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 Applecarplay and Roun Auto with the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 1: or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Echoes from Detroit still in our heads, of course, Kayley.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump speaking to the Economic Club of Detroit yesterday.
Speaker 2: We brought you some of his remarks here on Bloomberg.
Speaker 2: It was a long speech. We went through it together,
Speaker 2: and about an hour and a half into this address,
Speaker 2: we got a new deduction, another piece of news to
Speaker 2: help round out what has been a series of economic
Speaker 2: policy proposals put forth by Donald Trump, creating the mosaic
Speaker 2: that we're going to be talking about here with Scott Besstt.
Speaker 2: Let's go to Detroit now, remembering this is motown and
Speaker 2: what Donald Trump had to offer yesterday.
Speaker 3: Today, I am also announcing that as part of our
Speaker 3: tax we will make interest on car loans fully deductible.
Speaker 3: This will stimulate massive domestic auto production and make car
Speaker 3: ownership dramatically more affordable for millions and millions of working
Speaker 3: American families.
Speaker 4: So for more on these policy proposals. We turn next
Speaker 4: to someone who is advising Donald Trump on economic policy,
Speaker 4: Scott Bess and his promises here with us here on
Speaker 4: Bloomberg TV and radio. He is Key Square Capital CEO
Speaker 4: joining us in Washington. Good to see you, Thank you
Speaker 4: for being here. So we have a new deduction on
Speaker 4: car loans. You also have no tax on tips, on overtime,
Speaker 4: on social Security permanence to the twenty seventeen tax cuts,
Speaker 4: but undoing part of it because the salt cap will
Speaker 4: be lifted. This is a lot of proposals. Can we
Speaker 4: now call this the full picture of what tax policy
Speaker 4: would look like under Donald Trump? Have you talked through
Speaker 4: other ideas with him? And we might still see in
Speaker 4: the next three and a half weeks.
Speaker 5: So first of all, thanks for having me. President Trump
Speaker 5: is a big idea guy and he generates a lot
Speaker 5: of these himself. I had a meeting with him on
Speaker 5: the Monday after he mentioned or proposed and no tax
Speaker 5: on tips, and I said, sir, what inspired you to
Speaker 5: do that? He said, I was looking at this hard
Speaker 5: working woman and a diner in Nevada, and I thought
Speaker 5: it's not fair to tax these tips.
Speaker 2: So you guys have a chance to talk about things
Speaker 2: before we get to hear about them. Maybe you're surprised
Speaker 2: by some of them too, But I've been looking forward
Speaker 2: to running around the track with you on a couple
Speaker 2: of these ideas because you hear the same conversations that
Speaker 2: we have every day here. A lot of economists say
Speaker 2: that these tax proposals are inflationary. We just got a
Speaker 2: new number from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
Speaker 2: that Donald Trump's economic proposals could add as much as
Speaker 2: fifteen trillion dollars to the deficit over the course of
Speaker 2: ten years. Where are they wrong?
Speaker 5: Well, the good news is we have a roadmap for
Speaker 5: what Donald Trump did, and Trump one point zero it
Speaker 5: was not inflationary. The government revenues went up. And my
Speaker 5: friends at the committee are they are anti growth and
Speaker 5: higher taxes. Because if you look at the way the
Speaker 5: scoring works, and I'm a Wall Street person, I've just
Speaker 5: become familiar with this, and I think most of your
Speaker 5: viewers and listeners don't understand the way it works, and
Speaker 5: it is heavily skewed towards higher taxes and less growth.
Speaker 5: You end up you begin with a baseline GDP estimate
Speaker 5: that doesn't move. So I believe it's unreasonable to think
Speaker 5: that if Donald Trump's proposals are to cut taxes that
Speaker 5: growth will not accelerate. If Vice President Harris's tax proposals
Speaker 5: are to raise taxes, that growth will not be lower.
Speaker 5: But in the scoring, it's always at one point eight percent,
Speaker 5: straight line for ten years.
Speaker 4: Okay, So what is the figure you think is realistic
Speaker 4: if all of these tax cuts are implemented, If we're
Speaker 4: to grow our way out of this, what does that
Speaker 4: translate to and annualized GDP growth?
Speaker 5: Well, for annualized GDP growth, I think, like under Trump
Speaker 5: one point zero that we can get moved back towards
Speaker 5: three percent. But right now you know our GDP growth.
Speaker 5: And I find this very interesting that we're hearing that
Speaker 5: Kamala Harris is the one who is going to have
Speaker 5: some kind of budget rectitude, because I will tell you
Speaker 5: I am very concerned about what is happening right now.
Speaker 5: We have never had a budget deficit like this. We
Speaker 5: are at seven percent of GDP in terms of the deficit,
Speaker 5: We've never had this when it's not a recession, not
Speaker 5: a war. And what do we have to show for it?
Speaker 5: We have eighteen they have created eighteen thousand manufacturing jobs.
Speaker 5: Last year, the economy only created two hundred and fifty
Speaker 5: thousand private sector jobs. This is a takeover of the
Speaker 5: government of the private sector. The jobs are being created
Speaker 5: in the government and government adjacent And I think President
Speaker 5: Trump's goal is to reprivatize the economy, get the private
Speaker 5: sector creating jobs. And I think we could bring down
Speaker 5: the deficit to GDP to something with a three on
Speaker 5: it by twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 2: The three, three and three that we keep hearing about.
Speaker 2: You've got another idea that's generating a lot of talk
Speaker 2: right now that Congress create a FED chair designate who
Speaker 2: would essentially serve alongside J. Powell for the.
Speaker 1: Remainder of his term.
Speaker 2: You said quote based on the concept of forward guidance.
Speaker 2: No one is going to care what J. Powell has
Speaker 2: to say anymore. Interestingly, Donald Trump told Bloomberg Business Week
Speaker 2: a couple months ago that he would allow J. Powell
Speaker 2: to finish out the rest of his term. What does
Speaker 2: Donald Trump think of this idea?
Speaker 5: Well, first of all, I'll say I don't speak for
Speaker 5: the Trump campaign, and it's not for Congress to create.
Speaker 5: It would be for President Trump when he wins to
Speaker 5: nominate because if we go back, and I've gotten blown
Speaker 5: up on the Twitter sphere on this, and I think
Speaker 5: it is a serious lack of understanding because the original sin,
Speaker 5: in my mind, that unleashed the Great inflation on the
Speaker 5: American people. The Biden administration waited until the last possible
Speaker 5: moment to renominate J.
Speaker 1: Powell.
Speaker 5: It was the latest nomination in the twenty first century
Speaker 5: for a FED chair. It was clear in his Jackson
Speaker 5: Hole speech in August of twenty one that he thought
Speaker 5: inflation was accelerating. He was still calling it transitory, but
Speaker 5: was open to the idea was accelerating. They kept their
Speaker 5: thumb on him until November and renominated him at the
Speaker 5: end of the month. He was confirmed in December, and
Speaker 5: then he didn't do the first rate hike until March.
