WEBVTT - Electoral Incentives

0:00:03.800 --> 0:00:06.760
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Bloomberg Opinion. I'm Vonnie Quinn. A week after

0:00:06.800 --> 0:00:08.760
<v Speaker 1>the mid terms. We're still waiting on some votes to

0:00:08.760 --> 0:00:11.600
<v Speaker 1>be counted, but the broad parameters are set and though

0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>Republicans likely did win a House majority, it will be

0:00:14.400 --> 0:00:17.119
<v Speaker 1>the smallest in ninety years. Joe Biden is also the

0:00:17.160 --> 0:00:19.800
<v Speaker 1>first Democratic president in nearly all that time to gain

0:00:19.920 --> 0:00:22.880
<v Speaker 1>governorships in a set of mid terms. I asked Bloomberg

0:00:22.960 --> 0:00:26.639
<v Speaker 1>Opinions Jonathan Bernstein to explain what happened and what happens next.

0:00:27.040 --> 0:00:28.800
<v Speaker 1>All right, Jonathan, Well, it's been a few days, so

0:00:28.920 --> 0:00:32.839
<v Speaker 1>you've been able to digest the recent events midterms. Obviously,

0:00:32.840 --> 0:00:35.199
<v Speaker 1>we're not fully decided yet. There's still a couple of

0:00:35.200 --> 0:00:38.000
<v Speaker 1>seats that are not fully counted, but we do know

0:00:38.040 --> 0:00:39.720
<v Speaker 1>the broad outlines of what we want to see in

0:00:39.720 --> 0:00:42.920
<v Speaker 1>the next Congress. What do you after a few days

0:00:42.920 --> 0:00:45.560
<v Speaker 1>of rumination is the most surprising thing about what happened

0:00:45.560 --> 0:00:47.879
<v Speaker 1>in the midterms? You know? I think that I'll go

0:00:47.920 --> 0:00:50.640
<v Speaker 1>along with the conventional wisdom. Democrats definitely did a little

0:00:50.640 --> 0:00:54.560
<v Speaker 1>bit better than I think reasonable expectations based on polling

0:00:54.680 --> 0:00:57.600
<v Speaker 1>and what the expert opinion was. I think they beat

0:00:57.840 --> 0:01:00.320
<v Speaker 1>some of the expectations. There's no question that there was

0:01:00.360 --> 0:01:03.400
<v Speaker 1>sort of some momentum that came out in the mainstream media.

0:01:03.840 --> 0:01:06.760
<v Speaker 1>Few outlets in particular sort of bought the Republican spin

0:01:07.160 --> 0:01:09.800
<v Speaker 1>that it was going to be a landslide. The polling

0:01:09.840 --> 0:01:11.440
<v Speaker 1>really never said it was going to be a landslide.

0:01:11.440 --> 0:01:14.240
<v Speaker 1>It said it should be a moderately good year for Republicans.

0:01:14.720 --> 0:01:16.560
<v Speaker 1>So I don't think that there was much that was

0:01:16.600 --> 0:01:18.479
<v Speaker 1>sort of a shocking surprise, but there was a lot

0:01:18.560 --> 0:01:21.120
<v Speaker 1>that was. It turns out that the ball bounced a

0:01:21.120 --> 0:01:24.319
<v Speaker 1>little bit the Democrats way in enough races and enough

0:01:24.640 --> 0:01:28.360
<v Speaker 1>states that it wound up being an unusually good year

0:01:28.480 --> 0:01:31.080
<v Speaker 1>for Democrats. I guess I would say there wasn't that

0:01:31.319 --> 0:01:34.080
<v Speaker 1>any huge shocker on election day, and then the returns

0:01:34.080 --> 0:01:36.240
<v Speaker 1>came in. If you look at the broad sweep of things,

0:01:36.720 --> 0:01:40.840
<v Speaker 1>if you look at what happens when there's a democratic president,

0:01:40.880 --> 0:01:43.920
<v Speaker 1>and in particular, unpopular democratic president in the White House,

0:01:44.200 --> 0:01:46.959
<v Speaker 1>then it is a big surprise that it was basically

0:01:47.000 --> 0:01:50.160
<v Speaker 1>a draw and that Republicans didn't pick up forty seats

0:01:50.160 --> 0:01:52.919
<v Speaker 1>in the House and you know, several seats in the Senate.

