WEBVTT - Are Markets Facing a Looming Correction? 0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:06.760 Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. 0:00:11.960 --> 0:00:15.560 This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene along 0:00:15.600 --> 0:00:18.960 with Paul Sweeney. Join us each day for insight from 0:00:18.960 --> 0:00:23.160 the best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. You 0:00:23.160 --> 0:00:26.520 can also watch the show live on YouTube. Visit the 0:00:26.520 --> 0:00:31.280 Bloomberg Podcast channel on YouTube to see the show weekday 0:00:31.280 --> 0:00:34.320 mornings from seven to ten am Eastern from our global 0:00:34.360 --> 0:00:39.000 headquarters in New York City. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, 0:00:39.360 --> 0:00:42.920 or anywhere else you listen, and always I'm Bloomberg Radio, 0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:46.720 the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App. We have 0:00:46.800 --> 0:00:50.160 the right guy at the right time on a five 0:00:50.200 --> 0:00:55.280 percent nominal GDP ending June thirty. Comedy Stuart Kaiser, I 0:00:55.320 --> 0:00:57.000 got goosebumps right now. 0:00:57.400 --> 0:01:00.720 How you were out two years ago saying it will 0:01:00.760 --> 0:01:05.319 be okay and as I've always said, corporations will adjust 0:01:05.720 --> 0:01:06.640 in your mind. 0:01:06.880 --> 0:01:11.160 Away from Andrew Hollandhorst and Veronica Clark, Victoria Clark, are 0:01:11.200 --> 0:01:13.000 you modeling a slowdown? 0:01:13.720 --> 0:01:15.200 You know, we're we're a little more worried about it 0:01:15.240 --> 0:01:17.120 than we have been probably in the last eighteen months. 0:01:17.160 --> 0:01:20.160 I would say, you know, Veronica and Andrew definitely have 0:01:20.319 --> 0:01:22.479 a recession kind of later this year. We have seen 0:01:22.520 --> 0:01:24.319 some I think shots across the bow and the weak 0:01:24.400 --> 0:01:27.080 data perspective, but as you mentioned, GDP strong this morning 0:01:27.240 --> 0:01:29.720 claims are up to two hundred and thirty eight thousand, 0:01:30.000 --> 0:01:33.440 So like in our view, the macro backdrop is positive 0:01:33.480 --> 0:01:36.480 for equities. You've got solid jobs growth, you've got inflation 0:01:36.640 --> 0:01:38.679 using your blow consensus, you've got a FED that wants 0:01:38.720 --> 0:01:40.160 to cut, So that to us says you want to 0:01:40.240 --> 0:01:41.240 keep running long equity, right. 0:01:41.360 --> 0:01:45.280 Gina Martin Adam's parses down the income statement. She sees solidity. 0:01:45.800 --> 0:01:49.040 She's worried about revenue shortfall. If I have a five 0:01:49.120 --> 0:01:52.720 percent Q two nominal GDP, how do I have a 0:01:52.760 --> 0:01:53.760 revenue shortfall? 0:01:54.280 --> 0:01:57.160 You know? Probably probably unlikely. I think that the biggest 0:01:57.200 --> 0:01:59.120 race in the back half to me would be even 0:01:59.160 --> 0:02:01.840 though five percent high from a nominal perspective, compared to 0:02:01.880 --> 0:02:03.880 what we had a year or two ago, that nominal 0:02:03.960 --> 0:02:05.680 number is lower, And I think the question is in 0:02:05.720 --> 0:02:08.919 a slowly nominal environment, do we see downward pressure on margins? 0:02:09.320 --> 0:02:11.760 But look big picture, I think the earnings outlooks looks 0:02:11.760 --> 0:02:14.000 pretty strong. Twelve month forward EPs is like two hundred 0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:16.880 and sixty bucks, which is a very big number. So look, 0:02:16.960 --> 0:02:19.760 I think the earnings outlook is still pretty solid. The 0:02:19.880 --> 0:02:23.200 challenge is that the expectations around that earnings outlook are 0:02:23.240 --> 0:02:26.119 quite high. And if you look at this quarter to date, 0:02:26.240 --> 0:02:28.760 forty six percent of companies have traded up on earnings. 