Speaker 5: If they had announced his reappointment in June July, he
Speaker 5: could have been hiking rates in October.
Speaker 4: So they were reappointing the same man. If it's to
Speaker 4: be someone new, couldn't that create massive market uncertainty If
Speaker 4: you're not clear on which voice is providing forward guidance?
Speaker 5: Well, I think no, I disagree, because I actually think
Speaker 5: it provides more certainty because you could do one of
Speaker 5: two things that the current FED chair could be reappointed,
Speaker 5: so you created a path there, and the new FED
Speaker 5: chair nominee would give forward guidance beyond the current Fed
Speaker 5: shares the sell by date, so you would have for
Speaker 5: ad guidance up until May twenty May twenty six with
Speaker 5: j Powell, and then you would know the market could
Speaker 5: structure a forward curve since then. So you know, I
Speaker 5: call this if and I'm not such a big fan
Speaker 5: of Ford guidance, but if you believe forward guidance is good,
Speaker 5: why can't you give Ford guidance? And who the Fed
Speaker 5: shair is going to be?
Speaker 2: Where's Donald Trump's head on this? And I know you're
Speaker 2: not speaking for the campaign, but your relationship with him
Speaker 2: is why we're here right now. He wants to play
Speaker 2: a role in setting interest rates. How deliberate will he
Speaker 2: be if he's reelected on that front?
Speaker 5: Well, he wants to have a voice, but every president
Speaker 5: has a voice. Joe Biden told us in the State
Speaker 5: of the Union, I think we're about to get.
Speaker 2: In it as opposed to setting actually.
Speaker 5: And I think what's very interesting about President Trump. He
Speaker 5: understand he's been in the financial markets through his real
Speaker 5: estate holdings. He under he has a deep understanding of
Speaker 5: financial markets as opposed to most politicians, so he wants
Speaker 5: to be involved in the conversation. He has very well
Speaker 5: formed opinions. He has a lot of private sector friends,
Speaker 5: so he just wants to be a voice. Senator Warren
Speaker 5: and two other senators right before the FED decision came
Speaker 5: out and said, oh, it should be seventy five basis points,
Speaker 5: which no, there's no model that said that it should
Speaker 5: have been. But they opined that's their right, and I
Speaker 5: think it's his right. I just think his opinions might
Speaker 5: better informed.
Speaker 4: Well, certainly has many of them, including around the issues
Speaker 4: of migration, which he probably will be focusing a lot
Speaker 4: on as he visits Aurora, Colorado today. He has floated
Speaker 4: mass my mass deportation rather and if you're looking at
Speaker 4: a figure of over thirteen million people who have not
Speaker 4: legally or do not have legal status in the US
Speaker 4: as of April of this year, if they were to
Speaker 4: go away, there's studies, including from the American Immigration Council,
Speaker 4: that say that could produce GDP by four point two
Speaker 4: to six point eight percent. The economic policy Institute found
Speaker 4: that without immigration, the prime age workforce would have essentially
Speaker 4: seen no growth at all in the past quarter century.
Speaker 4: What is the economic impact potentially of the kind of
Speaker 4: deportation he's talking about. Where would you find those workers otherwise?
Speaker 5: Well, let's go back, because I find all this pretty
Speaker 5: duplicitous for my entire career, probably most of your entire lives.
Speaker 5: The academic economists said, oh no, absolutely they unauthorized new
Speaker 5: arrivals do not put downward pressure on wages. Then lo
Speaker 5: and behold. In this cycle, when we we had the
Speaker 5: massive inflation, we get, whether it's eleven million new arrivals
Speaker 5: or as President Trump thinks, twenty one million new arrivals,
Speaker 5: it does push down wages on the bottom quintile, which
Speaker 5: I think is abominable. These are working people, Americans who
Speaker 5: are seeing their wages get pushed down. So now it's
Speaker 5: what I always believed, what you could see, what you
Speaker 5: could observe, it does push wages down. And you know,
Speaker 5: I would just say I dispute those GDP numbers because
Speaker 5: if it were good, why wouldn't we just have a
Speaker 5: road from Terra del Fuego to the Rio Grande and
Speaker 5: let everybody who wants to come in in. We could
Speaker 5: double GDP, but per capita GDP per American would drop substantially.
Speaker 5: It is about American citizens' standards of living. So and
Speaker 5: you know, to talk about the mass deportation. I really
Speaker 5: like the Senator Vance's answer on that said, well, how
Speaker 5: are you going to do it? He said, the same
Speaker 5: way I eat a large subway sandwich, one bite at
Speaker 5: a time.
Speaker 2: Scott Besstt he's CEO Key Square Capital and has the
Speaker 2: former president's here. We appreciate your time being with us
Speaker 2: year at the table today. Thanks for talking policy. We'd
Speaker 2: like to stay in touch with you as we get
Speaker 2: closer to the election.
Speaker 5: I think there's gonna be a lot of action between now,
Speaker 5: a lot.
Speaker 2: Of action I'm about. Thank you very much for being
Speaker 2: with us.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast ken
Speaker 1: just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play
Speaker 1: and then roun Oo with the Bloomberg Business app. You
Speaker 1: can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship
Speaker 1: New York station, Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: The date we're focusing on is November fifth. Of course,
Speaker 4: the election and November twelfth, because that is the date
Speaker 4: that Congress returns to Washington, and this town gets a
Speaker 4: little less empty. It's just Joe, Matthew and I seem
Speaker 4: to be here at the moment, but that is the
Speaker 4: return date set in stone. The Speaker of the House,
Speaker 4: Mike Johnson, says that he is not planning to change that,
Speaker 4: despite President Biden saying yesterday thinks Congress should come back
Speaker 4: immediately to address the emergency funding needs that have emerged
Speaker 4: because of these massive hurricanes that have hit the US
Speaker 4: Helene of course, and then Milton after that this week.
Speaker 2: The word from Mike Johnson so far remains no. We
Speaker 2: did hear from ATHENA Lawson spokesperson last evening to be clear,
Speaker 2: Congress will act again upon its return in November, so
Speaker 2: we'll keep that twelve, I guess circles on our calendars here.
Speaker 2: There are still a lot of questions though about how
Speaker 2: much money FEMA has to work with here when it
Speaker 2: comes to individual assistants, public assistance. The SBA, as we
Speaker 2: heard from Joe Biden last evening, is a completely different
Speaker 2: ballo axe here. And that's where Tyler Kendall comes in.
Speaker 2: I want to bring you into our newsroom in Washington
Speaker 2: with Bloomberg's Tyler Kendall and some reporting on exactly where
Speaker 2: the funding stands for these agencies.
