Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. This is the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia podcast. I'm Doug Krisner. You can join Brian Curtis and myself for the stories, making news and moving markets in the APAC region. You can subscribe to the show anywhere you get your podcast and always on Bloomberg Radio, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App.

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. This is the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia podcast. I'm Doug Krisner. You can join Brian Curtis and myself for the stories, making news and moving markets in the APAC region. You can subscribe to the show anywhere you get your podcast and always on Bloomberg Radio, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App.

Terry Spath, founder and CIO of Zumo Wealth. So, Terry, the China stimulus is also providing another leg for the bulls to stand on with the soft landing thesis, and people are factoring that in. But it is also competition for funds. There's no doubt about that. It could be sucking money away from US assets. But then on the other hand, this stimulus is likely to be good for the Chinese economy. So how are you reading the stimulus and how are you playing it?

Terry Spath, founder and CIO of Zumo Wealth. So, Terry, the China stimulus is also providing another leg for the bulls to stand on with the soft landing thesis, and people are factoring that in. But it is also competition for funds. There's no doubt about that. It could be sucking money away from US assets. But then on the other hand, this stimulus is likely to be good for the Chinese economy. So how are you reading the stimulus and how are you playing it?

Yeah, we have to talk about China.

Yeah, we have to talk about China.

As you pointed out that massive nose fleed rally that we've seen recently, they've unlined the government there is really unleashed a massive stimulus and those measures have led to these astonishing gains. They're all really good measures. They're sweeping stimulus that's going on. They've delivered a rate cut, there's lower mortgage rates, there's a range of monetary easing measures.

As you pointed out that massive nose fleed rally that we've seen recently, they've unlined the government there is really unleashed a massive stimulus and those measures have led to these astonishing gains. They're all really good measures. They're sweeping stimulus that's going on. They've delivered a rate cut, there's lower mortgage rates, there's a range of monetary easing measures.

A lot of capital is being encouraged to be lent, and.

A lot of capital is being encouraged to be lent, and.

That's what's driving I think mostly this just ricochet to the upside that we've seen.

That's what's driving I think mostly this just ricochet to the upside that we've seen.

And you know, we're still at levels.

And you know, we're still at levels.

What's interesting is we're still at levels for these for the Chinese equities, that are lower than they were five years ago. On the flip side, you've got rsi's or relative stock relative strength of north of eighty five, which signals over bought situation for those stocks.

What's interesting is we're still at levels for these for the Chinese equities, that are lower than they were five years ago. On the flip side, you've got rsi's or relative stock relative strength of north of eighty five, which signals over bought situation for those stocks.

So we're weighing both of those things.

So we're weighing both of those things.

We do think that there's still interesting despite this strong gains. But on the other hand, we think we'll see a pullback and some opportunities to get in at cheaper levels.

We do think that there's still interesting despite this strong gains. But on the other hand, we think we'll see a pullback and some opportunities to get in at cheaper levels.

And the reason for that is that both presidential.

And the reason for that is that both presidential.

Candidates are very hawkish when it comes to China, and we think that that you know, some investors perhaps are forgotten about that, and we'll get some opportunities, but you can also buy right now because relative to prior levels, we're still we're still in negative territory.

Candidates are very hawkish when it comes to China, and we think that that you know, some investors perhaps are forgotten about that, and we'll get some opportunities, but you can also buy right now because relative to prior levels, we're still we're still in negative territory.

For sure, So do you want to be exposed to other markets in the Asia Pacific at the same time. I mean, if you wait for a pullback and then you go into China, do you want to look at Taiwan? Do you want to look at South Korea at the same time.

For sure, So do you want to be exposed to other markets in the Asia Pacific at the same time. I mean, if you wait for a pullback and then you go into China, do you want to look at Taiwan? Do you want to look at South Korea at the same time.