0:02:29.280 --> 0:02:31.760 Historically that's like fifty two So less than half of 0:02:31.800 --> 0:02:34.000 companies are trading high around the earnings prints, I think, 0:02:34.000 --> 0:02:36.080 which tells you how high the bar is this quarter. 0:02:36.440 --> 0:02:38.760 Tom Stewart's got this great stat here, I'm just looking 0:02:38.760 --> 0:02:41.560 at it. SPX yesterday had its first two percent down 0:02:41.639 --> 0:02:44.640 day in more than in three hundred and sixty five 0:02:44.720 --> 0:02:48.400 trading days. I mean, that goes to the strength and 0:02:48.480 --> 0:02:52.040 consistency of this market here, which I guess is even 0:02:52.080 --> 0:02:54.760 more amazing than the context of the Fed's been raising rates. 0:02:55.280 --> 0:02:57.600 You know, it's just what happens when the Fed starts 0:02:57.600 --> 0:02:58.400 really cutting rates. 0:02:58.639 --> 0:03:00.840 Yeah, it's a really impress Paul. I think part of 0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:02.680 that is just the fact that you you sort of 0:03:02.760 --> 0:03:05.200 clip the tail off inflation, which helps a lot of 0:03:05.200 --> 0:03:07.840 people are blaming vas selling and sort of all these 0:03:07.880 --> 0:03:10.920 systematic strategies that are that are fundamentally supporting the market, 0:03:10.919 --> 0:03:13.760 and I think that's probably partially the case. There's there's 0:03:13.760 --> 0:03:15.400 a flip side of that coin though, right you know, 0:03:15.480 --> 0:03:18.080 coming out of yesterday, the size move we saw in 0:03:18.120 --> 0:03:21.000 the S and P means like volatility target funds are 0:03:21.000 --> 0:03:23.239 going to sell about seventy five billion dollars of equity 0:03:23.280 --> 0:03:24.760 over the course in the next couple of days. So 0:03:25.200 --> 0:03:28.040 the question is, yes, we've we've had a very low 0:03:28.120 --> 0:03:31.440 volatility rally. Now that we've broken out of that range, 0:03:31.760 --> 0:03:33.680 the test is going to be have we broken out 0:03:33.720 --> 0:03:35.120 of the range and do we end up a little 0:03:35.120 --> 0:03:37.520 bit untethered or do we get a strong GDP number 0:03:37.640 --> 0:03:38.680 and we sort of ourselves. 0:03:38.680 --> 0:03:42.840 How long does it take for these sophisticated institutional strategies 0:03:43.920 --> 0:03:48.280 to activate and then they clear the market and the 0:03:48.320 --> 0:03:49.720 market's left to itself? 0:03:50.080 --> 0:03:50.880 Is it ours? 0:03:51.080 --> 0:03:51.280 Is it? 0:03:51.440 --> 0:03:54.400 Days? Is it? You know when they bring au Twister three? 0:03:54.520 --> 0:03:54.960 When is it? 0:03:56.520 --> 0:03:58.320 I think it's I think it's more in the days category. 0:03:58.360 --> 0:03:58.560 Tom. 0:03:58.600 --> 0:04:00.600 You know, like the vall target funds, for instance, do 0:04:00.680 --> 0:04:02.640 it over a kind of a T plus two basis. 0:04:02.920 --> 0:04:04.920 You know, the CTAs are doing it sort of in 0:04:04.960 --> 0:04:07.640 real time, but they're obviously responsive to each day. 0:04:07.720 --> 0:04:09.480 Right, you know, you're down yesterday, you sell. If you're 0:04:09.560 --> 0:04:10.440 up today, you might buy. 0:04:10.520 --> 0:04:13.200 So I would say, you know you're talking days, not 0:04:13.200 --> 0:04:15.920 not necessarily hours, But it would depend on the strategy. 0:04:15.960 --> 0:04:17.800 And you know, it depends how actively managed they are. 0:04:17.839 --> 0:04:19.839 I mean, you think about city, I mean just just 0:04:19.920 --> 0:04:22.840 the most global of off firms in New York, London, 0:04:22.880 --> 0:04:26.640 Hong Kong. Your traders talk to everybody. It's the chatter 0:04:26.680 --> 0:04:28.880 bin over the pass a couple of days. Any panic 0:04:28.920 --> 0:04:30.640 coming back or are they just saying no, it's it's 0:04:30.760 --> 0:04:32.040 pretty orderly trading here. 0:04:32.120 --> 0:04:32.520 Yeah, I would. 