed we have to juxtappose will vibes went out,
Speaker 3: will that enthusiasm, you know, mobiliking the base, the energy
Speaker 3: in the base, will that propel Harris forward? That's a
Speaker 3: question mark because right now, the fundamentals, per this article,
Speaker 3: the fundamentals are in Trump's favor, basically historically lower, almost
Speaker 3: historically low approval ratings, the primary issue being inflation, but
Speaker 3: Trump being stronger than Harris on inflation, and so therefore
Speaker 3: we need to wait and see a bit. I think
Speaker 3: the numbers are a bit overstated for Harris at this point.
Speaker 3: I think there'll be a burnoff. I think that we
Speaker 3: have to wait a couple of weeks, probably after Labor Day,
Speaker 3: let's say, into the end of that week. But yes,
Speaker 3: it really is the vibes versus the fundamentals. We would
Speaker 3: expect the fundamentals to win out, but we don't know.
Speaker 2: All right, fair enough, Well, I want to talk more
Speaker 2: about Donald Trump, because he actually sat down for an
Speaker 2: interview with doctor Phil in recent days. It's starting to
Speaker 2: trickle out today, and he specifically talked about bases of
Speaker 2: voters that may or may not turn out for him.
Speaker 7: Take a listen, Christians for whatever reason, don't vote very much.
Speaker 7: You know, proportionately NRA people and people that feel very
Speaker 7: strongly about the Second Amendment, they're not voters. I don't
Speaker 7: know why. Maybe it's a rebellious straight and I said
Speaker 7: to the Christians, we got to win this election. If
Speaker 7: we win this election, I'll straighten everything out in less
Speaker 7: than four years by a lot.
Speaker 2: But as we think about some of these groups, Cliff
Speaker 2: in the way in which we've seen a messaging policy
Speaker 2: evolution from Donald Trump when it comes to say abortion,
Speaker 2: just in the last few days, suggesting he'd be great
Speaker 2: for reproductive rights, JD. Van saying Donald Trump has committed
Speaker 2: to him that he would veto a federal abortion ban.
Speaker 2: Does he risk alienating parts of his base, like evangelical
Speaker 2: Christians with that kind of turn on that policy Specifically.
Speaker 3: He's really worried about turnout. He's really worried about his
Speaker 3: base turning up. But he also is worried about the middle.
Speaker 3: And what he's doing right now is tacking to the middle.
Speaker 3: He's trying to be more moderate in tone. Whether that works,
Speaker 3: that's the million dollar question. But ultimately it's all going
Speaker 3: to be about turnout.
Speaker 2: Well, so on this abortion issue specifically, we have seen
Speaker 2: it be a driving turnout force for Democrats and special
Speaker 2: elections and others. Certainly in the midterms in twenty twenty two.
Speaker 2: Can he arrest that with this kind of policy shift
Speaker 2: that he's seeming to try and turculate, leave it to
Speaker 2: the states. I'm not for a federal ban. Can he
Speaker 2: kind of stop that propellant force of women specifically being
Speaker 2: driven to the poor.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he wants to eat his cake, his cack to
Speaker 3: excuse me, he wants to be on both sides of
Speaker 3: the fence. Obviously he's worried about those moderate women in
Speaker 3: suburbia that tend to be Republican. They are abortion orphans.
Speaker 3: Let's say if the theme is is orphans ultimately, but
Speaker 3: I would say the following it, I would say the
Speaker 3: primary issue stills inflation. Obviously, abortion mobilizes especially the Democratic base,
Speaker 3: and should be a worry in election of game adventures
Speaker 3: for Trump. But it's still about inflation. We haven't heard
Speaker 3: much from Trump talking about the economy inflation today.
Speaker 2: Well, we know that he wins on inflation. He also
Speaker 2: wins on the border consistently. We just have a minute
Speaker 2: left here, Cliff. Other than abortion, what is Kamala Harris
Speaker 2: winning on? What issues? Do voters trust her with?
Speaker 3: Healthcare is one, but obviously it's less important today than
Speaker 3: it was a number of years ago. The primary democratic
Speaker 3: issue today, which is the second issue in people's minds
Speaker 3: in Americans minds, are threats to democracy. She far out strips,
Speaker 3: far up paces Trump on that critical issue that's been
Speaker 3: a Biden theme, primarily a Biden theme. Obviously Harris is
Speaker 3: using as well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and we heard some of that in her acceptance
Speaker 2: speech last week, when she talked about Donald Trump as
Speaker 2: an unserious man but described the consequences of him winning
Speaker 2: this election as quite serious. Cliff Young of ipso's always
Speaker 2: great to have you here in studio. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 1: rod Oro with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also
Speaker 1: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: We have our eye on geopolitics, not just what's happening
Speaker 2: in the Middle East, though certainly it's consequential and worth discussion, discussion.
Speaker 2: We will do that in just a moment, but I
Speaker 2: also want to talk about what's taking place in China
Speaker 2: this week. A visit from US National Security Advisor Jake
Speaker 2: Sullivan to Beijing will who'll be meeting with the Chinese
Speaker 2: foreign minister, potentially even with Chinese President Xijinping himself. China,
Speaker 2: for its part, says it's going to be bringing up
Speaker 2: issues related to Taiwan and tariffs. But the question is
Speaker 2: ever with visits like these, is whether or not there
Speaker 2: will be an actual tangible outcome to these kind of talks,
Speaker 2: or if they're just talking for the sake of doing so.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg's Ian Marlowe is here with me in our Washington,
Speaker 2: d C. Studio now to help answer this question. He's
Speaker 2: a senior reporter covering foreign policy for US here at Bloomberg. So, Ian,
Speaker 2: what is the aim of this trip? Are we going
Speaker 2: to see something firm that Sullivan will be taking away?
Speaker 8: I assume no. I assume we're going to see much
Speaker 8: of what we've seen over the last six months to
Speaker 8: a year with this administration, which is sending senior delegations
Speaker 8: over to try and to sort of maintain an acceptable
Speaker 8: level of instability to some degree, because the US and
Speaker 8: China do not agree across a range of fundamental issues.