I think those are all interesting ways that you can also play this. I think that the most the clearest path for us is to just look directly at these Chinese ets that you can participate in through I Shares has an MSCI China ETF, Invesco has a goal and Dragon ETF, and that provides great exposure to the trends that are going in in China. And we think that direct investment, directly investing in that theme, I should say, through those ETFs is the is the kind of the cleanest.

I think those are all interesting ways that you can also play this. I think that the most the clearest path for us is to just look directly at these Chinese ets that you can participate in through I Shares has an MSCI China ETF, Invesco has a goal and Dragon ETF, and that provides great exposure to the trends that are going in in China. And we think that direct investment, directly investing in that theme, I should say, through those ETFs is the is the kind of the cleanest.

Way to go.

Way to go.

Yeah, just to put some numbers on the comment that you made earlier about even though we've had this completely crazy rebound that these benchmarks are still way short. The Hangksing Index did gain thirty two percent, you know, since September eleventh, but it's still about thirty three percent below it's high in twenty twenty one. Most markets around the world are higher now than where they were in twenty twenty one, yet the Hangksing index is down by a third. But if you believe in the structural impediments in China, then I guess the greater fool theory kicks in here, where you buy now and sell later to a greater fool. I know that sounds harsh. Markets markets, markets can be cool.

Yeah, just to put some numbers on the comment that you made earlier about even though we've had this completely crazy rebound that these benchmarks are still way short. The Hangksing Index did gain thirty two percent, you know, since September eleventh, but it's still about thirty three percent below it's high in twenty twenty one. Most markets around the world are higher now than where they were in twenty twenty one, yet the Hangksing index is down by a third. But if you believe in the structural impediments in China, then I guess the greater fool theory kicks in here, where you buy now and sell later to a greater fool. I know that sounds harsh. Markets markets, markets can be cool.

Yeah, I hope I'm not the fool in that analogy. I'm not really sure.

Yeah, I hope I'm not the fool in that analogy. I'm not really sure.

Was or not, which is probably means I am. And I do think that you're putting out it is not a risk free trade. And whenever you see the kind of nosebleed rally that we've seen in such a brief amount of time, I mean you could easily look at the chart and be shocked, and look at technical indicators as we mentioned of RSI and be shocked. And those are definitely reasons to give pause. And I do think that, as you you know, there's a number of risks that are still out there. I mean, if Trump takes the office, he's floated the possibility of very high tariffs on Chinese products that could potentially decimate Asian economies. They're really looking at this as a zero sum game with the US and the Harris ticket is very similar. They have the same assertive policies. The Biden administration is kept a lot of the Trump tariffs. They need an added to them in some cases. So there's certainly risks, and you know these stiminus measures might not work. So to just you know, buy because you're worried about missing out and hope that there's fool down the road. You know that's that's not going to.

Was or not, which is probably means I am. And I do think that you're putting out it is not a risk free trade. And whenever you see the kind of nosebleed rally that we've seen in such a brief amount of time, I mean you could easily look at the chart and be shocked, and look at technical indicators as we mentioned of RSI and be shocked. And those are definitely reasons to give pause. And I do think that, as you you know, there's a number of risks that are still out there. I mean, if Trump takes the office, he's floated the possibility of very high tariffs on Chinese products that could potentially decimate Asian economies. They're really looking at this as a zero sum game with the US and the Harris ticket is very similar. They have the same assertive policies. The Biden administration is kept a lot of the Trump tariffs. They need an added to them in some cases. So there's certainly risks, and you know these stiminus measures might not work. So to just you know, buy because you're worried about missing out and hope that there's fool down the road. You know that's that's not going to.

Work, or you buy because you've been short at the market. You have no choice at this point. Let's talk a little bit about what you're seeing here in the US. I mean data today from ADP that was surprisingly strong the market automatically. The knee jerk response is, hey, we're not going to get a super sized rate cut at the November meeting. Where are you on Fed policy between now and the end of the year.