0:04:32.520 --> 0:04:35.880 I would say we haven't seen outright panic necessarily. Yesterday 0:04:35.960 --> 0:04:38.200 we were about thirty three percent better to sell on 0:04:38.279 --> 0:04:40.640 the desk, which is which is a significant amount of 0:04:40.720 --> 0:04:42.840 risk reduction. In tech, you were two and a half 0:04:43.040 --> 0:04:45.320 to one better to sell. So we definitely saw in 0:04:45.400 --> 0:04:48.039 tech yesterday some people taking out risk. That said through 0:04:48.040 --> 0:04:50.360 the pipes, it looked like retail was pretty actively buying 0:04:50.400 --> 0:04:53.040 those tech stocks. So look, you know people that people 0:04:53.040 --> 0:04:55.040 that wanted to be in at Video or SMCI or 0:04:55.160 --> 0:04:57.440 ARM or one of these stocks maybe looking at this 0:04:57.480 --> 0:04:59.680 pullback as you know, them getting a second bite at 0:04:59.680 --> 0:05:02.080 the Apple in terms of getting back engaged. And if 0:05:02.120 --> 0:05:03.200 that's the case, that's positive. 0:05:03.320 --> 0:05:07.200 So within your securities analysis team at City Group, what 0:05:07.240 --> 0:05:09.359 do you do with Google? Do you let the things 0:05:09.400 --> 0:05:14.160 settle down for X number of days and then repurpose Google. 0:05:15.080 --> 0:05:19.599 My head is spinning over, Paul, you understand it. I 0:05:19.680 --> 0:05:23.000 don't gamma trading and all the rest of it for 0:05:23.120 --> 0:05:28.000 conservative normal Hey, I've got to fund my retirement plan investors. 0:05:28.200 --> 0:05:29.840 This is an opportunity, right. 0:05:30.320 --> 0:05:32.600 I think ultimately people will look back at this, at 0:05:32.600 --> 0:05:35.320 these Google learnings and say they were actually quite solid. 0:05:35.400 --> 0:05:37.440 Obviously the YouTube side of it was a little bit weak, 0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:40.920 but the other sides were positive. The read across from 0:05:40.960 --> 0:05:43.400 a Google perspective, I think was on the cap x 0:05:43.440 --> 0:05:46.160 side of things, the AI trade this year there's been 0:05:46.160 --> 0:05:48.720 an ongoing debate of do I own the capex spenders 0:05:49.000 --> 0:05:51.919 or do I own the recipients of that Capex? And 0:05:51.960 --> 0:05:54.280 I think what you saw with you know, Google kind 0:05:54.320 --> 0:05:56.279 of guiding down a little bit on the cap x side, 0:05:56.320 --> 0:05:59.719 it really got people's antennas up. So the issue there 0:05:59.760 --> 0:06:02.400 is not of Google issue only. It is a is 0:06:02.400 --> 0:06:04.800 a feedback loop to the other parts of the ecosystem. 0:06:04.880 --> 0:06:07.960 Apple does a very clear presentation. I sit there at 0:06:08.000 --> 0:06:09.599 four to twelve pm, people go, what do you do 0:06:09.640 --> 0:06:12.120 when you go home? You know, I walk the dogs. 0:06:12.160 --> 0:06:14.200 You know, I take they take the fame for surveillance 0:06:14.240 --> 0:06:16.680 and APP. I got a beverage of my choice in 0:06:16.760 --> 0:06:20.120 my hand, and I'm looking at the Apple numbers and 0:06:20.160 --> 0:06:24.440 I'm seeing this hysteria out there within financial media, and 0:06:24.480 --> 0:06:28.559 I'm looking at the cash flow statement, going what why 0:06:29.120 --> 0:06:30.880 you know? And I don't mean to pick on Apple. 0:06:30.880 --> 0:06:32.719 It could be any of these other stucks like Google 0:06:32.760 --> 0:06:35.360 the other day they had a solid quarter. 0:06:35.080 --> 0:06:37.080 The solid quarter, a solid free cash flow. 0:06:37.360 --> 0:06:37.960 How about that? 0:06:38.160 --> 0:06:39.640 You know, as Tom's talking about some of those big 0:06:39.720 --> 0:06:41.920 names we have, we've seen a real kind of rotation 0:06:41.960 --> 0:06:44.240 the last few weeks into the small cap, you know, 0:06:44.279 --> 0:06:46.760 looking at the Russell app performing the small cap Russell 0:06:46.760 --> 0:06:47.320 two thousand. 