Speaker 8: The point now is to just manage those differences. And
Speaker 8: I've been on some of these trips to China with
Speaker 8: the Secretary of State and they're much the same. They
Speaker 8: almost always say there's not going to be anything tangible
Speaker 8: or concrete coming out of it, but the goal is
Speaker 8: to keep the talks going. So I think that's to
Speaker 8: some degree what we're seeing here.
Speaker 2: I would be correct to say that this is the
Speaker 2: first time we're seeing a Biden administration official make a
Speaker 2: trip to China since Biden effectively made himself a lamb
Speaker 2: duck president right and announced he's not seeking reelection. I
Speaker 2: would just wonder how that might change the nature of
Speaker 2: these conversations when it's kind of a notion we might
Speaker 2: not be dealing with you a few months from now,
Speaker 2: so why would we cooperate and collaborate.
Speaker 9: At this point?
Speaker 8: Yeah, I think so. I think there's definitely, like with
Speaker 8: a lot of foreign policy at the moment, there's a
Speaker 8: bit of a sort of Trump proofing idea here that
Speaker 8: they're trying to solidify some gains to go through no
Speaker 8: matter who wins in November. But I think there's still
Speaker 8: always just with Jake Salvin, the National Security Advisor, I
Speaker 8: think there's a lot of He's been doing these meetings
Speaker 8: at a sort of regular cadence over the last few months, sorry,
Speaker 8: the last year or so, with these senior Chinese officials,
Speaker 8: and I think it's there is some stuff they do
Speaker 8: want to continue pushing. There is China's economic aid to Russia,
Speaker 8: which they worry has, you know, effectively given Russia more
Speaker 8: of a fighting chance in Ukraine. They're still angry about that,
Speaker 8: but they still aren't able to kind of twist China's
Speaker 8: arm to some degree to get them to stop that aid.
Speaker 8: That's the main thing, and then the other stuff is
Speaker 8: really just it's sort of the laundry list of things
Speaker 8: you see in these US China meetings, Taiwan tariffs and
Speaker 8: other things. So I think there is still stuff to discuss.
Speaker 8: It's just I don't think we're seeing any fundamental change
Speaker 8: in either side's position right now.
Speaker 2: All right, Well, that reminds me of some other talks
Speaker 2: that are happening in which we haven't really seen many
Speaker 2: changes in either side's position, which is the ongoing ceasefire
Speaker 2: negotiations between Israel and Hamas and the other mediators including
Speaker 2: the US did have success in rescuing a hostage from
Speaker 2: Gaza today that was being held by Hamas, a fifty
Speaker 2: two year old man, a father of eleven. There are
Speaker 2: still one hundred more being held, either alive or otherwise ian.
Speaker 2: What is the feeling today on the likelihood of a
Speaker 2: deal to bring them home or are hostage? Family is
Speaker 2: only going to get the kind of closure or their
Speaker 2: own family members back that they need by these kind
Speaker 2: of individual rescue operations that we know are very complicated
Speaker 2: and have taken a lot of time to carry out.
Speaker 8: Yeah, the US has been putting a lot of pressure
Speaker 8: on Israel to try and bring home a deal here
Speaker 8: there is the complicating factory that they're dealing both with
Speaker 8: a country that has a very complicated internal political dynamic.
Speaker 8: You know, Netnyaho has a fragile coalition, some of whom
Speaker 8: some of the members of whom do not want a
Speaker 8: ceasefire at all. And the other side of the table
Speaker 8: there is a terrorist group, some of whom Israel has
Speaker 8: assassinated over the last several months. So it's a fragile
Speaker 8: dynamic that I believe ever since Biden kind of stepped
Speaker 8: out and owned the ceasefire process, you know, laying out
Speaker 8: this three stage proposal that he said Israel had agreed
Speaker 8: to and then it was just on Hamas to agree to.
Speaker 8: Ever since that, the US has been very positive, sort
Speaker 8: of endlessly optimistic about the deal and the potential of
Speaker 8: a deal. So we hear language like a bridging proposal,
Speaker 8: or it's a final bridging proposal. We just need to
Speaker 8: close the gaps on certain things. But really you're talking
Speaker 8: about two sort of you know, fundamentally opposed, you know,
Speaker 8: parties that are at war, some of whom have hostages,
Speaker 8: the other whom's assassinating the negotiators for the other. And
Speaker 8: I think we're still quite far. I mean, it's a
Speaker 8: sense that there is a sense in Washington that this
Speaker 8: deal is still not likely to come to fruition anytime soon.
Speaker 8: And to some degree it's you know, for net Yahou,
Speaker 8: keeping the negotiations spinning out while he's also doing military
Speaker 8: operations is sort of to their benefit some degree. The
Speaker 8: only pressure he feels, to some degree, faces is on
Speaker 8: the hostages and from the hostage families within Israel.
Speaker 2: But do you think that's also true of other Middle
Speaker 2: East players? Largely the idea that because all of these
Speaker 2: different actors are still either physically or otherwise at the
Speaker 2: negotiating table that is preventing further escalation when it comes
Speaker 2: to Israel and Hesbala, even though we did see those
Speaker 2: preempti strikes from Israel over the weekend, or Israel and
Speaker 2: Iran directly for that matter, how does that wider backdrop
Speaker 2: of the other proxies and players fit into these ongoing
Speaker 2: conversations around a ceasefire with the moss.
Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean, I think the US believes that the
Speaker 8: ceasefire deal and negotiations remains sort of the primary driver,
Speaker 8: the only thing that can sort of end the sort
Speaker 8: of endless cycle we've seen of escalation on Israel side,
Speaker 8: escalation on Iran's side and through its proxies. So it
Speaker 8: remains the sort of core focus. But at the same time,
Speaker 8: there's now this sort of freezon of danger around the region,
Speaker 8: of these of this sort of looming retaliation from Iran
Speaker 8: that we haven't fully seen for the assassination of the
Speaker 8: Hamas political chief in Tehran, which was quite bold obviously
Speaker 8: and was bound to lead to something. So I think
Speaker 8: at the moment there is still this general sense that
Speaker 8: the region remains on edge, But to be honest, it
Speaker 8: has remained on edge. You know for almost a year now,
Speaker 8: since since October seventh, and both sides have managed to
Speaker 8: calibrate their responses to the point where there isn't this
Speaker 8: sort of like dangerous escalatory cycle that gets out of
Speaker 8: control and then you see sort of Israel and Iran
Speaker 8: in direct confrontation in the US getting pulled into that.