Speaker 6: Tyler, Yeah, hey, Joe. The federal government is rapidly using
Speaker 6: its disaster relief funding. FEMA came out earlier this week
Speaker 6: saying that it had already gone through about nine billion
Speaker 6: of the twenty billion dollars in congressionally a funding for
Speaker 6: fiscal year twenty twenty five, which just started and is
Speaker 6: supposed to take the agency through September thirtieth of next year.
Speaker 6: But as you mentioned, it's not just FEMA. The Small
Speaker 6: Business Administration has been highlighted in its role for helping
Speaker 6: the federal government when it comes to disaster relief efforts.
Speaker 6: The SBA provides low interest loans to homeowners and businesses,
Speaker 6: in some cases up to two million dollars to rebuild
Speaker 6: after natural disasters. And as you mentioned, President Biden yesterday,
Speaker 6: as we wait for him today to address the nation,
Speaker 6: yesterday he came out and urged Congress I wanted to
Speaker 6: take a listen here to what he said to lawmakers
Speaker 6: when it comes to pushing for that additional emergency funding.
Speaker 7: I think in terms of the SPA. It's pretty right
Speaker 7: at the edge right now, and I think the Congress
Speaker 7: should be coming back and moving on emergency needs immediately.
Speaker 7: They're going to have to come back after the election
Speaker 7: as well. This is going to be a long haul
Speaker 7: for total rebiliting. It's going to take several billion dollars.
Speaker 7: It's not going to be a matter of just a
Speaker 7: little bit.
Speaker 6: In a letter to Congress last night, the SBA administrator
Speaker 6: said that that emergency loan program will likely run out
Speaker 6: by the end of next week if it does not
Speaker 6: have additional funds to replenish it. They did say that
Speaker 6: the SBA will continue to process loans though up to
Speaker 6: the point of payment. But Joe and Kayley experts are
Speaker 6: saying that once that SBA loan program runs out, that's
Speaker 6: only going to put a bigger drag on the FEMA
Speaker 6: funds as people look elsewhere if they can't get that
Speaker 6: that SBA funding.
Speaker 4: So as we consider the rule Congress has in providing
Speaker 4: more funding, the argument that lawmakers who are not eager
Speaker 4: to return to Washington right now, Tyler, is that it's
Speaker 4: because it's campaign season. They're in the final stretches of
Speaker 4: their own races ahead. Of election day. But that kind
Speaker 4: of is an important point here. It is the last
Speaker 4: weeks before the election. This storm and everything that comes
Speaker 4: with it might have massive political implications, including the ability
Speaker 4: of voters to vote at all.
Speaker 6: Right, exactly, you two have been covering closely how the
Speaker 6: storm and electoral politics have kind of been intertwining here.
Speaker 6: We've been talking a lot about rhetoric at the top
Speaker 6: of the ticket, but I would also say I'm watching
Speaker 6: voter access, for example, in some of these hard hit states,
Speaker 6: including battleground states like North Carolina, where we're already seeing
Speaker 6: them implement some emergency provisions to allow for mail in
Speaker 6: ballots to be more easily attained if you are in
Speaker 6: a disaster zone, even in Florida, of Florida's governor Ron
Speaker 6: de Santis, for example, is reevaluating some of the polling
Speaker 6: sites to make sure that there are in accessible areas.
Speaker 6: And then beyond that, as we've been covering, the economy
Speaker 6: is always repeatedly the top issue according to our Bloomberg
Speaker 6: News Morning Console polling, and we're going to be watching
Speaker 6: how the economic impacts from the storm could impact voters
Speaker 6: in some of these key states. For example, if you
Speaker 6: look at Florida. A lot of those key ports, like
Speaker 6: the Port of Tampa, the largest port in the state,
Speaker 6: being closed. How that's going to impact supply chain issues
Speaker 6: taking us right up to election day.
Speaker 4: Very good point, Bloomberg, Tyler Kendall, great reporting, Thank you
Speaker 4: so much, and Joe, it is something to consider here.
Speaker 4: The optics of all of this, let alone the actual physical,
Speaker 4: tangible impact on ability of people to vote in that
Speaker 4: kind of thing. The optics of the response, how federal
Speaker 4: officials and other elected members of office respond to this,
Speaker 4: including whether or not they returned to Washington, could be
Speaker 4: something very impactful on the ultimate vote just weeks from now.
Speaker 2: Well, that's for sure. And if the Speaker holds the
Speaker 2: line on this and we wait for everybody to come
Speaker 2: back after the election, we are really getting a good
Speaker 2: sense of what this lame duck session is shaping up
Speaker 2: to be. We knew it would be an emergency request.
Speaker 2: A lot of folks thought it might be for the Pentagon.
Speaker 2: Looks like it will be for a disaster relief once again.
Speaker 4: Indeed, so for more on the disaster relief that's needed
Speaker 4: and the kind of funding issues we seem to be
Speaker 4: running into again and again We're pleased to be joined
Speaker 4: now by former FEMA Deputy Administrator for Resilience, Daniel Kanuski.
Speaker 4: He is now marsh mcclenn in Public Sector Managing Director,
Speaker 4: and he's here with us in our Washington, d C. Studio.
Speaker 4: Thanks for being here. On balance of is we consider
Speaker 4: this funding question the idea that FEMA now after these
Speaker 4: two storms, may not be in a very strong position
Speaker 4: to respond to anything else that could come this hurricane
Speaker 4: season or any other disasters because of the extent to
Speaker 4: which resources have been depleted. How great of a problem
Speaker 4: is it that we even have to consider these vulnerabilities
Speaker 4: in the first place.
Speaker 8: Well, certainly, the two hurricanes back to back have strained
Speaker 8: FEMA's resources. It strained its budget, it's strained its personnel,
Speaker 8: and it's trained its ability to respond effectively to future disasters. Now,
Speaker 8: knock on wood, let's hope that there's not any major
Speaker 8: disasters that happen right now. But assuming not, we're really
Speaker 8: you know, they're going to be really focused on that
Speaker 8: recovery and prioritizing all of those resources, whether they be
Speaker 8: personnel or funding, to those two major disasters. But let's
Speaker 8: not forget there are many other disasters that FEMA is
Speaker 8: still on the ground for a still helping communities recover
Speaker 8: from those disasters number in the hundreds.
Speaker 2: So to that end, that's exactly what I wanted to
Speaker 2: ask you about. Are we two weeks from now playing
Speaker 2: triage with money and turning away from recovery from fires
Speaker 2: in California or in Hawaii for that matter.