0:01:53.320 --> 0:01:56.520
<v Speaker 1>This was one of the very few elections. I think

0:01:56.560 --> 0:01:59.000
<v Speaker 1>there's been six or something the last hundred years where

0:01:59.040 --> 0:02:03.440
<v Speaker 1>the in party picked up seats and state legislatures. So

0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:06.280
<v Speaker 1>while overall it was sort of a you know, Democrats

0:02:06.360 --> 0:02:09.280
<v Speaker 1>will either pick up zero or one Senate seats, Republican

0:02:09.639 --> 0:02:13.080
<v Speaker 1>are picking up a handful of House seats, Democrats are

0:02:13.120 --> 0:02:16.560
<v Speaker 1>plus two and governors and plus a handful of state

0:02:16.600 --> 0:02:19.640
<v Speaker 1>legislative seats. But it's sort of a fifty fifty type

0:02:19.639 --> 0:02:22.720
<v Speaker 1>of election. But that in itself is over the course

0:02:22.720 --> 0:02:25.760
<v Speaker 1>of history, very surprising and any year where inflation has

0:02:25.760 --> 0:02:28.080
<v Speaker 1>been insane as well, so you would think that the

0:02:28.120 --> 0:02:31.679
<v Speaker 1>incumbent party wouldn't be benefiting from that. Is it fair

0:02:31.720 --> 0:02:33.400
<v Speaker 1>for the Democrats to do a lap of honor or

0:02:33.440 --> 0:02:35.959
<v Speaker 1>was this a little bit of luck? You know, that's

0:02:35.960 --> 0:02:39.679
<v Speaker 1>a good question. Sure, everybody deserves to take that was

0:02:39.720 --> 0:02:42.239
<v Speaker 1>when they win. I don't think it was really much

0:02:42.320 --> 0:02:47.000
<v Speaker 1>that Democrats did, especially governing Democrats. If you look at grassroots,

0:02:47.080 --> 0:02:50.520
<v Speaker 1>I think that there was a huge amount of enthusiasm,

0:02:50.560 --> 0:02:54.040
<v Speaker 1>again for the fourth cycle in a row, coming from women,

0:02:54.680 --> 0:02:58.240
<v Speaker 1>different demographic groups of women over the abortion issue. So

0:02:58.280 --> 0:03:00.000
<v Speaker 1>in a sense, it was Republicans shooting themselves in the

0:03:00.000 --> 0:03:02.359
<v Speaker 1>pot in some ways or conservatives, I should say yes,

0:03:02.440 --> 0:03:05.480
<v Speaker 1>I think that Republicans basically blew it rather than Democrats.

0:03:06.240 --> 0:03:09.680
<v Speaker 1>So two things. First of all, the presidence of Donald Trump,

0:03:10.000 --> 0:03:13.799
<v Speaker 1>a very unpopular former president who remains very much in

0:03:13.840 --> 0:03:17.080
<v Speaker 1>the public eye and keeps trying to put himself in

0:03:17.120 --> 0:03:21.679
<v Speaker 1>the political space. That probably changed things a little bit,

0:03:21.960 --> 0:03:24.359
<v Speaker 1>which is interesting because it wasn't clear whether it would

0:03:24.400 --> 0:03:26.800
<v Speaker 1>be a positive or negative in the early days, at

0:03:26.880 --> 0:03:29.160
<v Speaker 1>least of the campaign, and even in October. I think

0:03:29.160 --> 0:03:31.360
<v Speaker 1>all along it looked like to the extent that he

0:03:31.400 --> 0:03:33.720
<v Speaker 1>was a major figure, it was a negative. You know.

0:03:33.760 --> 0:03:37.320
<v Speaker 1>The thing is that normally people think, ah, the president,

0:03:37.480 --> 0:03:40.360
<v Speaker 1>he's the most important person right now, let's balance him

0:03:40.360 --> 0:03:43.040
<v Speaker 1>out some or if things are going badly, blame the president.

0:03:43.640 --> 0:03:47.080
<v Speaker 1>But with the former president being a very important figure

0:03:47.080 --> 0:03:51.080
<v Speaker 1>in politics to this day, people could blame Trump very easily,

0:03:51.160 --> 0:03:54.000
<v Speaker 1>even though he's not around as a governing official. The

0:03:54.040 --> 0:03:56.600
<v Speaker 1>other thing is that Trump, and this is only partially

0:03:56.640 --> 0:03:59.120
<v Speaker 1>Trump's fault, but he's getting blamed for it. A lot

0:03:59.160 --> 0:04:02.000
<v Speaker 1>within Republicans are the influence on the candidates themselves. There

0:04:02.040 --> 0:04:05.480
<v Speaker 1>were a whole lot of terrible candidates chosen by Republicans

0:04:05.480 --> 0:04:08.600
<v Speaker 1>in this cycle, some of them because Trump intervened in

0:04:08.640 --> 0:04:12.360
<v Speaker 1>primaries a lot, because those candidates are just very popular

0:04:12.400 --> 0:04:16.680
<v Speaker 1>among Republicans, in Republican line media, among Republican voters who

0:04:16.720 --> 0:04:20.000
<v Speaker 1>didn't see going in any penalty to be faced. And

0:04:20.040 --> 0:04:21.520
<v Speaker 1>I think some of that may have to do with

0:04:21.560 --> 0:04:25.159
<v Speaker 1>Trump and his electoral history. That if they don't see

0:04:25.160 --> 0:04:28.120
<v Speaker 1>Trump as a loser for his various things that made

0:04:28.200 --> 0:04:30.320
<v Speaker 1>him very unpopular, as he was a loser, he is

0:04:30.360 --> 0:04:33.320
<v Speaker 1>a loser. He was never popular as president. He was

0:04:33.360 --> 0:04:36.440
<v Speaker 1>always unusually unpopular, and then even more so if you

0:04:36.520 --> 0:04:38.680
<v Speaker 1>take into factors, like you know that the economy was

0:04:38.720 --> 0:04:40.960
<v Speaker 1>generally very good for his first three years in office.