Speaker 8: So I think that that remains a possibility, but I
Speaker 8: think a lot of people are sort of confident that
Speaker 8: it's been managed to some degree.
Speaker 2: All Right, Ian, thank you so much for being here.
Speaker 2: Ian Marlow is a senior reporter covering foreign policy for
Speaker 2: US here at Bloomberg, and we want to ge continue
Speaker 2: this conversation now and bring in Carmel arbit two Balance
Speaker 2: of Power here on Bloomberg TV and radio. She is
Speaker 2: a senior fellow for the Middle East Programs at the
Speaker 2: Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council. Carmel,
Speaker 2: welcome back. It's always good to have you. I'd like
Speaker 2: to begin with just a point that Ian was just
Speaker 2: making about how the US has seemed endlessly optimistic about
Speaker 2: the prospects for a ceasefire agreement getting done. We've had
Speaker 2: a number of head fakes. It feels like and it
Speaker 2: never actually results in a finalized deal in which all
Speaker 2: parties agree. So do you see that as the Biden
Speaker 2: administration the US being disingenuous with the actual state of play,
Speaker 2: or is it that they do feel like they keep
Speaker 2: getting close and then the rug gets pulled out from
Speaker 2: under them.
Speaker 9: Thanks so much. I think it's a combination of the two.
Speaker 9: The Biden administration has made clear that it is deeply
Speaker 9: committed to bringing about this ceasefire, and so they're very
Speaker 9: invested in that outcome and are bringing that optimism to
Speaker 9: the table to try to cajole the parties along. I
Speaker 9: think every time they think they get closer or they
Speaker 9: find a resolution on one issue, another issue comes up.
Speaker 9: Eventually there's going to be a cease fire, without a doubt.
Speaker 9: The question really is one of timing. One negotiator described
Speaker 9: the process at this moment as artificial respiration. I think
Speaker 9: that's a little negative, but reflects how negotiators are feeling
Speaker 9: that they're breathing and chugging along here, but that it's
Speaker 9: not achieving the breakthrough that they had hoped for at
Speaker 9: this stage.
Speaker 2: So if you do operate under this assumption that eventually
Speaker 2: there will be a cease fire. It is just a
Speaker 2: question of when. What would your bet be on when
Speaker 2: at this time? Kermeal, because the longer this draws on,
Speaker 2: the closer we get to an election here in the
Speaker 2: US and a new player potentially coming in who could
Speaker 2: completely change the game theoretically, at least the policy position
Speaker 2: of the US and the way in which they're trying
Speaker 2: to exercise leverage in all of this. Is this something
Speaker 2: that realistically can happen before November.
Speaker 9: I think it's certainly possible for it to happen by November,
Speaker 9: but there are significant factors that are pulling both parties
Speaker 9: away from achieving agreement. You have, on the one hand, Natayah,
Speaker 9: who sees the prospect of a Trump administration as a
Speaker 9: positive outcome for him, who might want to take that
Speaker 9: gamble as he thinks through negotiations and what types of
Speaker 9: concessions he might have to make. On the other hand,
Speaker 9: you have Sinoar, who sees the prospect of a regional
Speaker 9: war is strengthening his hand. And so you have two
Speaker 9: leaders who have really conflicting political interests, whose negotiators who
Speaker 9: are working for them keep coming closer and closer to
Speaker 9: an agreement. And yet the leaders themselves keep pulling back,
Speaker 9: so I think it is certainly in the realm of possibility.
Speaker 9: What we're hearing is that they keep getting closer. And
Speaker 9: the two main sticking points right now are over Israel's
Speaker 9: continued military presence in Gaza, which is key for Nata
Speaker 9: Naho and something that Hamas and Egypt really are opposed to.
Speaker 9: But we continue to see forward momentum on questions like
Speaker 9: the identity and number of hostages that will be released,
Speaker 9: or the identity and number of Palestinium prisoners that will
Speaker 9: be released. So we see them getting very close. It's possible,
Speaker 9: but the timeline really is a big question.
Speaker 2: Well, and to ask you a different version of the question,
Speaker 2: I just asked Ian, to what extent do you feel
Speaker 2: that these conversations as close as they may be getting,
Speaker 2: or the ebbs and flows, or what is actually preventing
Speaker 2: the retaliation that's been expected by Iran and Hesbela for
Speaker 2: well over a month now and reaction to the assassinations
Speaker 2: of a Hesbela and Hamas leader back in July and
Speaker 2: quick succession. We obviously saw Israel trying to thwart an
Speaker 2: attempt by Hesbela. They say over this past weekend, But
Speaker 2: I can't imagine that was really it carmeal. How does
Speaker 2: the action of Hesbela and Iran moving forward have a
Speaker 2: through line to what's happening with Hamas and Israel and
Speaker 2: the mediators at the table.
Speaker 9: Yeah, so their regional conflict has been eating up slowly
Speaker 9: and continually. So what we saw over the weekend was
Speaker 9: kind of a moderated escalation where there was a significant
Speaker 9: strike by Israel but yet limited in range. It really
Speaker 9: focused on the border areas and similarly in attack by
Speaker 9: Hesbula that was larger than what we've seen in the past.
Speaker 9: At the same time, we haven't seen either country push
Speaker 9: forward into a full blown war. The US and regional
Speaker 9: allies are really committed to keeping the temperature low to
Speaker 9: moving forward with the ceasefire. Israel has significant constraints as
Speaker 9: it deals with the multi front war. It is in
Speaker 9: the interest of everyone to try to keep this quiet.
Speaker 9: That being said, it's not going to go away. This
Speaker 9: isn't going to just resolve itself on its own. I
Speaker 9: think what we're going to continue to see is this
Speaker 9: kind of wiet staging of escalation over time that we're
Speaker 9: already in but not necessarily a full boil all at once.