Speaker 8: Well, the FEMA administrator does have the authority to prioritize
Speaker 8: those immediate needs, and that there is precedent for That's
Speaker 8: happened several times even recently, so I would expect that
Speaker 8: if funding started to get lower than what the FEMA
Speaker 8: administrator felt comfortable with, she would prioritize funding for those
Speaker 8: immediate response needs. With the two disasters we've recently experienced. Now,
Speaker 8: long term, you're absolutely right, like the concern would be
Speaker 8: that those communities that are still recovering from those disasters
Speaker 8: that were weeks, months, even years ago are going to
Speaker 8: be slowed down in their long term recovery, in their
Speaker 8: ability to bounce back from those disasters and build resilience.
Speaker 8: So certainly a concern, but prioritizing the current response needs
Speaker 8: would be the priority.
Speaker 4: Well, as you mentioned, resilience which of course is what
Speaker 4: you focused on at FEMA. To what extent is this
Speaker 4: conversation one that needs to be had not just about
Speaker 4: making sure enough money is there, that you aren't constantly
Speaker 4: having to request emergency supplementals, but also that adequate investment
Speaker 4: is being made in resilience, in mitigation, in adapting to
Speaker 4: a climate that is changing and storms that we've seen
Speaker 4: can grow more powerful over warm ocean water for example.
Speaker 8: Well, certainly resilience needs to be a priority, and I'm
Speaker 8: so heartened that FEMA is now largely known as the
Speaker 8: disaster resilience Agency. It wasn't always that. That wasn't always
Speaker 8: the case. Quite frankly, it was always known as this
Speaker 8: agency that would provide funding and support after disaster, which
Speaker 8: is absolutely critical. But in those times we're not experienced
Speaker 8: a disaster, FEMA and the emergency management community should really
Speaker 8: be focused on investments that can reduce future disaster losses.
Speaker 2: Were we in a world in which funding should increase
Speaker 2: along with the temperature.
Speaker 8: Well I think that, no question, funding will have to
Speaker 8: increase for funds like the Disaster Relief Fund, which needs
Speaker 8: to constantly be replenished based on these large disasters. There
Speaker 8: is an increasing amount of funding being spent on the
Speaker 8: pre disaster programs, and again, that is the right direction
Speaker 8: to go because we know that for every one dollar
Speaker 8: invested in risk reduction programs, save six dollars when the
Speaker 8: disaster occurs. And that's just the savings to the federal government.
Speaker 8: If you layer on top of that the economic savings.
Speaker 8: Thanks to a recent report by All State in the
Speaker 8: US Chamber of Commerce, they found that number is actually
Speaker 8: thirteen to one.
Speaker 4: Do you feel like lawmakers in Washington recognize that or
Speaker 4: is this just something that happens in the agency?
Speaker 8: I think it was. Let's go back to twenty seventeen.
Speaker 8: When I was at the agency. We had back to
Speaker 8: back hurricanes, Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, and policy makers,
Speaker 8: to their credit, came to us and said, what can
Speaker 8: we do to prevent this in the future. What can
Speaker 8: we do to lessen the impact on taxpayers and lessen
Speaker 8: the impact on disaster survivors? And we said, give us
Speaker 8: a pre disaster hazard mitigation program, let us invest ahead
Speaker 8: of time before that aster occurs. And that report from
Speaker 8: the National Institute of Building Sciences, that six to one
Speaker 8: number had just come out, So it's really the confluence
Speaker 8: of that data, empirical data that says mitigation saves combined
Speaker 8: with those increasing disaster losses.
Speaker 4: How quickly does it save?
Speaker 9: Though?
Speaker 4: I mean, if we're talking about these kind of investments
Speaker 4: and rethinking the way you build, perhaps where you build
Speaker 4: the kind of infrastructure required to better withstand these natural disasters,
Speaker 4: you can't just do that overnight.
Speaker 9: Right.
Speaker 4: This is not something that's going to change the game
Speaker 4: for hurricane season twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: Five, that's right.
Speaker 8: It will lessen the impacts of that future disaster. So
Speaker 8: in the interim, there's a number of steps that can
Speaker 8: be taken too. Well mentioned preparedness, so being prepared to
Speaker 8: effectively respond to that disaster, realizing you can't reduce that
Speaker 8: disaster risk to zero. And you've seen communities that are
Speaker 8: prepared and those that are less prepared. There are federal
Speaker 8: dollars available to help those communities prepare. The second point
Speaker 8: I would make is insurance. Insurance fills that gap, right,
Speaker 8: that fills the gap between that level of preparedness or
Speaker 8: the risk being fully mitigated, and the disaster that's inevitably
Speaker 8: going to occur. So everyone needs to have insurance. The homeowners,
Speaker 8: governments need to have it, and that insurance is what
Speaker 8: protects you against the financial consequences of these inevitable disasters.
Speaker 2: We reached out to you because you were FEMA's deputy
Speaker 2: administrator for resilience. It's tough to be resilient when people
Speaker 2: don't trust you. And I wonder, based on your experience,
Speaker 2: your unique perspective, how corrosive has been this round of
Speaker 2: miss and disinformation to the reputation and effectiveness of FEMA.
Speaker 8: Well, unfortunately, misinformation is part of a catastrophic disaster response.
Speaker 8: It's simply because during a catastrophic disaster, communications are knocked out.
Speaker 8: People aren't having access to the information that they would
Speaker 8: normally have access to, and in the absence of information,
Speaker 8: they grasp at anything that might be available and that
Speaker 8: might not be a trusted government source. So what I
Speaker 8: can say is in disasters, what we often say is
Speaker 8: make sure you have multiple ways to communicate. Make sure
Speaker 8: you have things like, you know, a radio and backup
Speaker 8: generators in ways so that you can get that information
Speaker 8: directly from government officials who will give you who are
Speaker 8: the truth tellers during a disaster, and in that way,
Speaker 8: you're not going to be swayed by this misinformation.
Speaker 4: If we could go back to something you were just
Speaker 4: mentioning about the importance of having insurance in some of
Speaker 4: these areas, including Florida, which was just slammed by Milton.
Speaker 4: Insurance can be prohibitively expensive in some areas. We understand
Speaker 4: it's not even provided because the risk is so great
Speaker 4: a flooding and what have you. How do we solve
Speaker 4: that problem.
Speaker 8: Well, if we're talking about home if we're talking about
Speaker 8: insurance for individuals as opposed to governments. But for individuals,
Speaker 8: there's homeowners and renters insurance and there's flood insurance, and
Speaker 8: oftentimes you know, those are two separate policies. Now, for
Speaker 8: homeowners insurance, you're seeing increasing strain on the homeowner's market.
Speaker 8: It could be because of disasters such as what we're
Speaker 8: seeing in Florida, wildfires in California, or it could be
Speaker 8: because of other reasons, including inflation that we're all dealing with. Nonetheless,
Speaker 8: homeowners need to have obviously adequate homeowners insurance. Renters need
Speaker 8: to have insurance. But let's focus on flood for a second.