0:04:41.560 --> 0:04:44.000
<v Speaker 1>So the Republicans wound up with all these terrible candidates

0:04:44.000 --> 0:04:47.520
<v Speaker 1>and that certainly cost them. Do the make Republicans moderate

0:04:47.520 --> 0:04:49.960
<v Speaker 1>their views a little bit now, given what we've seen

0:04:50.000 --> 0:04:52.120
<v Speaker 1>and given how leadership is going to change, even though

0:04:52.120 --> 0:04:55.280
<v Speaker 1>there will obviously be some extreme candidates and some fringe candidates. Still,

0:04:55.600 --> 0:04:58.080
<v Speaker 1>I don't think those people moderate their views because I

0:04:58.080 --> 0:05:01.600
<v Speaker 1>think what they're up to is in views as much

0:05:01.640 --> 0:05:05.479
<v Speaker 1>as it is confrontation. And what does happen is some

0:05:05.520 --> 0:05:08.520
<v Speaker 1>of them go away because they lost their elections. Um, so,

0:05:08.920 --> 0:05:12.599
<v Speaker 1>to the extent that we have fewer of those extremists

0:05:12.640 --> 0:05:16.280
<v Speaker 1>in the House, in the Senate, as governors, as secretaries

0:05:16.279 --> 0:05:19.039
<v Speaker 1>of state of the various states, that does make a difference,

0:05:19.120 --> 0:05:21.080
<v Speaker 1>But there still are quite a lot and there still

0:05:21.160 --> 0:05:23.479
<v Speaker 1>are quite a lot of people who in the House,

0:05:23.480 --> 0:05:26.960
<v Speaker 1>for example, voted to overturn the election, and you know,

0:05:27.040 --> 0:05:30.480
<v Speaker 1>and then new people who mostly subscribe to that kind

0:05:30.520 --> 0:05:34.320
<v Speaker 1>of thinking, and so, um, you know, do they moderate?

0:05:34.440 --> 0:05:37.080
<v Speaker 1>I I don't see what in the party there is

0:05:37.120 --> 0:05:39.960
<v Speaker 1>to push them in that direction. Well, just the idea

0:05:40.040 --> 0:05:43.080
<v Speaker 1>that perhaps their seat won't be absolutely guaranteed next time

0:05:43.120 --> 0:05:44.960
<v Speaker 1>because the voters are seeing which way the wind is

0:05:44.960 --> 0:05:47.960
<v Speaker 1>blowing conservative voters. I mean, yeah, I don't see that

0:05:48.120 --> 0:05:50.840
<v Speaker 1>as a likely outcome. It's possible it will be. There

0:05:50.839 --> 0:05:54.320
<v Speaker 1>are certainly people in the Republican Party who believe now

0:05:54.520 --> 0:05:58.520
<v Speaker 1>if they didn't before, that extremism is an electoral minus

0:05:58.520 --> 0:06:01.559
<v Speaker 1>in general elections. But the problem with the Republican Party

0:06:01.680 --> 0:06:04.440
<v Speaker 1>is that the normal incentive the political parties always have

0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:07.640
<v Speaker 1>to try to win elections above all else has been weakened,

0:06:07.800 --> 0:06:10.880
<v Speaker 1>in part because Republican align media is such a powerful

0:06:11.040 --> 0:06:14.360
<v Speaker 1>force within the party and the Republican aligned media has

0:06:14.880 --> 0:06:20.400
<v Speaker 1>much weaker incentives for electoral victory than do campaign professionals,

0:06:20.440 --> 0:06:25.159
<v Speaker 1>governing professionals, politicians themselves, and that it's such an important

0:06:25.160 --> 0:06:28.320
<v Speaker 1>point the incentives are so different. Well, we already have

0:06:28.600 --> 0:06:32.160
<v Speaker 1>Andy Biggs, Conservative from Arizona, telling the GOP that he's

0:06:32.160 --> 0:06:36.040
<v Speaker 1>planning to challenge Kevin McCarthy. We spoke already about Kevin

0:06:36.080 --> 0:06:37.960
<v Speaker 1>McCarthy and how you know he might have to negotiate,

0:06:37.960 --> 0:06:40.200
<v Speaker 1>But it's not clear what promises he can give people

0:06:40.279 --> 0:06:43.159
<v Speaker 1>or what he can offer them. Does anything come to mind, No,

0:06:43.880 --> 0:06:47.640
<v Speaker 1>m Kevin McCarthy is let's assume that he winds up

0:06:47.680 --> 0:06:51.400
<v Speaker 1>having a four seat majority to nineteen to two fifteen.