Speaker 2: Carmille, I also want to ask you about something that
Speaker 2: the Trump campaign is paying a lot of attention to
Speaker 2: this week, which is the third year mark of the
Speaker 2: US withdrawal from Afghanistan yesterday, of course, marking three years
Speaker 2: since thirteen US service members were killed in the suicide
Speaker 2: bombing at the airport there. I asked Jennifer kavanav Defense
Speaker 2: Priorities last night about whether or not it is a
Speaker 2: fair characterization to describe the events we have seen take
Speaker 2: place over the last three years, including these escalating tensions
Speaker 2: in the Middle East, if part of the blame does
Speaker 2: lie on that rather chaotic withdrawal from the US that
Speaker 2: we saw back in twenty twenty one. This is what
Speaker 2: she told me, and then I'd like your take.
Speaker 10: Certainly, how left much to be desired in terms of
Speaker 10: its organization and communication with allies and partners, But it
Speaker 10: hasn't really damaged US relationships with any of its European
Speaker 10: or Asian all alex Air partners. It didn't really have
Speaker 10: any ramifications in the Middle East, And in terms of
Speaker 10: the kind of broader terror threat that people have warned about,
Speaker 10: that too hasn't really affected US national security, and in fact,
Speaker 10: the intelligence apparatus has shown its proficiency in detecting these
Speaker 10: attacks ahead of time. So I think it's a little
Speaker 10: bit of a red herring.
Speaker 2: Pil if you agree with that, and if we're assigning
Speaker 2: blame here to what extent you believe that this was
Speaker 2: just a Biden administration problem versus responsibility that may lie
Speaker 2: with Donald Trump himself having agreed to the pull out
Speaker 2: with the Taliban during his administration.
Speaker 9: Yeah, I think there's plenty of blame to go around,
Speaker 9: and both administrations are complicit in the withdrawal from Afghanistan
Speaker 9: and the events that transpired afterwards. As you said, the
Speaker 9: Trump administration had drawn down troops and committed to the
Speaker 9: withdrawal on the timeline that Biden then executed. I think
Speaker 9: what we're seeing right now in an election season is
Speaker 9: that the Trump administration, excuse me, the Trump campaign sees
Speaker 9: an opportunity here to really seize on this issue, to
Speaker 9: point to one of the kind of gaffes of the
Speaker 9: Biden Harris administration as a way to gain political leverage.
Speaker 9: But there's plenty of blame to go around for both
Speaker 9: campaigns on this issue.
Speaker 2: But when it comes to what they are actually being
Speaker 2: blamed for to kind of the point I was asking
Speaker 2: Jennifer about as well. How much do you think of
Speaker 2: the intensified conflict, the outright conflict of course between Israel
Speaker 2: and a moss the trading a fire with other Iranian proxies,
Speaker 2: the general higher tension in the Middle East as a
Speaker 2: whole is because of the pullout from Afghanistan, or do
Speaker 2: you think that these things actually are not as related
Speaker 2: as they may be made out to be.
Speaker 9: Yeah, I would actually really differentiate between what happened in
Speaker 9: Afghanistan and the timing of what happened and what's going
Speaker 9: on right now between Gaza and Israel, because what you
Speaker 9: have are two really distinct conflicts in some largely distinct
Speaker 9: territory regionally, where we've seen kind of the US fight
Speaker 9: against terror and broader interests in the Middle East that
Speaker 9: it has sought to disengage from overtime have been unsuccessful.
Speaker 9: But that's really the extent of the through line that
Speaker 9: I would see there. I think what you have instead
Speaker 9: is a conflict between Israel and the Palestinians that has
Speaker 9: been going on since the establishment of the Jewish state
Speaker 9: that is being fueled by or run and by other
Speaker 9: neighbors in the region. And at the same time, a
Speaker 9: conflict that happened in Afghanistan, a war that has been
Speaker 9: winding down, and the control of the Taliban that has
Speaker 9: continued to subjugate the rights of people in Afghanistan.
Speaker 2: All right, Canriel'll always appreciate your insight. Thank you so
Speaker 2: much for joining us. That's Carmel Arbit of the Atlantic
Speaker 2: Council joining us here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg
Speaker 2: TV and Radio. And we still have much more ahead.
Speaker 2: We'll reassemble our political panel next on Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Amocar Play and
Speaker 1: then roun Otto with the blue Burn Business app. Listen
Speaker 1: on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us
Speaker 1: live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: I'm Kaylee lyin slam solo. Today is Joe Matthew takes
Speaker 2: this Tuesday off. Welcome back to Balance of Power on
Speaker 2: Bloomberg TV and Radio. And it is on this Tuesday
Speaker 2: that a new ad is running in battleground States now
Speaker 2: by the Harris Campaign, titled Every Day. It focuses on
Speaker 2: the economy, specifically and includes some of the policy proposals
Speaker 2: that Kamala Harris outlined in North Carolina earlier this month.
Speaker 2: When it comes to price gouging and housing, here's a
Speaker 2: little bit of it.
Speaker 6: I will be laser focused on creating opportunities for the
Speaker 6: middle class that advance their economic security, stability, and dignity.
Speaker 6: If you want to know what someone cares about, look
Speaker 6: who they fight for. I'll try fights pavillionaires and large corporations.
Speaker 6: I will fight to give money back to working and
Speaker 6: middle class Americans.
Speaker 2: So she says she'll be fighting for working class, middle
Speaker 2: class Americans. But a lot of these ideas still are
Speaker 2: quite broad in nature. We don't have many specifics on
Speaker 2: how exactly she does that. Granted, specifics are missing in
Speaker 2: some of the policy platforms of the Republican ticket as well.
Speaker 2: So let's bring in a Republican and a Democrat now
Speaker 2: to discuss a Republican panelist today, Rick Davis, Bloomberg Politics
Speaker 2: contributor and stone Court Capital partner, together with Democratic Strategistim
Speaker 2: Jim Kessler, who is the executive vice president at Third Way. Rick,
Speaker 2: I'll come to you first, as you've obviously had plenty
Speaker 2: of experience putting campaign ads together as well. Is this
Speaker 2: a message that is going to resonate considering the audience
Speaker 2: where it is targeted, the battleground states that ultimately will
Speaker 2: decide the outcome of this election or those do those voters,
Speaker 2: the ones who could swing either way, those just thousands
Speaker 2: realistically we're talking about niche of those states needs something
Speaker 2: more specific.