Speaker 8: Flood insurance is something that the federal government provides. The
Speaker 8: federal government has to offer that to you. So it's
Speaker 8: not a matter of availability for flood insurance. It's more
Speaker 8: a matter of affordability to reduce the cost of flood insurance.
Speaker 8: I think there's a couple of important points here. One
Speaker 8: is we need to reduce the risk, going back to
Speaker 8: the earlier points. To the extent that the reduce the
Speaker 8: risk is reduced, those flood insurance premiums will be more affordable.
Speaker 8: The second point, though, since we're sitting here in Washington,
Speaker 8: is that we need to reform the National Flood Insurance Program.
Speaker 8: The program is in desperate need of reform. There are
Speaker 8: a dozen or so reforms that have been not only
Speaker 8: floated but proposed by FEMA. If you go to the
Speaker 8: FEMA website, you can actually see the legislative language that
Speaker 8: they have proposed, and yet action has not taken. And
Speaker 8: until those actions are taken, until there's reforms made to
Speaker 8: the National Flood Insurance Program, we're going to be dealing
Speaker 8: with the situation again and again in the future.
Speaker 2: So you get to the heart of the matter here,
Speaker 2: and of course that I don't mean to set you
Speaker 2: up with a minute left, but clearly Ashville has shown
Speaker 2: us that something needs to be done. What do you
Speaker 2: do to the flood maps, What do you do to
Speaker 2: the system to make this work better?
Speaker 8: Yeah, the cold, hard truth is only about four percent
Speaker 8: of American households have flood insurance. That's a huge problem,
Speaker 8: and as big of a problem as that is, it's
Speaker 8: much bigger in those areas hardest hit. In North Carolina,
Speaker 8: one percent or less of those households had flood insurag.
Speaker 8: That means they're going to be completely dependent on their
Speaker 8: own savings, on government programs and other community wide, hopefully
Speaker 8: efforts that can help safeguard those individuals. But the reality
Speaker 8: is it's not going to be enough. Those in North
Speaker 8: Carolina are going to have a tough, long recovery.
Speaker 2: So throw the map out and start over.
Speaker 8: I'm just saying something needs to be done. Innovative solutions
Speaker 8: do exist in the flood insurance market. We have community
Speaker 8: based catastrophe insurance that we've been talking about for two
Speaker 8: or three years now. But very few communities are taking
Speaker 8: up these innovative flood programs because either they don't realize
Speaker 8: the risking says, or they've grown dependent on the government programs.
Speaker 2: Really lucky that you came by. We were looking forward
Speaker 2: to the conversation. Daniel, Thank you. Daniel Kanuski is at
Speaker 2: Marshall mcclennan, now public sector Managing Director, but was famous
Speaker 2: Deputy administrator for Resilience. Smart talk here as you would
Speaker 2: expect on Balance of Power, Daniel, thank you, as we
Speaker 2: bring you voices of experience every day here when it
Speaker 2: comes to policy and politics in Washington, we'll have much
Speaker 2: more ahead our signature panels up next, Rick and Jeanie
Speaker 2: alongside Kaylee Lines. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 1: roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 4: I'm Cailey Lines alongside Joe Matthew here in Washington, where,
Speaker 4: of course we always bring you the latest policy analysis
Speaker 4: and the most relevant polling. As we get closer and
Speaker 4: closer to November fifth, and while we've been looking at
Speaker 4: the breakdown Joe of just Trump voters versus Harris's voters
Speaker 4: and those who still remain undecided. Although that's a very
Speaker 4: small basket, we're talking about there's a lot more nuance
Speaker 4: within these figures than that, including the demographic breakdowns of
Speaker 4: who is supporting who are more importantly, who is choosing
Speaker 4: not to support the other candidate, and numbers we've seen historically.
Speaker 4: We know that there's a big difference in terms of gender,
Speaker 4: men more likely for Trump, women more likely for Harris,
Speaker 4: but also other demographics as well, including black voters and
Speaker 4: Hispanic voters.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're going into the cross tabs here where things
Speaker 2: get actually interesting and it's really affecting the strategy, the
Speaker 2: travel decisions, the advertising decisions for both campaigns. Is it
Speaker 2: as simple as that? Is this bros versus gals? Because
Speaker 2: when you start reading some of the tipsies this morning,
Speaker 2: you really start to think that Donald Trump is acting
Speaker 2: that way, is going on a series of podcasts and
Speaker 2: interviews that are geared toward young men. Of course, we
Speaker 2: know that Kamala Harris has been doing the exact opposite,
Speaker 2: talking about reproductive rights in some more favorable forums. Last
Speaker 2: evening at the Univision town hall, things got pretty emotional
Speaker 2: as a matter of fact, talking about a lot of
Speaker 2: kitchen table issues. But it was Barack Obama who made
Speaker 2: the headline on his first night out in the series
Speaker 2: of events for Kamala Harris in Pittsburgh, we should hear
Speaker 2: that the former president speaking to young black men about
Speaker 2: their views of Kamala Harris. Let's listen part of it, I'm.
Speaker 9: Speaking two men directly. Part of it, Well, you just
Speaker 9: aren't feeling and you're coming up with other al Harness.
Speaker 9: I'm a breathe explorer. Anybody you are talking to a barbershop,
Speaker 9: anybody who are talk through your house, your family, Uh,
Speaker 9: the church was coming and then you have to ask them,
Speaker 9: well how did that because the women in our lives
Speaker 9: have been in.
Speaker 2: That's this entire time, Barack Obama talking about you just
Speaker 2: aren't feeling the idea of a woman as president. Let's
Speaker 2: assemble our panel. Genie Shanzano is with US and Rick
Speaker 2: Davis Bloomberg Politics Contributors. Genie is Senior Democracy Fellow with
Speaker 2: the Center for the Study of the Presidency in Congress.
Speaker 2: Rick is, of course partner at Stone Court Capital. Surely, Genie,
Speaker 2: it couldn't be as simple as men versus women in
Speaker 2: this campaign, or is it?
Speaker 10: It is a huge gender gap. And I like how
Speaker 10: you said bros versus gals. I mean we are seeing
Speaker 10: it in poll after poll, the New York Times poll,
Speaker 10: the Siena poll, also Quinnipiac in the some of the
Speaker 10: key battle ground states. And I would just add one
Speaker 10: and that is the Harris Harvard Youth poll where they
Speaker 10: show that the divide is enormous, with young people, young
Speaker 10: women going for Harris by almost fifty percent if you
Speaker 10: can believe it. So the divide is real. It is there,
Speaker 10: and you know, I think there's a lot of factors
Speaker 10: that contribute it, to contribute to it rather but one
Speaker 10: that is really important, and I see it with young
Speaker 10: people in the classroom. These two groups are getting information
Speaker 10: from very different media outlets, and I think we need
Speaker 10: more work to back this up, but I would suspect
Speaker 10: the research will show that that is helping drive this division,
Speaker 10: as some of the media outlets where they are depending
Speaker 10: on not just for political news, but news and information
Speaker 10: of all kinds, has embraced political talk in a really
Speaker 10: heightened election year.