0:06:51.440 --> 0:06:54.400
<v Speaker 1>There's still some possibilities around that. The thing is that

0:06:54.480 --> 0:06:57.080
<v Speaker 1>in normal times, all you have to do to become

0:06:57.160 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 1>speaker is to win the vote of your caucus. Yeah,

0:07:00.040 --> 0:07:03.760
<v Speaker 1>a majority of your caucus, and then everybody loyally supports

0:07:03.800 --> 0:07:06.479
<v Speaker 1>that person when you have the floor vote. The formal

0:07:06.839 --> 0:07:10.440
<v Speaker 1>form for speaker where McCarthy will be opposed, if it's him,

0:07:10.640 --> 0:07:13.520
<v Speaker 1>will be opposing either Nancy Pelosi or whoever the Democrats

0:07:14.040 --> 0:07:18.480
<v Speaker 1>leader is. Republicans to some extent. Democrats, but especially Republicans,

0:07:18.480 --> 0:07:22.080
<v Speaker 1>have challenged that norm over the last oh seven eight

0:07:22.160 --> 0:07:25.680
<v Speaker 1>nine congresses already, and they say, well, we can use

0:07:26.320 --> 0:07:29.520
<v Speaker 1>this procedural tick, which Mitchell Collin doesn't have to worry

0:07:29.520 --> 0:07:31.400
<v Speaker 1>about because there is no vote like that in the Senate,

0:07:31.840 --> 0:07:34.120
<v Speaker 1>only a vote like that for one office, which is

0:07:34.160 --> 0:07:36.720
<v Speaker 1>Speaker of the House. We can use that to hold

0:07:36.760 --> 0:07:41.680
<v Speaker 1>the party hostage. And if it's a majority, if five

0:07:41.680 --> 0:07:44.840
<v Speaker 1>of us vote for King Kong or Donald Trump or

0:07:45.200 --> 0:07:48.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, whoever to be speaker, then nobody will have

0:07:48.120 --> 0:07:51.560
<v Speaker 1>a majority and we can use that. Now, what they

0:07:51.600 --> 0:07:54.520
<v Speaker 1>can use it for, Well, they're not policy demanders. We're

0:07:54.520 --> 0:07:56.840
<v Speaker 1>talking about people like Marjorite Heller Green here, Jim Jordan's

0:07:56.880 --> 0:07:59.600
<v Speaker 1>that's right. What they want is to create controversy. That's

0:07:59.640 --> 0:08:03.240
<v Speaker 1>their you know, as as members of the House, is

0:08:03.280 --> 0:08:05.880
<v Speaker 1>to get their appearances on Fox News and to be

0:08:05.920 --> 0:08:12.200
<v Speaker 1>on conservative talk radio. And so Kevin McCarthy can't give that, Yeah, exactly. Um,

0:08:12.240 --> 0:08:15.480
<v Speaker 1>So there's nothing to stop them from doing it, and

0:08:15.600 --> 0:08:18.800
<v Speaker 1>other than the realization that oh, we'll have chaos if

0:08:18.840 --> 0:08:21.880
<v Speaker 1>we do that, but they may not mind having some chaos.

0:08:21.920 --> 0:08:24.480
<v Speaker 1>So who would be the unifier in the Republican Party,

0:08:24.520 --> 0:08:27.120
<v Speaker 1>then there isn't one. There isn't one. The bottom line

0:08:27.160 --> 0:08:30.320
<v Speaker 1>is there is no unifier because the people who are

0:08:30.360 --> 0:08:34.960
<v Speaker 1>revolting are not looking for unity. More next on Bloomberg Opinion,

0:08:35.000 --> 0:08:38.040
<v Speaker 1>I'm Vonnie Quinn. Is there anybody else that's emerging as

0:08:38.080 --> 0:08:41.040
<v Speaker 1>some kind of a maybe not a unifying figure, but

0:08:41.400 --> 0:08:43.760
<v Speaker 1>even a polarizing figure, even somebody that would, you know,

0:08:44.040 --> 0:08:47.000
<v Speaker 1>lead the chaos? You have to go through the House

0:08:47.040 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 1>Caucus with a lot more intimate detail and knowledge than

0:08:50.200 --> 0:08:52.240
<v Speaker 1>I have, But I don't see it. Um. You know,

0:08:52.400 --> 0:08:54.599
<v Speaker 1>when John Bayner, who is the last good leader of

0:08:54.600 --> 0:08:57.920
<v Speaker 1>the Republicans had when he resigned, McCarthy wanted the job,

0:08:57.960 --> 0:09:01.160
<v Speaker 1>didn't have the votes they recruit did Paul Ryan because

0:09:01.160 --> 0:09:03.400
<v Speaker 1>he was he was the one who had the respect

0:09:03.480 --> 0:09:07.920
<v Speaker 1>of different factions within the party. They don't have that now.