Speaker 4: That's a good question, Kaylee. I think that one of
Speaker 4: the things that this represents is the big pivot away
Speaker 4: from the national campaign that Kamala Harris has been running,
Speaker 4: the big convention consolidation of power within the Democratic Party,
Speaker 4: and really finally targeting even more so the suburbs in
Speaker 4: key cities around these targeted six states, seven states, you know,
Speaker 4: places like Pittsburgh suburbs, Philadelphia suburbs, Maricopa County, Arizona. And
Speaker 4: they are talking to an issue that a lot of
Speaker 4: voters have concerns about it, especially those voters that might
Speaker 4: be willing to vote Democrat, who maybe are independent or
Speaker 4: unaligned voters. And that is on housing, and that is
Speaker 4: probably one of the areas where she's actually presented the
Speaker 4: most specific kind of proposals that she's talked about. Two
Speaker 4: Thursdays ago during her announcement of her economic plan, and
Speaker 4: so this might be the one area where she's got
Speaker 4: a little teeth to bear, and I think that that
Speaker 4: gives her substance. It gives her something that sounds like
Speaker 4: she's got well thought out proposals that don't really sound
Speaker 4: too cradic in nature. And so I think she's trying
Speaker 4: to do a lot of things at one time. But
Speaker 4: you're right, they are chasing tens of thousands of votes
Speaker 4: in these key locations, and this is where the rest
Speaker 4: of the campaign is going to be seen, not by
Speaker 4: the rest of the country, but by these suburban locations
Speaker 4: around these major cities in the key swing states.
Speaker 9: Well.
Speaker 2: And it is worth pointing out in these key swing
Speaker 2: states that Donald Trump and Jade Vance are spending a
Speaker 2: great deal of time in them this week. In fact,
Speaker 2: Jade Vance is speaking in Michigan right now, also on
Speaker 2: the subject of the economy. But Jim, before we heed
Speaker 2: back to what the Republicans are proposing and think more
Speaker 2: about Harris and the language we just heard her use
Speaker 2: in this ad talking about being for the middle class,
Speaker 2: it does sound pretty similar to the message we've gotten
Speaker 2: from the president she has served with over the last
Speaker 2: three and a half years. Joe Biden, how often have
Speaker 2: we heard him say the middle class built America and
Speaker 2: unions built the middle class. Kamala Harris trying to paint
Speaker 2: herself as union friendly as well. Is she creating enough
Speaker 2: distance separation between the economy she would like to create
Speaker 2: in the policy proposals she would like to use to
Speaker 2: do it versus the one Joe Biden has created, knowing
Speaker 2: that he didn't very well get good marks on that
Speaker 2: while he was still in this race.
Speaker 11: I think there's some cheap differences between the way Harris
Speaker 11: talks about the economy and Biden. One is it just
Speaker 11: feels a lot more modern when Harris is talking about
Speaker 11: it and Biden's going back to you know what his
Speaker 11: dad used to tell him when you know, in the
Speaker 11: nineteen forties and nineteen fifties, Like I just felt very nostalgic.
Speaker 11: I am struck by how Harris's language and proposals are
Speaker 11: very centrist Democratic with a populist chaser there. So opportunity, economy,
Speaker 11: those were not Biden words. Those are Harris words. You know,
Speaker 11: security and stability for the middle class. Again, there's a
Speaker 11: Harris words. There's aren't Biden words. And you know, in
Speaker 11: terms of policy specifics, if you go back to twenty sixteen,
Speaker 11: Hillary Clinton had two hundred and sixty four policy ideas
Speaker 11: on a website, everything from Alzheimer's to Zeka. Donald Trump
Speaker 11: had seven. So you know, this is not a quantity
Speaker 11: game out there. It's really about quality.
Speaker 2: Well, okay, if it's not about quantity but quality, what
Speaker 2: about the quality of ideas that actually are the same
Speaker 2: that both candidates seem to be agreeing with, Like, for example,
Speaker 2: Jim no tax on tips. It was Donald Trump's idea
Speaker 2: first before it became Kamala Harris's. What distinction will voters
Speaker 2: actually make in that regard if both candidates are saying
Speaker 2: similar populist.
Speaker 11: Things, right, And I just want to be clear, I
Speaker 11: don't love that idea from either candidate. Okay, this is
Speaker 11: what Rick Davis was talking about. This is Nevada. You
Speaker 11: know in some other places, but Nevada is very tip
Speaker 11: centric state. Okay, So it's like, how are you getting
Speaker 11: some younger voters, how are you getting service workers who
Speaker 11: are who are relying on tips that are swing voters,
Speaker 11: low propensity voters, and low information voters. So I do
Speaker 11: think some of these ideas are like a direct play
Speaker 11: for voters, and others are more broad economic ideas.
Speaker 9: Well.
Speaker 2: Novada of course one of the sun Belt states that
Speaker 2: it does seem if polling is to be believed, Harris
Speaker 2: stands a better chance than Joe Biden did of carrying them.
Speaker 2: He was very focused on the rest Belt and it
Speaker 2: is another sun Belt state. Rick. We will see Harris
Speaker 2: and Walls spending a few days this week, beginning tomorrow,
Speaker 2: a bus tour in Georgia that will run through Thursday.
Speaker 2: What is the messaging that would actually put them over
Speaker 2: the finish line in a state that, according to the
Speaker 2: New York Times Sienna latest poll, Trump is up by
Speaker 2: four It is within the margin of error. He does
Speaker 2: have a little bit of beef if you will with
Speaker 2: Governor Brian Kemp. How in play is Georgia really for Harris?
Speaker 2: What would it take for her to win? It is
Speaker 2: this economic messaging and she's going to.
Speaker 4: Have to replicate some of the magic that Joe Biden
Speaker 4: put onto the state in twenty twenty. It's not a
Speaker 4: dissimilar election, not a dissimilar electorate. She has to sow
Speaker 4: discontent with Republican voters. Obviously mentioned Donald Trump has a
Speaker 4: love hate relationship with the GOP in Georgia, and so
Speaker 4: she's going to have to do what she can to
Speaker 4: suppress that vote, keep Republicans thinking maybe Trump's not the
Speaker 4: guy for them, and then at the same time do
Speaker 4: everything she can to boost her base, because the reality
Speaker 4: is this is going to be a base election in Georgia.