Speaker 4: Rick, to bring you into this conversation as we consider
Speaker 4: the message of the reaching out to different demographic groups
Speaker 4: or who they just seem to be doubling down on
Speaker 4: through the selection, say of Jade Vance's vice president you
Speaker 4: might be doubling down on young men, not necessarily trying
Speaker 4: to bring in women alongside. For Kamala Harris, it does
Speaker 4: seem that a bit of work here was delegated to
Speaker 4: Barack Obama, a former president who also happens to be
Speaker 4: a black man. Is he the most effective messenger of
Speaker 4: the Harris campaign has in its corner right now for
Speaker 4: the voters that she does not yet have?
Speaker 11: You know, I think that's a big question that you
Speaker 11: have to even go deeper into the cross stabs. I mean,
Speaker 11: Genie's right, the younger you get, the bigger the divide
Speaker 11: between male and female voters. But then you slice and
Speaker 11: dice that to in the group that the former president
Speaker 11: was referring to as young black men, and young black
Speaker 11: men are a weak spot in the Democratic coalition right now.
Speaker 11: They used to be able to depend upon the homogeneity
Speaker 11: of black vote and that seems to be starting a
Speaker 11: splinter And part of that is because they're getting information
Speaker 11: the young black men from different sources than they used to,
Speaker 11: and a lot of this has emerged over the course
Speaker 11: of this campaign. This was We've always had a functional
Speaker 11: gender gap between Republicans and Democrats, but only a couple
Speaker 11: dozen percent. This is much different than what has existed
Speaker 11: in previous campaigns. So in the case of young black men, yes,
Speaker 11: does that impact young white men the way they hope
Speaker 11: Barack Obama impacts young black men, Probably not young Hispanic men,
Speaker 11: probably a different source. I think ultimately this has got
Speaker 11: to be on Harris's top priority list. You know, she
Speaker 11: has to create the bond between her and these constituencies,
Speaker 11: and they're moving around, and so if she doesn't close
Speaker 11: that deal soon, then she's going to lose them to
Speaker 11: the Republicans and to Donald Trump. And a lot of
Speaker 11: their issues are not the ones the Harris campaign talking about.
Speaker 11: They care about these woke issues. They they're there. They're
Speaker 11: anti transgender, they're you know, anti cancel culture because they've
Speaker 11: been the victims of cancel culture. You know, the TV
Speaker 11: they watch is not acceptable, the foods they eat aren't appropriate,
Speaker 11: the way they exercise is not the right way to
Speaker 11: do it. I mean, like there's a there's a whole
Speaker 11: cause and effect of this, and it's usually cultural issues
Speaker 11: that bring the young male voters into the Republican caucus.
Speaker 2: It's quite a dynamic genie, and I wonder does it
Speaker 2: help Donald Trump to be going to Aurora to talk
Speaker 2: about the border in Venezuelan gangs. When it comes to
Speaker 2: either holding or winning over that demographic.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I mean, this is gonna be what we hear
Speaker 10: from Donald Trump going forward. He is doubling down on
Speaker 10: the base and he has enormous support obviously from non
Speaker 10: college educated white men, particularly young. The challenge for Donald
Speaker 10: Trump with them group is that this is the same
Speaker 10: group that doesn't vote in as large numbers, so that's
Speaker 10: a challenge, and also the challenge that women tend to
Speaker 10: vote more than these men. So those are a couple
Speaker 10: challenges he's facing. And but if anybody can get them out,
Speaker 10: it is Donald Trump. Because you look historically, Donald Trump,
Speaker 10: I think, better than anybody I can remember in recent
Speaker 10: American politics, gets people who aren't energized interested in voting
Speaker 10: out to the polls. So he's able to do it,
Speaker 10: and he's going to try, and that, I fear means
Speaker 10: we will hear a lot more of this doubling down
Speaker 10: on rhetoric. And just to underscore what Rick was talking about,
Speaker 10: the biggest ad that they are spending on right now
Speaker 10: on Trump's side is the anti transgender ad That is
Speaker 10: an ad that has gone you know, viral many social
Speaker 10: media accounts. They've spent big on it, according to ad Impact,
Speaker 10: and that is supposed to do double duty by the
Speaker 10: way of appealing not just to these you know anti
Speaker 10: cancel culture young men.
Speaker 1: You're listening over the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast just
Speaker 1: Live weekdays at Newneaster on Emo car Play and then
Speaker 1: royd Oro with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also
Speaker 1: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York
Speaker 1: station Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: That about the advice of Kamala Harris her sheer power
Speaker 4: to invest not only in advertising but also in the
Speaker 4: ground game. As she's raised over a billion dollars since
Speaker 4: becoming the Democratic candidate, what do you see as her
Speaker 4: ability to have something to show for that when what
Speaker 4: we have actually seen, by and large in most polls
Speaker 4: is the race tightening, not materially moving more in her favor.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I mean the billion dollar mark is incredible when
Speaker 10: you think of the short period of time she has
Speaker 10: been in it. I think we always knew this was
Speaker 10: going to be a tight race, and it has remained
Speaker 10: remarkably stable despite the change of one candidate from the
Speaker 10: top to the other. You know, she has just three
Speaker 10: weeks left, so she is going to have to hit hard.
Speaker 10: I think number one on the economy, number two on
Speaker 10: the issue of healthcare tied to reproduction and abortion, and
Speaker 10: she is going to have to try to reach those
Speaker 10: Nicky Haley voters who just can't see themselves voting for
Speaker 10: Trump and are not quite convinced that she's the person
Speaker 10: to do it. She's going to have to also, I
Speaker 10: think go on the offensive against Donald Trump. We haven't
Speaker 10: seen her do that as much, but I think she
Speaker 10: is going to need to do that and let people
Speaker 10: see and remember who Donald Trump is on January sixth
Speaker 10: and those other times. We're just talking about about one
Speaker 10: point five million voters in seven states who still are
Speaker 10: undecided in this race that she needs to reach and
Speaker 10: quite frankly, Donald Trump needs to reach as well.
Speaker 2: Rick Jenny just said an important name we haven't heard
Speaker 2: in a bit, and that's Nicky Haley. I think it
Speaker 2: was just last weekend Liz Cheney was on stage with
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris. Correct me if it was two weekends ago.
Speaker 2: It's all just kind of a blur at this point,
Speaker 2: and the hope was to unlock that vote, to let
Speaker 2: them know former Nikki Haley supporters that it was safe
Speaker 2: to vote for Kamala Harris. How large is this group?
Speaker 2: How important will it be in November?