0:06:47.960 --> 0:06:48.520 Is that a thing? 0:06:49.279 --> 0:06:51.400 I think it's a It's a thing if you believe 0:06:51.400 --> 0:06:53.279 in the soft landing. So I think what you saw 0:06:53.480 --> 0:06:56.359 late last year, middle of June on the June FMC 0:06:56.600 --> 0:06:59.280 and July eleventh on CPI is when you get soft 0:06:59.360 --> 0:07:03.160 landing data, which is solid jobs and downward surprises on inflation, 0:07:03.320 --> 0:07:05.200 especially if the FED wants to cut in the background. 0:07:05.520 --> 0:07:10.000 People gravitate towards these soft landing trades, and the target 0:07:10.120 --> 0:07:12.800 for those trades is small cap, it's regional banks, it's 0:07:12.840 --> 0:07:14.800 things of that nature. So I think what you've seen 0:07:15.040 --> 0:07:18.160 is is the market sort of going through a soft 0:07:18.280 --> 0:07:21.480 landing trade for the moment. We think it's more tactical. 0:07:21.480 --> 0:07:24.000 I don't necessarily think that's sustainable over a medium term 0:07:24.040 --> 0:07:27.320 period because Andrew Holmenhorsten team do have a deceleration and growth. 0:07:27.560 --> 0:07:29.880 A lot of people said, oh, small caps in election trade. 0:07:29.960 --> 0:07:32.120 I think that's reverse engineering a narrative. I think this 0:07:32.240 --> 0:07:34.880 is very much a macroeconomic data trade. 0:07:35.040 --> 0:07:38.080 Keep talking that. Marcus just swin Green was Stuaris. 0:07:38.400 --> 0:07:39.600 Where we at the end of the year. 0:07:39.640 --> 0:07:42.680 I understand that's deep and long term for you, but 0:07:42.760 --> 0:07:43.440 where we at the. 0:07:43.440 --> 0:07:43.960 End of the year. 0:07:44.680 --> 0:07:47.160 Our research sides got Kroner the third fifty six hundred 0:07:47.320 --> 0:07:49.640 end of year. You know, I think we're higher than 0:07:49.640 --> 0:07:52.280 we are today at the end of the year. Personally, obviously, 0:07:52.320 --> 0:07:53.920 if we get a recession, that's not going to be 0:07:53.960 --> 0:07:56.840 the case. But our view is, as I mentioned, you 0:07:56.920 --> 0:07:59.920 run long equity risk unless and until that US job 0:08:00.120 --> 0:08:03.000 market cracks if the job marker hade strong, you remain 0:08:03.080 --> 0:08:04.920 long equities and I think we're hiring to year end 0:08:04.960 --> 0:08:05.680 in that case. 0:08:05.640 --> 0:08:06.480 Hugely valuable. 0:08:06.480 --> 0:08:09.320 Can't say enough about Stewart Keiser was City Group head 0:08:09.360 --> 0:08:22.320 of US equity Trading. What we're going to do is 0:08:22.600 --> 0:08:27.120 stop on a July morning, with our heads spinning over 0:08:27.160 --> 0:08:30.640 the American history lessons of the last ten days. We 0:08:30.720 --> 0:08:34.160 have a guest esteemed in Washington, Libby Cantrell's with Pimco, 0:08:34.920 --> 0:08:37.920 out of Brown, out of Harvard, with some serious effort 0:08:37.960 --> 0:08:42.560 at Morgan Stanley to understand inside the Beltway, and I 0:08:42.679 --> 0:08:44.880 just want to stop, and I want to talk about 0:08:44.880 --> 0:08:48.559 two senators and how they were different, How was the 0:08:49.040 --> 0:08:53.079 and I had the honor of speaking with Senator Obama 0:08:53.080 --> 0:08:55.800 by the bruin Zamboni when he was a senator, nobody 0:08:55.840 --> 0:08:59.839 knew who he was. How is Senator Obama different from 0:09:00.120 --> 0:09:04.400 Senator Harris in Libby Cantrill's world or were they the same? 0:09:04.480 --> 0:09:06.600 Just two young junior senators. 0:09:07.240 --> 0:09:10.240 Well so, Senator Obama actually had fewer years of service 0:09:10.320 --> 0:09:12.800 than Senator Harris did. Remember he was only in the 0:09:12.800 --> 0:09:15.640 Senate for two years. Two cups, Yeah, right, exactly. 0:09:16.080 --> 0:09:17.280 And she was there for four years. 