0:09:08.679 --> 0:09:11.679
<v Speaker 1>There's no replacement for Ryan, who turned out to be

0:09:11.760 --> 0:09:16.520
<v Speaker 1>terrible anyway. But you know, at least they all sort

0:09:16.520 --> 0:09:18.800
<v Speaker 1>of thought he could do the job. I don't so

0:09:18.880 --> 0:09:21.960
<v Speaker 1>the best my knowledgeism there are members who are well liked.

0:09:21.960 --> 0:09:24.120
<v Speaker 1>There's always members who are well liked, and so they

0:09:24.160 --> 0:09:27.920
<v Speaker 1>may eventually find that that works for them. But in

0:09:28.000 --> 0:09:30.120
<v Speaker 1>terms of someone who has liked and respected that can

0:09:30.160 --> 0:09:32.679
<v Speaker 1>actually lead them. If there's somebody like that, it has

0:09:32.720 --> 0:09:35.600
<v Speaker 1>not been reported who in the party is going to

0:09:35.640 --> 0:09:38.920
<v Speaker 1>decide who should be the candidate for president. There's a

0:09:38.920 --> 0:09:43.000
<v Speaker 1>lot of controversy within political science and within the world

0:09:43.040 --> 0:09:46.040
<v Speaker 1>really about who has the power of these things. What

0:09:46.240 --> 0:09:48.920
<v Speaker 1>I always say and my reading of it is it's

0:09:49.200 --> 0:09:52.920
<v Speaker 1>party actors who make the decision, and that means it's

0:09:52.920 --> 0:09:56.920
<v Speaker 1>a huge number of people, thousands of people of politicians

0:09:57.120 --> 0:10:03.319
<v Speaker 1>and campaign and governing professionals and formal party officials and staff,

0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:07.559
<v Speaker 1>party aligned interest groups, party aligned media, all of whom

0:10:07.840 --> 0:10:10.840
<v Speaker 1>have their candidate, have their interests that they're pushing for

0:10:11.080 --> 0:10:14.800
<v Speaker 1>within the process. Because what matters almost more than who

0:10:14.840 --> 0:10:17.600
<v Speaker 1>the candidate is is which interests in which groups within

0:10:17.640 --> 0:10:20.800
<v Speaker 1>the party are represented by that candidate, and how that

0:10:20.840 --> 0:10:23.960
<v Speaker 1>the whole process goes on. Within the Republican Party. It

0:10:24.000 --> 0:10:27.680
<v Speaker 1>seems to me that the biggest players are Republican aligned

0:10:27.679 --> 0:10:29.760
<v Speaker 1>media talk show hosts or the people who make the

0:10:29.760 --> 0:10:33.520
<v Speaker 1>decisions at the Fox shows, Fox News, Fox News imitators.

0:10:33.920 --> 0:10:36.040
<v Speaker 1>They have a huge amount of clout within the party,

0:10:36.160 --> 0:10:38.040
<v Speaker 1>so that it would seem like Rhanda Santis does have

0:10:38.080 --> 0:10:40.520
<v Speaker 1>an actual shot at the next presidency. Now, if you

0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:43.640
<v Speaker 1>were on his team, and I'm suggesting you ever would be,

0:10:43.880 --> 0:10:46.600
<v Speaker 1>but put yourself in that position as team exactly if

0:10:46.640 --> 0:10:49.120
<v Speaker 1>you had to get out ahead of Marco Rubio or

0:10:49.240 --> 0:10:51.120
<v Speaker 1>Ted Cruz or any any of the others that might

0:10:51.160 --> 0:10:53.120
<v Speaker 1>emerge or might jump into the fray, who would you

0:10:53.160 --> 0:10:55.520
<v Speaker 1>be trying to appeal to beyond the Republican media, who

0:10:55.640 --> 0:10:58.319
<v Speaker 1>obviously already has appealed to. Yeah, And the problem is

0:10:58.360 --> 0:11:00.000
<v Speaker 1>that we don't know if those people will still be

0:11:00.080 --> 0:11:03.640
<v Speaker 1>supporting him six months in the future, levels fifteen months

0:11:03.679 --> 0:11:06.760
<v Speaker 1>in the future when Iowa and New Hampshire and South

0:11:06.760 --> 0:11:09.960
<v Speaker 1>Carolina vote. So, you know, you try to build up

0:11:10.000 --> 0:11:13.680
<v Speaker 1>support within the party. Then you try to fashion positions

0:11:13.760 --> 0:11:18.120
<v Speaker 1>and attitudes that are popular. You try to appeal to

0:11:18.160 --> 0:11:22.040
<v Speaker 1>all those people, you know, activist donors. Obviously, people with

0:11:22.120 --> 0:11:25.079
<v Speaker 1>money are important, But people who can you know, snab

0:11:25.120 --> 0:11:27.240
<v Speaker 1>their fingers and have a thousand people come to Iowa

0:11:27.280 --> 0:11:29.520
<v Speaker 1>to walk door to door for you are important too.