Work, or you buy because you've been short at the market. You have no choice at this point. Let's talk a little bit about what you're seeing here in the US. I mean data today from ADP that was surprisingly strong the market automatically. The knee jerk response is, hey, we're not going to get a super sized rate cut at the November meeting. Where are you on Fed policy between now and the end of the year.

Right, Yeah, I mean, there's what I think is going to happen and what I think should happen.

Right, Yeah, I mean, there's what I think is going to happen and what I think should happen.

So you know what I think. I thought that the Fed could have cut and should.

So you know what I think. I thought that the Fed could have cut and should.

Have cut much sooner and much more quickly than they have. So, you know, we finally got fifty basis points a couple of weeks ago and that was good, except that now we're starting to see these risks on the inflation side of things. I think this escalating conflict in the Middle East that you were talking about earlier in the show is a real risk for inflation.

Have cut much sooner and much more quickly than they have. So, you know, we finally got fifty basis points a couple of weeks ago and that was good, except that now we're starting to see these risks on the inflation side of things. I think this escalating conflict in the Middle East that you were talking about earlier in the show is a real risk for inflation.

This port strike which is just started up in that East coast and on the golf on the Gulf coast.

This port strike which is just started up in that East coast and on the golf on the Gulf coast.

That it can be a real risk to inflation. And so I think even with those those things happening and risk of inflation to the upside, I still think there's a very good chance that the FED cuts and you know, then you's then you've really got a bit of a mess.

That it can be a real risk to inflation. And so I think even with those those things happening and risk of inflation to the upside, I still think there's a very good chance that the FED cuts and you know, then you's then you've really got a bit of a mess.

I'm curious what you think about public markets versus private market. It's very interesting interview that Mark Rowan gave to Bloomberg, the CEO of Apollo, and he's talking about how you know banks are levered twelve to one, and you know private sector companies have low, if any leverage, and that you know, Paula's in this business. So he's talking in his own book to a certain degree. But are you are you wary of private markets for both private credit and private equity or are you game.

I'm curious what you think about public markets versus private market. It's very interesting interview that Mark Rowan gave to Bloomberg, the CEO of Apollo, and he's talking about how you know banks are levered twelve to one, and you know private sector companies have low, if any leverage, and that you know, Paula's in this business. So he's talking in his own book to a certain degree. But are you are you wary of private markets for both private credit and private equity or are you game.

Well, I think for our for our clients, hole we focus exclusively on daily liquidity, so we're always in the public markets, and there's there's often different things going on in both of those markets, but are not as easily investible themes for most for most people and certainly for our client So our focus is primarily on the public market to the debt side as well as the equity side.

Well, I think for our for our clients, hole we focus exclusively on daily liquidity, so we're always in the public markets, and there's there's often different things going on in both of those markets, but are not as easily investible themes for most for most people and certainly for our client So our focus is primarily on the public market to the debt side as well as the equity side.

Terry Spath, founder and CIO of Zooma Wealth and you can also catch some comments that she made on Bloomberg Television earlier.

Terry Spath, founder and CIO of Zooma Wealth and you can also catch some comments that she made on Bloomberg Television earlier.

Onto one of our top stories, open Ai completing a deal today to raise six point six billion dollars in new funding. Let's bring in Bloomberg's Katie Roof. She covers the venture capital Space Force, and she joins us from Los Angeles. Thanks for making time, Katie. From what I understand, we're talking about evaluation now of around one hundred and fifty seven billion dollars. How do we get at that valuation?

Onto one of our top stories, open Ai completing a deal today to raise six point six billion dollars in new funding. Let's bring in Bloomberg's Katie Roof. She covers the venture capital Space Force, and she joins us from Los Angeles. Thanks for making time, Katie. From what I understand, we're talking about evaluation now of around one hundred and fifty seven billion dollars. How do we get at that valuation?

Yeah, that's right. So it's one hundred and fifty billion pre money valuation, meaning prior to the investment, and so the one fifty seven is when you add in the size of the round, which is above six and a half billion, and so all in the company now is a total value of one hundred and fifty seven billion, and you know, just earlier this year it was eighty six billion, so a pretty big jump, Katie.