0:09:17.440 --> 0:09:19.280 I do think that maybe a similarity though, is that 0:09:19.320 --> 0:09:21.120 they both knew that they were going to be pursuing 0:09:21.280 --> 0:09:24.680 national office when they started their jobs in the Senate, 0:09:24.720 --> 0:09:26.280 so that they knew that the Senate was not sort 0:09:26.280 --> 0:09:28.679 of their landing place that they had. And I think 0:09:28.720 --> 0:09:31.200 that if you look at both of their records, that's 0:09:31.400 --> 0:09:33.360 sort of emblematic some of the things that they voted on. 0:09:33.520 --> 0:09:36.880 We're probably trying to tee them up for a national 0:09:36.960 --> 0:09:39.040 race versus just against stay in the Senate. 0:09:39.120 --> 0:09:43.359 I'm a prosecutor at Attorney General in California. I'm parachuting 0:09:43.400 --> 0:09:47.840 into the Senate, which is all collegialities. Smiley teams, put 0:09:47.880 --> 0:09:50.560 your napkin in your lap in the Senate lunch room. 0:09:50.880 --> 0:09:54.160 The rap on her is she said, troubled building a team? 0:09:54.679 --> 0:09:55.439 Discuss that. 0:09:56.160 --> 0:09:59.040 Yeah, I mean she's had I think management staff issues 0:09:59.080 --> 0:10:02.320 really since she was a DA in San Francisco. So 0:10:02.360 --> 0:10:05.160 this is something that it will be a liability. Obviously, 0:10:05.200 --> 0:10:08.440 building a national campaign in a very short period of time, 0:10:08.559 --> 0:10:11.920 basically building a plane while you're flying, it is challenging 0:10:12.240 --> 0:10:12.959 to begin with. 0:10:13.840 --> 0:10:17.959 But you have lived this. Do they change? Can she improve? Well? Look, 0:10:18.000 --> 0:10:18.960 she has a building. 0:10:19.080 --> 0:10:20.679 I mean there is a lot, there are a lot 0:10:20.720 --> 0:10:24.320 of tailwinds to continue that the airplane metaphor she has, 0:10:24.920 --> 0:10:28.440 I mean, she has the entire kind of Democratic Party apparatus. 0:10:28.480 --> 0:10:31.600 She has lots of national figures who are endorsing her 0:10:31.600 --> 0:10:35.079 and supporting her, so people are incredibly incentivized to see 0:10:35.120 --> 0:10:37.800 her succeed. In some ways, she might actually benefit from 0:10:37.800 --> 0:10:40.520 a shorter campaign because you don't have the time to 0:10:40.559 --> 0:10:43.320 sort of pick her apart, pick the campaign apart that 0:10:43.360 --> 0:10:46.640 you would and deserve a general general election cycle. So 0:10:46.679 --> 0:10:47.960 this is so extraordinary. 0:10:48.240 --> 0:10:48.640 I'm much. 0:10:48.720 --> 0:10:50.160 I don't think those are going to be the things 0:10:50.200 --> 0:10:51.640 that are really going to weigh on voters. But I 0:10:51.679 --> 0:10:54.959 think her liability, though, is that platform that she ran 0:10:55.000 --> 0:10:57.440 on in twenty twenty. And of course for the Democrats 0:10:57.480 --> 0:10:59.480 they may not be an issue, but to get those 0:10:59.520 --> 0:11:03.160 swing vote in those six states that she needs to 0:11:03.760 --> 0:11:04.400 in order to. 0:11:04.360 --> 0:11:05.359 Win the presidency. 0:11:05.880 --> 0:11:08.200 The fact that she has advocated for medicare for all, 0:11:08.240 --> 0:11:11.320 the fact that she basically is you know, talked about 0:11:11.320 --> 0:11:14.160 open borders or what have you, or fewer you know, 0:11:14.600 --> 0:11:16.679 repercussions for folks coming over the border. I mean, all 0:11:16.720 --> 0:11:20.040 of those things will plague her. So, Tom to your question, well, 0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:22.760 her management style, maybe that will plague her. Maybe, But 0:11:22.880 --> 0:11:25.400 is that going to be the big headwind going into November. 0:11:25.440 --> 0:11:27.079 Probably not. It's going to be more of trying to 0:11:27.120 --> 0:11:27.960 defend that record. 