Speaker 11: Yeah, when I asked pollsters that question, you know, how
Speaker 11: much Nikki Haley vote may be available to a Harris candidacy,
Speaker 11: you know, they plug it in as about ten percent,
Speaker 11: you know, And that's an extrapolation of numbers based on
Speaker 11: what we saw the vote against Donald Trump late in
Speaker 11: the primary season for Nicki Haley, things like that, And
Speaker 11: so it's a big chunk. There's no question that it
Speaker 11: could be a material difference. State by state would have
Speaker 11: a different impact based on, you know, the amount of
Speaker 11: campaigning and name I d that Nikki Haley had in
Speaker 11: places like Pennsylvania or Michigan. So so it's not immaterial,
Speaker 11: But it's also one of these hardest votes to get
Speaker 11: because you're really trying to get a functional Republican to
Speaker 11: vote for a Democrat. And obviously, using the Cheneese and
Speaker 11: other Republicans who have endorsed Nikki Hailey or Harris as
Speaker 11: a permission structure to do that has worked in the
Speaker 11: past for Biden. But that's a big question right now.
Speaker 11: I think what's really most amazing is just how hard
Speaker 11: the campaigns are working to get people to expand the
Speaker 11: base of this electorate. It's not so much who's already
Speaker 11: available in making up their minds, it's who's never voted
Speaker 11: and are going to show up this time, and that's inefficient.
Speaker 4: All right, Very good point from Rick Davis. As always,
Speaker 4: thank you so much. Alongside g Schanzeno.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Ketch
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on APO CarPlay and
Speaker 1: then Proud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcast are watch us live
Speaker 1: on YouTube.
Speaker 2: There's a lot I wanted to talk about with Aisha Mills.
Speaker 2: This is where we're going to start our conversation. The
Speaker 2: democratic political strategist and social impact advisor is back with
Speaker 2: us here on Bloomberg. Aisha, I'm happy to see you.
Speaker 2: Thanks for coming on. We talked a couple of days
Speaker 2: back about this idea of the former president visiting Springfield, Ohio, or,
Speaker 2: in the case of today, Aurora, Colorado. He's talked about
Speaker 2: Venezuela and gang's taking over the town, and this is
Speaker 2: an opportunity, I guess for the campaign to talk about
Speaker 2: border security. And I'm sure we're going to hear a
Speaker 2: lot about Kamala Harris as the so called borders are.
Speaker 2: What is this doing to the campaign?
Speaker 5: Though?
Speaker 2: And from a strategic standpoint, We're not spending time in
Speaker 2: swing states here, We're going to Aurora to make what point.
Speaker 12: You know, Look, there are so many things that we
Speaker 12: could actually be talking about subsnatively with regards to our
Speaker 12: immigration policies generally and the root causes of migration to
Speaker 12: the United States and the economic impact of that. Right Like,
Speaker 12: there are some real conversations to be had. Kamala Harris
Speaker 12: was actually charged with thinking about and figuring out what
Speaker 12: those root causes were, trying to come up with some
Speaker 12: diplomatic approach with Central American countries, with Mexico to be
Speaker 12: able to stem the crisis that is sending people here,
Speaker 12: and then certainly to make sure that where we need
Speaker 12: to be tough in our laws, that we are not
Speaker 12: bringing folks here who are going to do Americans harm
Speaker 12: in any way, right, that we are not emboldening sex
Speaker 12: trafficking or drug trafficking. Or on and on and on. Right,
Speaker 12: there are conversations that I absolutely agree matter to Americans
Speaker 12: that are important to have about immigration. What we shouldn't
Speaker 12: be doing is demonizing, stereotyping people based on falsehoods and
Speaker 12: just flat out lies. And I think that, you know,
Speaker 12: that is one of the problems with the Republicans and
Speaker 12: certainly with the Trump campaign, is that they are missing
Speaker 12: an opportunity to have a real conversation about immigration in
Speaker 12: the United States, that we can all find some common
Speaker 12: ground around solutions, and instead they are literally talking about
Speaker 12: people as if they are villains, as if they are criminals.
Speaker 12: They are making up lies about entire populations of people,
Speaker 12: and they're doing it in a way that is lifting
Speaker 12: up this trope of nationalism and frankly white nationalism that
Speaker 12: I don't think that most people agree with in this country.
Speaker 12: I think it's toxic, and I don't think that it's
Speaker 12: going to win them any favors or any votes.
Speaker 2: I guess I'm just trying to figure the strategy here.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump says that the city has turned into a
Speaker 2: war zone. Those are the words that he used. So
Speaker 2: I went on Google earlier with producer James and we
Speaker 2: checked out the Gaylord Rockies Resort and Convention Center, where
Speaker 2: he's going to be holding his rally later on. It's
Speaker 2: really nice. I'd kind of love to go there for
Speaker 2: a weekend. I have to admit issue, What is the
Speaker 2: purpose of demonizing a city like this? He talked last evening.
Speaker 2: We'll get to this in a minute about he was
Speaker 2: in Detroit. He's talking about, you know, how awful it
Speaker 2: would be to make the whole country like Detroit. I
Speaker 2: guess that it's counterintuitive to me in a race that
Speaker 2: is so close. Why we're using this method instead of
Speaker 2: talking about, say the economy.
Speaker 12: Yeah, well, listen, I appreciate you doing your due diligence
Speaker 12: and homework to get a sense of where it is
Speaker 12: that Donald Trump is standing when he's actually making all
Speaker 12: of these accusations right, and assertions about the world. Here's
Speaker 12: the thing. I live in a real community that happens
Speaker 12: to be a low income city in America, not unlike
Speaker 12: a Detroit. We are going through a lot of evolution
Speaker 12: and changes. I am on the ground here with real people.
Speaker 12: We are walking the streets, living our lives. We understand crime,
Speaker 12: we understand education, we understand the need for healthcare, for jobs,
Speaker 12: all those things. Donald Trump is making these accusations and
Speaker 12: coming up with these false narratives from mar A Lago,
Speaker 12: his mansion, from golf courses that he owns, from beautiful
Speaker 12: hotels like the one that you see that he's going
Speaker 12: to be doing this rally out there. He is standing
Speaker 12: in a place of elitism, making accusations about what's happening
Speaker 12: in on Main Street right a place that he doesn't
Speaker 12: actually go. And the reason why, to your point strategically
Speaker 12: is that, look, we are twenty days out from, you know,
Speaker 12: from the actual election day. We people are voting right
Speaker 12: now all around this country, and the way the path
Speaker 12: to two seventy to be able to win this election
Speaker 12: is really at this point a turnout game. It's about
Speaker 12: getting your base out to vote. Kamala Harris is out
Speaker 12: there talking to everybody that she possibly can that is
Speaker 12: going to come out and vote for her. We're kind
Speaker 12: of outside of a place now of moving new people,
Speaker 12: and I believe that what he is doing is he's
Speaker 12: trying to stoke his base. Now it's a very narrow
Speaker 12: swath of Americans, but they are very religiously having feels
Speaker 12: to him and are going to show up for him.