0:11:30.000 --> 0:11:32.439
<v Speaker 1>Does he have that kind of general liability to the

0:11:32.480 --> 0:11:34.040
<v Speaker 1>Only reason I'm talking about him is because you know,

0:11:34.040 --> 0:11:36.640
<v Speaker 1>he's sort of on everybody's lips right now. But it doesn't,

0:11:36.679 --> 0:11:38.240
<v Speaker 1>like you said, it doesn't mean that somebody else won't

0:11:38.280 --> 0:11:40.800
<v Speaker 1>to merge or that Ted Cuz won't suddenly grab the

0:11:40.800 --> 0:11:43.120
<v Speaker 1>spotlight again exactly. And you know, we have there's a

0:11:43.120 --> 0:11:46.240
<v Speaker 1>whole history of this, and the political scientists John Sides

0:11:46.280 --> 0:11:51.120
<v Speaker 1>and his co authors talk about a cycle of discovery, scrutiny,

0:11:51.160 --> 0:11:54.640
<v Speaker 1>decline where somebody all of a sudden becomes the candidate

0:11:54.679 --> 0:11:58.000
<v Speaker 1>at the moment and everybody's all excited about that person

0:11:57.320 --> 0:12:03.520
<v Speaker 1>and then yes, you know, Rudy Giuliani, Scott Walker, Ben

0:12:03.559 --> 0:12:08.400
<v Speaker 1>Carson Um, you know, and then after a while that

0:12:08.440 --> 0:12:10.920
<v Speaker 1>part wears off, and then they start to look at

0:12:10.960 --> 0:12:13.839
<v Speaker 1>and they discover stuff that's not so flattering about that person,

0:12:13.880 --> 0:12:16.280
<v Speaker 1>and that's what they run with. And then you know,

0:12:16.520 --> 0:12:20.760
<v Speaker 1>support sometimes plateaus, sometimes crashes. And do we know whether

0:12:20.800 --> 0:12:22.439
<v Speaker 1>that will have with the Santas. We have no idea.

0:12:22.480 --> 0:12:24.920
<v Speaker 1>And I you know a lot of people will like

0:12:24.960 --> 0:12:27.320
<v Speaker 1>watch them on TV. Oh does that person have the appeal?

0:12:27.480 --> 0:12:30.640
<v Speaker 1>I think it's very very difficult to know. I think

0:12:30.679 --> 0:12:33.960
<v Speaker 1>that especially with you know, we've seen a lot of

0:12:34.000 --> 0:12:36.760
<v Speaker 1>candidates who didn't appear to be that strong on television

0:12:36.800 --> 0:12:39.600
<v Speaker 1>but we're good enough person to person because even though

0:12:39.600 --> 0:12:42.400
<v Speaker 1>it's it's thousands and thousands of people, it's sort of

0:12:42.400 --> 0:12:45.199
<v Speaker 1>a discreet universe, it is. And also it's not clear

0:12:45.240 --> 0:12:46.880
<v Speaker 1>that he has a national profile here is I mean,

0:12:47.280 --> 0:12:50.079
<v Speaker 1>he's more than anyone right now? Yeah, exactly, He's just

0:12:50.160 --> 0:12:52.880
<v Speaker 1>building one up and we'll see how it plays over time.

0:12:52.880 --> 0:12:55.400
<v Speaker 1>And there's it's just not in my view, it's not

0:12:55.520 --> 0:12:58.880
<v Speaker 1>especially predictable. What we what will start to be meaningful

0:12:59.000 --> 0:13:03.600
<v Speaker 1>is if he gets real support, permanent support, permanent as

0:13:03.600 --> 0:13:06.240
<v Speaker 1>permanent as anything is in politics. If he gets endorsements,

0:13:06.720 --> 0:13:10.360
<v Speaker 1>if he gets commitments from donors, if those sorts of things,

0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:13.480
<v Speaker 1>those tend to be good markers that the candidate is

0:13:13.520 --> 0:13:15.360
<v Speaker 1>playing well and not just of the moment. But he

0:13:15.400 --> 0:13:17.480
<v Speaker 1>definitely has the backing of some will treaters like Ken

0:13:17.480 --> 0:13:19.880
<v Speaker 1>Griffin and people like that right now, So that's always helpful.