0:11:28.400 --> 0:11:31.240 It seems like the Democrats have some renewed momentum here. 0:11:31.280 --> 0:11:33.920 What are you telling the fund managers of pimpco about 0:11:34.800 --> 0:11:37.200 what's happened over the last you know, seventy two hours 0:11:37.200 --> 0:11:39.960 and what the next several months might entail with olipms. 0:11:40.040 --> 0:11:41.760 Yeah, of course, while the horse race may or may 0:11:41.760 --> 0:11:44.800 not be interesting, that there are traders really care about 0:11:44.880 --> 0:11:46.760 is like what does this mean for the economy? 0:11:46.760 --> 0:11:48.840 What does this mean for markets? And I think that 0:11:49.240 --> 0:11:51.960 in many ways this is just reset the race, right. 0:11:52.040 --> 0:11:54.360 And so if you were if you're putting odds on 0:11:54.400 --> 0:11:58.520 a Biden presidency and a A and sort of the 0:11:58.520 --> 0:12:01.079 composition of Congress, you would have said, wow, you know, 0:12:01.120 --> 0:12:04.040 the chips are really stacked in favor of Republicans. 0:12:04.120 --> 0:12:05.600 Last week, that has changed. 0:12:05.640 --> 0:12:08.280 And I think that is not only the top of 0:12:08.280 --> 0:12:11.000 the ballot, but really the down ballot. I mean, the 0:12:11.000 --> 0:12:13.880 composition of Congress really matters for the things that actually 0:12:13.920 --> 0:12:18.040 investors care about, For fiscal policy, for tax and for spending, 0:12:18.200 --> 0:12:20.680 and a Republicans sweep looked like it was much more 0:12:20.880 --> 0:12:24.280 likely as of last week than it does today. So 0:12:24.360 --> 0:12:27.520 of course it's still early days and how Harris will 0:12:28.240 --> 0:12:31.200 will do versus Trump, but there is so much more 0:12:31.240 --> 0:12:34.320 renewed enthusiasm. And I think the big challenge for Democrats 0:12:34.360 --> 0:12:36.199 going into the general if Biden were on the top 0:12:36.200 --> 0:12:39.520 of the ticket was lack of enthusiasm, and that has changed, right. 0:12:39.400 --> 0:12:41.640 I mean, what do you make of, you know, the fundraising. 0:12:41.679 --> 0:12:43.440 We had a story yesterday on the Bloomberg about how 0:12:43.440 --> 0:12:45.600 some of the big Wall Street folks are lining up 0:12:45.600 --> 0:12:49.280 behind Harris. But I guess what got me was the 0:12:49.840 --> 0:12:51.959 reporting that one hundred million dollars was raised by the 0:12:52.000 --> 0:12:56.360 Harris campaign in the twenty four hours after Biden announced 0:12:56.400 --> 0:12:59.200 you stepping down, and sixty two percent of those were 0:12:59.320 --> 0:13:00.520 new donors. 0:13:00.800 --> 0:13:03.439 Yeah, and there were relatively small donors. I think that 0:13:03.920 --> 0:13:04.280 was the thing. 0:13:04.280 --> 0:13:06.360 I mean, this is so this is I mean, yeah, 0:13:06.400 --> 0:13:09.240 these big donors are kind of coming back home, if 0:13:09.240 --> 0:13:10.920 you will. They were sort of sitting on the sidelines 0:13:10.920 --> 0:13:13.120 when Biden was the top of the ticket. But really 0:13:13.160 --> 0:13:15.320 the fact that there's so much more renewed energy, the 0:13:15.320 --> 0:13:18.440 fact that she is appealing to to some of the 0:13:18.480 --> 0:13:21.240 constituencies that did the Democrats need in order to win, 0:13:21.800 --> 0:13:24.839 like young people and like African Americans. And I think 0:13:24.880 --> 0:13:27.360 the grassroots fundraising service reflection. 0:13:27.040 --> 0:13:29.440 Of that and the craziness that we're living. Folks. I 0:13:29.480 --> 0:13:32.120 actually work. I do work more than three hours ago. 0:13:32.960 --> 0:13:33.520 It's hard to. 0:13:33.440 --> 0:13:35.640 Believe that don't work a day like Cantrell, but you know, 0:13:36.240 --> 0:13:37.640 it's fine, or Lisa Matteo. 0:13:37.720 --> 0:13:39.120 But you know, LIBBYA. 