Speaker 12: So he makes up these stories about how frankly brown
Speaker 12: people coming to the United States are doing harm to
Speaker 12: his base of you know, white working class Americans in
Speaker 12: order to get them briled up to make sure that
Speaker 12: they come out and vote. And you know, he thinks
Speaker 12: it's a winning strategy. Did in twenty sixteen, didn't work
Speaker 12: in twenty twenty, and I don't think it's going to
Speaker 12: work this time.
Speaker 2: All right, Let's turn to the other campaign, and that
Speaker 2: is the Harris campaign. And what well, frankly just broadly
Speaker 2: political is labeling it the Bros. Campaign. Today they're both
Speaker 2: fighting over young men, more deliberately over young men of
Speaker 2: color and Aisha. We heard from Barack Obama last night.
Speaker 2: He started the series of events he's doing next four
Speaker 2: weeks for Kamala Harris in Pittsburgh. Listen to this sound
Speaker 2: of the former president speaking to young men about their
Speaker 2: perceptions of Kamala Harris.
Speaker 9: Part of it basically, well, you just are a feeling
Speaker 9: and the other man a woman president, and you're coming
Speaker 9: up with other alternis on areas exported, anybody you are
Speaker 9: talking to, any barbershop, anybody you are talking to in
Speaker 9: your house, in your family, at church was coming with that.
Speaker 9: I think you have to ask them, well, how can
Speaker 9: that be, because the women in our lives have been
Speaker 9: in our backs this entire time.
Speaker 2: That might have been a little bit difficult to hear.
Speaker 2: He was in a campaign headquarters there speaking a bit
Speaker 2: off Mike that you just aren't feeling the idea of
Speaker 2: a woman as president. He said, Ayesha, how real is this?
Speaker 12: I think that's very real. It's very real. Look, we
Speaker 12: have not had a woman president in the United States,
Speaker 12: and when you listen to the rhetoric that is happening
Speaker 12: on one side, it's really a hearken to whatever may
Speaker 12: make America great again means. But it's this idea that
Speaker 12: women are subservient, that women shouldn't have bodily autonomy, right.
Speaker 12: The assault on abortion rights is really an assault on
Speaker 12: women's ability to manage our own health care. That women
Speaker 12: who don't have children and a husband are useless and
Speaker 12: have no purpose in nothing to live for. These are
Speaker 12: things that are coming out or the other side. There's
Speaker 12: a real sexism and a real patriarchy that are still
Speaker 12: part of the undercurrent of our society, whether we like
Speaker 12: it or not. Right, whether we want to admit it
Speaker 12: or not. And I think what Barack Obama is saying,
Speaker 12: and what he's always said having been raised by a
Speaker 12: single mother, is like, look, we've got to remember that
Speaker 12: the women in our lives have raised us, supported us,
Speaker 12: are the ones who are out there in the world,
Speaker 12: more than half the population of America, by the way,
Speaker 12: doing the hard work and order for us to be great.
Speaker 12: So why would we have any blink of an eye
Speaker 12: about a woman leading this country as president of the
Speaker 12: United States. It's an important conversation to have because there
Speaker 12: are so many other messages that are being pushed to
Speaker 12: suggest that women's place is only in the home, and
Speaker 12: that if she's single and has cats, then she is
Speaker 12: useless and you know, not healthy for society, and that
Speaker 12: all she should be doing is raising kids, when in
Speaker 12: fact that isn't true. And so that's what you're hearing
Speaker 12: this appeal to men to be reminded that men, you know,
Speaker 12: you have mothers, you have sisters, many of them have
Speaker 12: daughters themselves. That the world moves, their world moves because
Speaker 12: of women and because of the strength of women, and
Speaker 12: certainly we can have a president that's a woman.
Speaker 2: Well, look at the Trump strategy here. This is I
Speaker 2: mentioned the battle for the bros. This is political writing.
Speaker 2: They refer to the NLK boys. Producer James had to
Speaker 2: tell me who that was. Pro Trump millennial pranksters with
Speaker 2: more than eight million YouTube subscribers. These guys do like
Speaker 2: college drinking games or whatever on YouTube, launching a multimillion
Speaker 2: dollar voter registration campaign aisha. They plan to capitalize on
Speaker 2: college football game tailgates, gaming sites, male friendly podcasts, even
Speaker 2: Tender and another podcast I can't even read on the air.
Speaker 2: He's going for broke on this. What's Kamala Harris doing?
Speaker 12: You know, listen, But let's talk about that going for
Speaker 12: broke though, because it's such a broken sense of masculinity
Speaker 12: and bros and who bros are, right, like, when you
Speaker 12: look at the two the men who are present on
Speaker 12: either side, the Democratic ticket or the Republican ticket, when
Speaker 12: you look at who Donald Trump is advertising to. With
Speaker 12: all of that, their conversation is very much a patriarchal
Speaker 12: old school like man that does locker room talk right,
Speaker 12: that is held liable for sexual assault because you should
Speaker 12: be able to do whatever you want to a moment, right,
Speaker 12: And it's all just locker room talk. Saying nasty things,
Speaker 12: being a bully, being a bully. Really, on the other side,
Speaker 12: you've got Doug Kamala's husband, right, who's a kind, compassionate
Speaker 12: guy who's a father figure. You've got Governor walt Coach
Speaker 12: Waltz who is is a veteran and also a coach
Speaker 12: and a teacher and tender and kindness. So I think
Speaker 12: that this idea of a bro is really something that's
Speaker 12: on the ballot right now. The definition of a bro
Speaker 12: is it Ted Lasso, who is a kind, compassionate football guy, right,
Speaker 12: But someone who is taking that and that's the thing
Speaker 12: that's going to be on the ballot is this, Do
Speaker 12: we want a small segment of the population that still
Speaker 12: thinks that we should have locker room talk and be
Speaker 12: bullies and nasty and that's who they're appealing to, or
Speaker 12: do we believe that like men are decent, kind, respectful,
Speaker 12: wholesome humans. Right. We'll see how that plays out, but
Speaker 12: that's who they're going after with those ads for sure.
Speaker 12: Is that small segment of the bully population of bros.
Speaker 2: Are we getting Ted Lasso on James? I feel like
Speaker 2: that would be a great show. Are we working on
Speaker 2: that come back? On issue with Ted Lasso's son. Great
Speaker 2: to talk to you. As always, Aisha Mill's democratic political
Speaker 2: strategists social impact advice her with usun Bloomberg. Thanks for
Speaker 2: listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to
Speaker 2: subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever
Speaker 2: you get your podcasts, and you can find us live
Speaker 2: every weekday from Washington, DC at Noontimeeastern at Bloomberg dot com.