Speaker 4: More so than tipping the balance with some suburban voters
Speaker 4: around Atlanta. She's going to need a bigger, bigger turnout,
Speaker 4: especially amongst African American voters that have really supplied the
Speaker 4: wins in the past when they've had them for Democratic
Speaker 4: Canada statewide.
Speaker 2: Well, So, when we consider what plays to the base, Jim,
Speaker 2: it does bring us to the abortion issue, something that
Speaker 2: we have seen does drive turnout, at least it did
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty two, it has in special elections in
Speaker 2: the states in which the abortion question has been on
Speaker 2: the ballot. It also seems to be one that Donald
Speaker 2: Trump is trying to get more moderates in his corner
Speaker 2: on as well, with this kind of characterizing himself now
Speaker 2: as someone who will be great for women's and reproductive rates.
Speaker 2: Jade Van's saying that Donald Trump has committed to him
Speaker 2: that he would veto a federal abortion band. Do you
Speaker 2: think these voters who may actually vote on this issue,
Speaker 2: a group of them who are driven to the polls
Speaker 2: on this issue, will buy into that at all.
Speaker 11: If you're driven by this issue, you are not going
Speaker 11: to buy into the change of position essentially of JD.
Speaker 11: Vans and Donald Trump. If you go back in time
Speaker 11: six weeks, there were two issues bedeviling each campaign. For
Speaker 11: the Biden campaign it was age and for the Trump
Speaker 11: campaign it was the Dobbs decision and abortion. Harris has
Speaker 11: solved the age issue, Republicans have not solved the abortion issue,
Speaker 11: and Democrats have generally overperformed the polls and expectations in
Speaker 11: every election since Dobs a few exceptions, but in almost everyone.
Speaker 11: So I think Republicans have a right to be afraid.
Speaker 2: Okay, well, Rick is the Republican I'd love for you
Speaker 2: to weigh in on that, because we have been talking
Speaker 2: about this issue being something that very much does dog
Speaker 2: the party in that it's very hard for them to
Speaker 2: find a clear messaging line on this that seems to work,
Speaker 2: seems to stick. Do you think this one will this
Speaker 2: leave it to the states. No, federal van is something
Speaker 2: that Republicans can actually win on, not just Trump advance
Speaker 2: but others as well.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think this is an effort not to win
Speaker 4: on it, but just to keep the pain down to
Speaker 4: a short threshold for Republican candidates. And so, you know,
Speaker 4: but like they have a few things going against some
Speaker 4: One is they got a referendum in Arizona that's going
Speaker 4: to turn out voters on the choice issue, and so
Speaker 4: they're going to be fighting a two front war there.
Speaker 4: The other thing I would remind everybody is there were
Speaker 4: a lot of Democrats who took advantage of the decision
Speaker 4: on the DOBS to generate wins in a lot of states.
Speaker 4: But some of those wins came because they have a
Speaker 4: higher propensity voters than Republicans have in the off years,
Speaker 4: especially they show up. And so this is an election
Speaker 4: where I think you have to assume everybody's going to
Speaker 4: show up, and so that advantage tends to get neutralized
Speaker 4: a little bit, and so it tends to mask the
Speaker 4: victories that a lot of pro choice voters have been
Speaker 4: claiming for the last four years. But they should be
Speaker 4: cautious because those victories may not show up on election
Speaker 4: day in twenty twenty four, just because everybody else.
Speaker 2: Is all right, fair enough, Jim, in our final minute
Speaker 2: with you, just on this notion of voters potentially being
Speaker 2: turned to the polls, especially in states where abortion is
Speaker 2: on the ballot, like Arizona or even Florida, does it
Speaker 2: make you reconsider as well, who can win the congressional
Speaker 2: races in those states. What Democrats' odds maybe, say, flipping
Speaker 2: Senator Scott's seat in Florida blue.
Speaker 11: So that could happen if there's a wave. Certainly right
Speaker 11: now there there doesn't appear to be a blue wave,
Speaker 11: although the odds of a blue wave are certainly greater
Speaker 11: than it was five weeks ago. If you talk to
Speaker 11: Democrat congressional democrats, they are far more optimistic about their
Speaker 11: chances to win battleground states and pick up, you know,
Speaker 11: some tough races than they were five or six weeks ago.
Speaker 11: So the optimism is there, the money's there. It feels
Speaker 11: like there's some momentum. Florida's tough. Texas is tough, not impossible.
Speaker 2: All right, Jim Kessler and Rick Davis our political panel today,
Speaker 2: Thank you both so much for joining me. Appreciate your
Speaker 2: time and we're going to continue this conversation on the
Speaker 2: down ballot races to watch what the actual composition of
Speaker 2: Congress could look like after November. Is that is just
Speaker 2: as important potentially as who's going to be president in
Speaker 2: terms of the actual policy making we've been discussing. Aaron
Speaker 2: Covey of the Cook Political Report, who focuses on congressional races,
Speaker 2: will be with me next here on Balance of Power.
Speaker 2: So stick with us on Bloomberg TV and radio.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 1: Roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also
Speaker 1: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven.
Speaker 2: Thirty Minding everyone, I am counting seventy days until the election.
Speaker 2: Ten weeks from today is when voters will head to
Speaker 2: the polls. And while we spend a lot of our
Speaker 2: time and energy talking about potential voter selection for president
Speaker 2: between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, it is worth noting
Speaker 2: that depending on the state where they live, they will
Speaker 2: have a number of congressional candidates to consider. As well
Speaker 2: as they go to cast their vote, whether or not
Speaker 2: they'll be splitting their ballots, voting R or D all
Speaker 2: the way down. It is the composition of Congress we
Speaker 2: have to consider as well, because whoever is elected president
Speaker 2: will only have so much ability to accomplish their own
Speaker 2: agenda if they don't have congressional support. And that is
Speaker 2: where we go now to Aaron Covey, who is from
Speaker 2: the Cook Political Report for she's an editor and she
Speaker 2: does focus specifically on congressional races. Erin Welcome back to
Speaker 2: Bloomberg TV and Radio. Always great to have you here.
Speaker 2: On balance of power. Just a few minutes ago, I
Speaker 2: was speaking with Jim Kessler of Third Way, who said
Speaker 2: that the chances of a sweep for Democrats are higher
Speaker 2: today than they were five weeks ago when Joe Biden
Speaker 2: was still in the race. But higher is one thing.