0:13:20.520 --> 0:13:22.360
<v Speaker 1>I don't ever want to write him off, as you've

0:13:22.360 --> 0:13:24.480
<v Speaker 1>said in the past, But is Trump done or when

0:13:24.520 --> 0:13:26.200
<v Speaker 1>will we know if he is? And I don't mean

0:13:26.440 --> 0:13:28.400
<v Speaker 1>done in the sense that he might run or not run,

0:13:28.440 --> 0:13:30.600
<v Speaker 1>I just mean is his influence not what he used

0:13:30.640 --> 0:13:34.000
<v Speaker 1>to be, you know, I wouldn't want to make any guesses. Um,

0:13:34.160 --> 0:13:36.240
<v Speaker 1>what I read as as far as I see the pundits,

0:13:36.240 --> 0:13:38.800
<v Speaker 1>and there's there's sort of a group of pundits who are, oh,

0:13:38.880 --> 0:13:41.040
<v Speaker 1>don't pay any attention to anything that's going on. Trump

0:13:41.360 --> 0:13:43.600
<v Speaker 1>owns the party and when he snaps his fingers, eventually

0:13:43.679 --> 0:13:46.160
<v Speaker 1>everybody will come back to him. And then there's another

0:13:46.200 --> 0:13:49.520
<v Speaker 1>set that think he's finished. And I just don't think

0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:52.080
<v Speaker 1>we know. I think that this stuff plays out over time.

0:13:52.360 --> 0:13:55.160
<v Speaker 1>And what I would say is it's very clear that

0:13:55.200 --> 0:13:59.719
<v Speaker 1>there are a lot of Republican Party actors, especially politicians,

0:14:00.000 --> 0:14:03.040
<v Speaker 1>who have no use for him, who understand how he's

0:14:03.080 --> 0:14:05.040
<v Speaker 1>hurt the party and who would love to have him

0:14:05.040 --> 0:14:08.760
<v Speaker 1>go away. Whether that will be enough to prevent him

0:14:08.800 --> 0:14:11.360
<v Speaker 1>from being the nominee, I don't know whether those people

0:14:11.360 --> 0:14:14.440
<v Speaker 1>will fight hard against him. I don't know whether they're

0:14:14.440 --> 0:14:17.440
<v Speaker 1>willing to compromise on another candidate in order to stop him.

0:14:17.480 --> 0:14:20.240
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. Well, Also, people's wings have been clipped

0:14:20.400 --> 0:14:22.920
<v Speaker 1>January six, and the hearings and so on has to

0:14:22.960 --> 0:14:26.240
<v Speaker 1>have clipped some of the fans wings. Um, I wouldn't

0:14:26.240 --> 0:14:29.400
<v Speaker 1>worry as much about at the sort of voter level.

0:14:29.640 --> 0:14:31.440
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to say people automatically do whatever the

0:14:31.480 --> 0:14:34.080
<v Speaker 1>media says, because it's not quite that simple. But I

0:14:34.160 --> 0:14:38.240
<v Speaker 1>do think that if Fox News reports favorably about Trump,

0:14:38.800 --> 0:14:41.840
<v Speaker 1>most Republican voters are not going to care about any

0:14:41.880 --> 0:14:46.040
<v Speaker 1>of that stuff. And if Fox News starts ignoring him,

0:14:46.320 --> 0:14:48.880
<v Speaker 1>then you're going to find more and more voters going

0:14:48.920 --> 0:14:51.320
<v Speaker 1>to the candidates that they pay favorable attention to. So

0:14:51.440 --> 0:14:53.640
<v Speaker 1>you're saying that there's a scenario in which Trump could

0:14:53.640 --> 0:14:56.280
<v Speaker 1>get popular again and could whip up crowds just like

0:14:56.320 --> 0:14:58.040
<v Speaker 1>he was able to do in the past. Oh yeah,

0:14:58.120 --> 0:15:00.640
<v Speaker 1>that's very plausible to me. But hate to be the

0:15:00.640 --> 0:15:02.880
<v Speaker 1>person saying I don't know what's gonna happen. But in fact,

0:15:02.920 --> 0:15:05.120
<v Speaker 1>I don't know what's gonna happen. I don't think anybody

0:15:05.160 --> 0:15:08.280
<v Speaker 1>anybody who acts completely convinced that they know what's going

0:15:08.320 --> 0:15:11.880
<v Speaker 1>to happen in the presidential nomination battle that's still fifteen

0:15:11.920 --> 0:15:14.600
<v Speaker 1>months away or thirteen months away, whatever it is, and

0:15:14.680 --> 0:15:18.720
<v Speaker 1>that there's no consensus among party actors. You know, we

0:15:18.800 --> 0:15:23.280
<v Speaker 1>knew Hillary Clinton was going to win in UM because

0:15:23.720 --> 0:15:26.880
<v Speaker 1>everybody in the Democratic Party had already endorsed her at

0:15:26.880 --> 0:15:31.000
<v Speaker 1>this stage UM, and even so she had to fend

0:15:31.000 --> 0:15:33.920
<v Speaker 1>off a pretty serious challenge from Bernie Sandar. She was

0:15:33.960 --> 0:15:35.840
<v Speaker 1>never in that much trouble at that time, we knew.