0:13:39.880 --> 0:13:43.560 I was reading the Pew Research Topology report where they 0:13:43.559 --> 0:13:47.000 divide Americans into nine groups and there's three or four 0:13:47.120 --> 0:13:50.880 shades of Democratic Party. She's going to be painted as 0:13:50.880 --> 0:13:53.200 a Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren progressive? 0:13:53.880 --> 0:13:55.560 Is she is? 0:13:55.600 --> 0:13:55.720 She? 0:13:55.960 --> 0:13:56.360 Is she that? 0:13:57.120 --> 0:13:58.000 I don't know. 0:13:58.040 --> 0:14:01.400 I think that's another issue, is that voters don't really 0:14:01.480 --> 0:14:04.040 know what she stands for. I mean, obviously, when she 0:14:04.280 --> 0:14:07.559 was the DA, when she was the Attorney general in California, 0:14:07.720 --> 0:14:11.120 you know, she could have been characterized as center left, 0:14:11.200 --> 0:14:14.320 almost even centrist in terms of some of her approach 0:14:14.400 --> 0:14:15.400 to to to sort. 0:14:15.240 --> 0:14:16.520 Of law enforcement, what have you. 0:14:17.280 --> 0:14:19.200 But when she got to the Senate, and this is 0:14:19.360 --> 0:14:21.800 your previous question, Tom when she got to the Senate, 0:14:21.800 --> 0:14:23.000 she knew she was going to be running for a 0:14:23.120 --> 0:14:26.640 national office, and she did pivot pretty far left again 0:14:26.680 --> 0:14:28.720 on some of those things like Medicare for all, like 0:14:28.760 --> 0:14:32.600 defunding the police, like stopping fracking, and these issues will 0:14:32.640 --> 0:14:34.720 matter to swing voter. So I think this will be 0:14:34.800 --> 0:14:39.600 her challenge is almost reintroducing herself to voters in a 0:14:39.640 --> 0:14:42.320 way that maybe is more reflective of where she really stands. 0:14:42.320 --> 0:14:46.240 Because that the liberal, the progressive liberal that we saw 0:14:46.280 --> 0:14:48.520 in twenty twenty running for the primary against Elizabeth Warren. 0:14:48.760 --> 0:14:50.440 That will she will not be able to win the 0:14:50.480 --> 0:14:52.360 presidency if that is her platform. 0:14:52.480 --> 0:14:57.160 Who's debating who going forward? I mean debate Trump advance 0:14:57.480 --> 0:15:00.000 and does that work? And who decides how that plays out? Yeah, 0:15:00.000 --> 0:15:01.640 because I'm looking forward to that. I'm looking forward to. 0:15:01.640 --> 0:15:03.080 And I do think and I you know again, I 0:15:03.120 --> 0:15:04.840 think one of the reasons why there's so much renewed 0:15:04.880 --> 0:15:08.120 optimism is because Harris like her or not like her. 0:15:08.200 --> 0:15:09.920 I mean, we'll be able to litigate the case against 0:15:09.960 --> 0:15:12.080 Trunk better than certainly than Biden was able to write 0:15:12.200 --> 0:15:14.400 in terms of the June twenty seventh debate. Yeah, So 0:15:14.520 --> 0:15:16.400 the running mate her re selection of the running mate. 0:15:16.440 --> 0:15:18.680 I do think will be important just in terms of 0:15:18.720 --> 0:15:21.600 reflective of her judgment, and obviously who she picks her 0:15:21.640 --> 0:15:25.640 running mate will then debate JD vance TBD on the dates. 0:15:25.680 --> 0:15:27.600 There were some dates thrown out when she was the 0:15:27.680 --> 0:15:30.000 vice president and now when she was the running mate, 0:15:30.040 --> 0:15:33.520 and now that's changed. September tenth is still potentially the 0:15:33.600 --> 0:15:36.680 date where there might be a Trump versus Harris debate, 0:15:37.040 --> 0:15:39.200 And of course, just in terms of history, that is 0:15:39.320 --> 0:15:43.000 much more typical. Usually we see the debates after the conventions. 0:15:43.200 --> 0:15:44.960 The fact that we saw this debate in June was 0:15:45.000 --> 0:15:48.000 of course what the Biden world wanted, pretty pretty impressent. 0:15:48.080 --> 0:15:50.600 Ten seconds, who's your VP pick? Who's the common sense 0:15:50.640 --> 0:15:51.120 pick for her? 0:15:51.320 --> 0:15:54.080 You know, you know, you know, I think Mark Kelly, 0:15:54.280 --> 0:15:57.200 I think Roy Cooper, I think Jos Shapiro. You know, 0:15:57.240 --> 0:16:01.200 William mcgraven was was rumored for for a very hot second. 