Speaker 2: Higher to the point that it actually seems likely is
Speaker 2: entirely another. How have the last five weeks, in the
Speaker 2: sudden energy and exuberance that has come along with the
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris presidential campaign, changed your own calculus about the
Speaker 2: way in which the balance of power in Congress is
Speaker 2: likely to switch up?
Speaker 4: November.
Speaker 12: Hi, Kaylee, Well thanks for having me on. Yeah, so
Speaker 12: Harris's entrance into the race has reset it not just
Speaker 12: for the presidential race, as you mentioned, but for the
Speaker 12: down ballot races as well, and I think it has
Speaker 12: had a much larger effect on the battle for control
Speaker 12: of the House, where Republicans only have a four seat majority,
Speaker 12: and so all cycle, I think the House has kind
Speaker 12: of looked like the best area for Democrats to succeed
Speaker 12: in compared to the presidential race, where Biden was trailing
Speaker 12: Trump for most of the cycle at the top of
Speaker 12: the ticket, and the Senate, which is where the map
Speaker 12: currently is very good for Republicans this cycle, and so
Speaker 12: even now, I think with Harris at the top of
Speaker 12: the ticket, Democrats would need to hold seats in Montana
Speaker 12: and Ohio, which are states that Trump is still very
Speaker 12: likely to win by single or double digits this year,
Speaker 12: and so the Senate I think remains difficult for Democrats
Speaker 12: for that reason, just because of the map, but the
Speaker 12: House is a lot more feasible at this point. You know,
Speaker 12: I saw him polling even before Biden's disastrous debate performance.
Speaker 12: He was a huge anchor on House Democrats, and you know,
Speaker 12: these a lot of these House candidates were overperforming Biden
Speaker 12: pretty significantly, but it's very difficult at the end of
Speaker 12: a day for a House candidate to separate themselves from
Speaker 12: the top of the ticket, as they're so tied to
Speaker 12: the national environment. You know, twenty twenty, we only saw
Speaker 12: sixteen congressional districts that voted one way for president and
Speaker 12: the other way for Congress, and so Biden could have
Speaker 12: made it incredibly difficult for Democrats to take control of
Speaker 12: the House. Now, with Harris at the top of the ticket,
Speaker 12: they're in a much stronger position, and you know, we
Speaker 12: still see control of the House to be close. You know,
Speaker 12: I think if you look at the races in our
Speaker 12: toss up column, you'll see that neither party has a
Speaker 12: clear edge, and it looks like it's going to come
Speaker 12: down to the two dozen or so races that we
Speaker 12: consider pure toss ups. But Democrats now have a much
Speaker 12: better shot at winning those toss races and gaining a majority.
Speaker 2: Well, and let's talk about where those tass up braces
Speaker 2: are actually concentrated, because we know a lot of them
Speaker 2: are in states like New York, for example, which is
Speaker 2: a safely blue state. When it comes to the presidential election,
Speaker 2: but not so when it comes to the many different
Speaker 2: districts that are in the Empire state. So how should
Speaker 2: we be thinking about that kind of dynamic era, and
Speaker 2: knowing that the presidential candidates themselves are focusing a lot
Speaker 2: of their time, energy, and frankly resources into the swing
Speaker 2: states that will decide the electoral college, We're not necessarily
Speaker 2: going to see Paris or Trump frequently visiting New York, right,
Speaker 2: And how does that affect the candidates that are running there?
Speaker 12: Yeah, so you're right, Kaylee. It's an interesting dynamic. The
Speaker 12: reason that you have a lot of competitive races and
Speaker 12: states like New York, California, Oregon, New Mexico is because
Speaker 12: of the fact that Republicans did pretty well in these
Speaker 12: states here in the midterm cycle. Whereas Democrats did surprisingly
Speaker 12: well in a lot of the swing states like Michigan
Speaker 12: and Pennsylvania, Republicans made pretty significant gains in states like
Speaker 12: California and New York. And so because of that, now
Speaker 12: Republicans have several vulnerable incumbents who are in these states,
Speaker 12: and because of the fact that you don't have the
Speaker 12: presidential candidates fighting the battlegrounds on that territory. I think
Speaker 12: that Republican incumbents are in a slightly better position to
Speaker 12: separate themselves from the top of the tickets in some ways.
Speaker 12: But at the end of the day, all of these
Speaker 12: races have become so nationalized. I think it's going to
Speaker 12: be difficult, whether you're a Republican member in California or
Speaker 12: Republican member in Michigan, to distance yourselves from the national dynamics.
Speaker 12: They'll certainly try to do so. And then on the
Speaker 12: other hand, most of the Democratic incumbents who are most
Speaker 12: vulnerable are actually in some of the more competitive states.
Speaker 12: So that includes Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, North Carolina. These are
Speaker 12: the states that have the most competitive districts that Democrats
Speaker 12: currently hold, and so you know, it's a weird geographic
Speaker 12: divide here. I think that it could have a marginal
Speaker 12: impact maybe on Republicans' ability to hold the House, which
Speaker 12: couldn't matter if control of the House is decided on
Speaker 12: the margins, which we think it will be. But I
Speaker 12: do think at the end of the day, it is
Speaker 12: very difficult as a member of the House and certainly
Speaker 12: as a House candidate, to separate yourselves from the national
Speaker 12: environment and from the top of the ticket.
Speaker 2: Well, I want to talk about the Senate as well,
Speaker 2: and I know you touched on it in your first answer, Aaron,
Speaker 2: this idea that it still is going to be incredibly
Speaker 2: difficult from a map perspective for Democrats to keep control
Speaker 2: of the Senate, given the vulnerability of Senator Shared Brown
Speaker 2: in Ohio and John Tester in Montana. But how do
Speaker 2: you think their odds have changed with now Harris at
Speaker 2: the top of the ticket. Do they have a greater
Speaker 2: likelihood of holding on to their seats or if there
Speaker 2: is any way for the Democrats to keep hold of
Speaker 2: the Senate, do you think it's likely going to require
Speaker 2: them flipping a seat that right now isn't actually seen,
Speaker 2: at least in the prevailing thought as easily flippable, like
Speaker 2: in Florida or Texas.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 12: So, I think it is true that Harris has had
Speaker 12: a positive effect on almost all of these down ballot
Speaker 12: races across the country because she has injected new energy
Speaker 12: into these Democratic base voters. And there was a question
Speaker 12: when Biden was at the top of the ticket about
Speaker 12: whether a lot of these Democratic voters would even turned out.