Yeah, that's right. So it's one hundred and fifty billion pre money valuation, meaning prior to the investment, and so the one fifty seven is when you add in the size of the round, which is above six and a half billion, and so all in the company now is a total value of one hundred and fifty seven billion, and you know, just earlier this year it was eighty six billion, so a pretty big jump, Katie.

What will they do with the six point six billion dollars that they've raised besides spy and video chips.

What will they do with the six point six billion dollars that they've raised besides spy and video chips.

Right, I mean, certainly it's going to be used for a bit of R and D. You know, it's it's a capital intensive business building this AI technology, and it's become a very competitive landscape. You know, there's other highly valued companies in Silicon Valley like Anthropic and cohere, and you know they need to keep investing in their technology to make sure that they are ahead. You also have Elon Musk, which recently raised sixty six billion for his own AI company, Xai, and so know they've got a lot of competition.

Right, I mean, certainly it's going to be used for a bit of R and D. You know, it's it's a capital intensive business building this AI technology, and it's become a very competitive landscape. You know, there's other highly valued companies in Silicon Valley like Anthropic and cohere, and you know they need to keep investing in their technology to make sure that they are ahead. You also have Elon Musk, which recently raised sixty six billion for his own AI company, Xai, and so know they've got a lot of competition.

Boy, but there's been a lot of upheaval. I think it's fair to say in the c suite. Mirror Maradi, who was the chief technology officer, recently stepped away from the company at around the time that we were hearing that the structure from kind of nonprofit status to for profit it's kind of complicated. Maybe you can help me understand that to some extent, but I'm surprised that there is this level of enthusiasm for what may be I don't want to say questionable in terms of leadership going forward, but there are a number of questions around the core group of people who are here right.

Boy, but there's been a lot of upheaval. I think it's fair to say in the c suite. Mirror Maradi, who was the chief technology officer, recently stepped away from the company at around the time that we were hearing that the structure from kind of nonprofit status to for profit it's kind of complicated. Maybe you can help me understand that to some extent, but I'm surprised that there is this level of enthusiasm for what may be I don't want to say questionable in terms of leadership going forward, but there are a number of questions around the core group of people who are here right.

Yes, certainly there are some questions about the direction of the company. They've obviously had a lot of departures and a lot of executive drama. But you know, there's people who are big believers in Sam Altman. I've talked to investors who say, you know, they're okay with some of these other departures, that it's Sam that's the key person for them.

Yes, certainly there are some questions about the direction of the company. They've obviously had a lot of departures and a lot of executive drama. But you know, there's people who are big believers in Sam Altman. I've talked to investors who say, you know, they're okay with some of these other departures, that it's Sam that's the key person for them.

There was this question raised by the ft about open Ai demanding or requesting exclusivity agreements from these investors. In our own reporting, we say that they simply discouraged investors and there was no actual agreement on it. Can you shed any light on this because you're talking about some really big besides Thrive Capital and Microsoft, Causal, a venture's fidelity, some really big investors. How much teeth is there in this request for exclusivity?

There was this question raised by the ft about open Ai demanding or requesting exclusivity agreements from these investors. In our own reporting, we say that they simply discouraged investors and there was no actual agreement on it. Can you shed any light on this because you're talking about some really big besides Thrive Capital and Microsoft, Causal, a venture's fidelity, some really big investors. How much teeth is there in this request for exclusivity?

Yeah, and so a lot of times this happens to a certain degree with private companies where venture capitalists, you know, kind of pick a team. And so we saw this actually already with open ai existing investors Sequoia Capital and Andres and Horowitz. They're not participating in this round because it could be seen as because they invested in Ilia Sutskovar's Safe Superintelligence. Now, Ilia was one of the form board members of open Ai who departed recently, and so it does seem like there's starting to be an emerging pattern here where even if you were an open end investor, if you've gone to Ilia, doesn't seem like you're in this round.