0:15:36.120 --> 0:15:38.600
<v Speaker 1>But any time that we don't have that kind of

0:15:39.000 --> 0:15:42.640
<v Speaker 1>consensus that we had, say around George W. Bush when

0:15:42.640 --> 0:15:45.840
<v Speaker 1>he first ran, we don't know. It just takes time

0:15:45.960 --> 0:15:47.960
<v Speaker 1>for the stuff to shake out. Is Biden doing the

0:15:48.040 --> 0:15:50.320
<v Speaker 1>right thing he said he'd announced, but in the new year,

0:15:50.400 --> 0:15:52.960
<v Speaker 1>after the new year sometime, Yeah, I do think that

0:15:53.000 --> 0:15:57.560
<v Speaker 1>he probably the happy impression that most Democrats have about

0:15:57.600 --> 0:16:00.320
<v Speaker 1>the elections. Yeah it wasn't the democratic landslide, you know,

0:16:00.440 --> 0:16:04.680
<v Speaker 1>but but that no disasters happened. I think probably bought

0:16:04.760 --> 0:16:06.840
<v Speaker 1>him even more time than he would have had anyway.

0:16:06.880 --> 0:16:09.760
<v Speaker 1>But yeah, I think he needs to decide sometime in

0:16:09.800 --> 0:16:13.120
<v Speaker 1>the first several months of the year in order to

0:16:13.200 --> 0:16:15.640
<v Speaker 1>give the party time to react if he chooses not

0:16:15.720 --> 0:16:18.480
<v Speaker 1>to run. If he does choose to run, as long

0:16:18.520 --> 0:16:21.200
<v Speaker 1>as he can maintain around the level that he's at now,

0:16:21.200 --> 0:16:26.520
<v Speaker 1>he's around approval, I think that he may yet a

0:16:26.560 --> 0:16:29.200
<v Speaker 1>minor challenge, but nothing too serious, and the data may

0:16:29.240 --> 0:16:31.400
<v Speaker 1>actually work out for him because we're not quite sure

0:16:31.400 --> 0:16:33.600
<v Speaker 1>about a recession yet, but it looks like inflation is

0:16:33.600 --> 0:16:36.760
<v Speaker 1>coming down. So if inflation comes down, and if we

0:16:36.800 --> 0:16:39.960
<v Speaker 1>don't have a recession, then I would expect Biden we

0:16:39.960 --> 0:16:42.040
<v Speaker 1>don't go to war or anything like that. I would

0:16:42.120 --> 0:16:46.240
<v Speaker 1>expect if economic news is good, no other particularly bad news,

0:16:46.760 --> 0:16:51.160
<v Speaker 1>one would expect that Biden's approval rating will gradually recover,

0:16:51.560 --> 0:16:55.120
<v Speaker 1>and he will a year from now be certainly popular

0:16:55.200 --> 0:16:58.840
<v Speaker 1>enough the Democrats would rather live with him than get

0:16:58.840 --> 0:17:01.160
<v Speaker 1>into the mess of a of an domination battle, if

0:17:01.200 --> 0:17:02.880
<v Speaker 1>that's what he wants. I think it has a lot

0:17:02.960 --> 0:17:05.720
<v Speaker 1>to do with what his health actually is, you know.

0:17:05.760 --> 0:17:07.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, there's a lot of crazy stuff about his health.

0:17:07.840 --> 0:17:11.360
<v Speaker 1>But he's not young, and and we don't know how

0:17:11.359 --> 0:17:14.200
<v Speaker 1>it feels to be an eighty year old president. Yes,

0:17:15.119 --> 0:17:17.600
<v Speaker 1>and you know he's gonna have to make that decision

0:17:18.080 --> 0:17:21.479
<v Speaker 1>as long as he's not any less popular in is now.

0:17:21.520 --> 0:17:24.000
<v Speaker 1>If he gets truly unpopular, then the party will start

0:17:24.040 --> 0:17:26.040
<v Speaker 1>making it for him. But as long as he is,

0:17:27.440 --> 0:17:29.760
<v Speaker 1>and certainly if he becomes a little more popular than

0:17:29.760 --> 0:17:33.080
<v Speaker 1>this or less unpopular, I should say it's his decision

0:17:33.280 --> 0:17:36.760
<v Speaker 1>and nobody can get into his head for that. Bloomberg Opinions.

0:17:36.840 --> 0:17:40.280
<v Speaker 1>Jonathan Bernstein, Bloomberg opinion airs every weekend on Bloomberg Radio

0:17:40.320 --> 0:17:43.040
<v Speaker 1>and as a podcast every week on Apple, Spotify, or

0:17:43.080 --> 0:17:46.520
<v Speaker 1>your favorite podcast platform. Do send us your opinions too.

0:17:46.760 --> 0:17:49.919
<v Speaker 1>I'm at Quinn at Bloomberg dot net. We're produced by

0:17:50.040 --> 0:17:51.960
<v Speaker 1>Eric mollow This is more than the