Speaker 12: It wasn't a question of whether they were going to
Speaker 12: vote for Trump, but it was a question of whether
Speaker 12: they were going to vote at all, which of course
Speaker 12: had a trickled out effect on the Senate races and
Speaker 12: the House races as well. So yes, I do think
Speaker 12: she has maybe given Democrats a better slightly better chance
Speaker 12: in Ohio and in Montana. But these are both still
Speaker 12: very difficult states for them, you know, I think they
Speaker 12: have They certainly have a better chance in Ohio. I
Speaker 12: would say we have both of these states rated as
Speaker 12: toss up races. But I think Ohio, just at a
Speaker 12: fundamental level, this is a state that Trump won by
Speaker 12: about eight points in twenty twenty and twenty sixteen, whereas
Speaker 12: Montana Trump won this state by digits in the teams
Speaker 12: for the last couple of cycles. So just in terms
Speaker 12: of the fundamentals of these states, Republicans have a slightly
Speaker 12: better chance in Montana. But then if you're looking at
Speaker 12: the rest of the map, you're right, they do have
Speaker 12: potential offensive opportunities in Texas and in Florida. Now you know,
Speaker 12: these are both states that we expect Trump to win.
Speaker 12: Trump only won them by single digits in twenty twenty,
Speaker 12: but by about mid single digits, and so I would
Speaker 12: be surprised if Harris managed to win either. I think
Speaker 12: they're going to be closer, and I think we're you know,
Speaker 12: in twenty twenty two, we saw Republicans do really well
Speaker 12: in Texas and Florida. I think it's going to be
Speaker 12: more similar to twenty twenty, but that still might not
Speaker 12: be enough for these Democratic Senate candidates to unseat Republican incumbents.
Speaker 12: So in Texas you have Ted Cruz, who was up
Speaker 12: for reelection, and obviously we all remember in twenty eighteen,
Speaker 12: the Democratic nominee there Better o' work only came a
Speaker 12: couple of points away from unseating him, but that was
Speaker 12: in a cycle that was uniquely good for Democrats. And
Speaker 12: we're going to have a much more a little much
Speaker 12: more even environment this time, and so that makes the
Speaker 12: Democratic nominee, Colin Alread's task a little bit harder. And
Speaker 12: then in Florida, here this is a state that used
Speaker 12: to be quite competitive at the federal level in presidential races,
Speaker 12: but has moved towards Republicans pretty dramatically over the last
Speaker 12: couple of cycles. So, you know, I think probably this
Speaker 12: is still a state that we're going to see Trump
Speaker 12: winning by single digits. I don't think we're going to
Speaker 12: see him carrying Florida by double digits, certainly, and especially
Speaker 12: now with Harris at the top of the ticket, but
Speaker 12: that is going to make it difficult for the Democratic
Speaker 12: nominee there to outperform Harris.
Speaker 2: All right, erin, and finally, before we let you go,
Speaker 2: this is some other news that I think took some
Speaker 2: of us a back today, but maybe won't be that
Speaker 2: surprising to you. I'm not sure Trump's transition team, according
Speaker 2: to the campaign, is going to be co chaired by
Speaker 2: two former Democrats, Robert F. Kennedy Junior, who of course
Speaker 2: just suspended his presidential campaign, and former Democratic Congresswoman Tolsi Gabber.
Speaker 2: Are you surprised by this or should we not actually
Speaker 2: be considering these people as former Democrats because they are
Speaker 2: so now far removed from where the party finds itself today.
Speaker 12: Yeah, it's a good question, you know. I think Tulci Gabbard,
Speaker 12: obviously she ran for the Democratic presidential nomination twenty twenty
Speaker 12: and used to be a Democratic congresswoman, but I think
Speaker 12: she has moved pretty consistently to the right over the
Speaker 12: past couple of years, and I'm not sure that her
Speaker 12: involvement with his campaign is going to have a significant impact, though,
Speaker 12: you know, it could have a marginal impact with undecided voters.
Speaker 12: I think we've seen the number of undecided voters has
Speaker 12: certainly shrunk since Harris got in the race. You know,
Speaker 12: before what we were seeing was that Trump was performing
Speaker 12: about steady, but Biden's numbers were dropping. Now we see
Speaker 12: that Harris has kind of consolidated Democratic support and Democratic
Speaker 12: leaning independent support, and so now the number of undecided
Speaker 12: voters who might vote for some of these third party
Speaker 12: candidates who are still on the ballot, that number has shrunk.
Speaker 12: So they're both both candidates are fighting over a pretty
Speaker 12: small group of voters at this point. So who knows.
Speaker 12: Maybe Gabbard and rfk's involvement in Trump's campaign could sway
Speaker 12: enough voters to make a key difference in the battleground states,
Speaker 12: but I don't think it's going to have ultimately a
Speaker 12: huge impact on the contours of this.
Speaker 4: Race, all right.
Speaker 2: Aaron Covey of the Cook Political Report, always great to
Speaker 2: get your analysis. Thank you so much, appreciate your insight
Speaker 2: into the down ballot races. We should be watching, and
Speaker 2: I would point out that we are still in the
Speaker 2: middle of primary season that will decide ultimately who the
Speaker 2: final general election candidates are in a number of these states,
Speaker 2: including next week after Labor Day, on September third, the
Speaker 2: Senate and House primaries take place in Massachusetts, and for
Speaker 2: our listeners in Massachusetts and all of New England here
Speaker 2: on Bloomberg Radio. Starting on September third, how convenient you
Speaker 2: can listen to Bloomberg Radio in and around Boston on
Speaker 2: our new signal nineth FM. It's your news source for
Speaker 2: business news from the financial center of New England. Of course,
Speaker 2: will on Balance of Power have all the politics news,
Speaker 2: including the results of those primaries cover for you as well. Again,
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Radio is moving to ninety two nine FM at
Speaker 2: noon on the day after Labor Day.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make
Speaker 1: sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find
Speaker 1: us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg dot com.