0:16:01.240 --> 0:16:03.560 He's a general who obviously killed some of them. Laden 0:16:03.600 --> 0:16:05.440 he would have that would have really shored up the ticket. 0:16:05.920 --> 0:16:08.400 But I think one of those gentlemen would do a 0:16:08.480 --> 0:16:09.320 nice job of bouncing. 0:16:09.440 --> 0:16:16.040 Julie Pimcoff, You're on the list, Levy Ketchel, thank you 0:16:16.080 --> 0:16:19.680 so much, Pacific Investment Management Company and of course her 0:16:19.960 --> 0:16:23.960 really expertise on the Halls of Congress and the policy 0:16:24.160 --> 0:16:27.200 of America. 0:16:28.920 --> 0:16:30.880 This is a joy. This is someone Postsuen, you know, 0:16:31.040 --> 0:16:31.480 some Duke. 0:16:32.080 --> 0:16:35.280 There are young Turks in academics and in this case 0:16:35.320 --> 0:16:38.840 coming out of Stanford who just start writing his book. 0:16:38.880 --> 0:16:44.880 Goldilock's globalism has created a stir and Paul it centers 0:16:44.920 --> 0:16:49.720 around like in twenty sixteen, both candidates walked away from TPP, 0:16:50.160 --> 0:16:52.880 they walked away from the Pacific and the only tool 0:16:53.000 --> 0:16:55.680 you have is a blunt instrument of terrorists of tarffs. 0:16:55.760 --> 0:16:58.920 And we've seen that from both the Trump administration, but 0:16:59.240 --> 0:17:01.640 staying with the By administration as well. We're seeing more 0:17:01.640 --> 0:17:04.960 and more talk, more and more tariffs, I guess in 0:17:06.000 --> 0:17:09.040 you know, really saying it's part of economic security, and 0:17:09.080 --> 0:17:12.000 that's something new. Tim Meyer Joints is Associate Professor of 0:17:12.240 --> 0:17:15.400 Duke Law. Tim, can you put into context why we're 0:17:15.440 --> 0:17:20.359 seeing more I guess economic policy being invested in the 0:17:20.400 --> 0:17:22.720 presidency as opposed to Congress. 0:17:23.960 --> 0:17:28.359 Sure, so, you know, I think presidents have long used 0:17:28.800 --> 0:17:33.719 foreign policy as a vehicle to get around gridlock and Congress. 0:17:34.080 --> 0:17:36.520 The president has long been thought to have a pretty 0:17:36.560 --> 0:17:40.440 wide degree of latitude in making foreign policy. It's very 0:17:40.440 --> 0:17:42.960 common to talk about presidents, especially in their second term, 0:17:43.160 --> 0:17:46.320 you know, turning pivoting to foreign policy. And one of 0:17:46.359 --> 0:17:49.360 the things that we've observed since President Trump first took 0:17:49.400 --> 0:17:53.920 office in twenty seventeen is that foreign commerce, commercial policy 0:17:54.000 --> 0:17:56.679 has kind of gotten wrapped up in that in that bubble, 0:17:56.800 --> 0:18:00.760 Congress has granted the president a pretty broad, odd degree 0:18:01.040 --> 0:18:06.880 of discretion in setting trade restrictions, in particular in negotiating 0:18:06.960 --> 0:18:11.479 new trade agreements. The president, multiple presidents have kind of 0:18:12.520 --> 0:18:15.560 treated it as their prerogative to go out and negotiate 0:18:15.640 --> 0:18:18.840 new trade agreements. President Trump obviously treated it as his 0:18:18.960 --> 0:18:24.119 prerogative to impose a wide degree of tariffs on steel 0:18:24.200 --> 0:18:29.480 aluminum imports from China. Obviously he tried to regulate foreign 0:18:29.560 --> 0:18:34.720 investment in businesses like TikTok, and you know, there's some 0:18:34.880 --> 0:18:37.479 question about the legality of those actions, whether or not 0:18:37.560 --> 0:18:40.760 that goes too far in terms of cutting Congress out 0:18:40.760 --> 0:18:46.000 of the out of the policy making framework. But economic 0:18:46.040 --> 0:18:48.640 security has been what the trumpet Biden administrations have really 0:18:48.760 --> 0:18:50.800