Yeah, and so a lot of times this happens to a certain degree with private companies where venture capitalists, you know, kind of pick a team. And so we saw this actually already with open ai existing investors Sequoia Capital and Andres and Horowitz. They're not participating in this round because it could be seen as because they invested in Ilia Sutskovar's Safe Superintelligence. Now, Ilia was one of the form board members of open Ai who departed recently, and so it does seem like there's starting to be an emerging pattern here where even if you were an open end investor, if you've gone to Ilia, doesn't seem like you're in this round.

Yeah, that was a shocking departure that happened to wild Back talk to us about what it means that Apple didn't participate in this deal.

Yeah, that was a shocking departure that happened to wild Back talk to us about what it means that Apple didn't participate in this deal.

You know, it's hard to say why they chose not to invest. I mean, they had been in discussions. We don't know if they will invest at some point down the road or what the reason was. But they still do have strategic investments. You know, Microsoft has been a continued investor in them, and then in Nvidia joined this round as well.

You know, it's hard to say why they chose not to invest. I mean, they had been in discussions. We don't know if they will invest at some point down the road or what the reason was. But they still do have strategic investments. You know, Microsoft has been a continued investor in them, and then in Nvidia joined this round as well.

I was kind of half joking about the Nvidia question about buying all those chips, but there are some investors out there that are saying. The way I would play this is actually to invest more in Nvidia. We still have a lot of questions about AI, not only on the security side, but also on whether or not it really does eventually get to productivity. What do you hear from investors they think this is going to be a big boon in productivity or not so much.

I was kind of half joking about the Nvidia question about buying all those chips, but there are some investors out there that are saying. The way I would play this is actually to invest more in Nvidia. We still have a lot of questions about AI, not only on the security side, but also on whether or not it really does eventually get to productivity. What do you hear from investors they think this is going to be a big boon in productivity or not so much.

You know, I was in Silicon Valley last week at the Y Combinator demo day, and there was not a single investor who seemed to care about anything other than AI. Everyone just feels like this is, you know, the future of technology and that any business, no matter what their core business is, it's going to incorporate artificial intelligence in a major way.

You know, I was in Silicon Valley last week at the Y Combinator demo day, and there was not a single investor who seemed to care about anything other than AI. Everyone just feels like this is, you know, the future of technology and that any business, no matter what their core business is, it's going to incorporate artificial intelligence in a major way.

That said, is anybody concerned about a level of maybe a hype. We had a very interesting piece on the Bloomberg today quoting an MIT professor of economics, Darren Ausimoglu. He was saying, yes, AI may be promising. There's a little chance though it's going to live up to its hype and by his calculation, only a small percentage of all jobs and I think his figure was merely five percent. Is ripe to be taken over or at least heavily aided by AI over the next decade. So there are a lot of skeptics out there as well.

That said, is anybody concerned about a level of maybe a hype. We had a very interesting piece on the Bloomberg today quoting an MIT professor of economics, Darren Ausimoglu. He was saying, yes, AI may be promising. There's a little chance though it's going to live up to its hype and by his calculation, only a small percentage of all jobs and I think his figure was merely five percent. Is ripe to be taken over or at least heavily aided by AI over the next decade. So there are a lot of skeptics out there as well.

Yeah, absolutely, and there are people that are concerned from an ethical perspective, you know, as you mentioned earlier. But you know, in terms of job displacement, I think, you know, even the investors who believe in AI are well aware that this is going to be something that happens, but they view it as more of an inevitability. They see it as you know, technology is going to continue to develop and that you know, some jobs may become more efficient because they you know, are no longer you know, doing data entry and some of these other technology types of tasks that the technology can handle for them. But yes, certainly there's going to be you know a lot of changes to a lot of jobs, and some of it will be positive and some of it will be negative.

Yeah, absolutely, and there are people that are concerned from an ethical perspective, you know, as you mentioned earlier. But you know, in terms of job displacement, I think, you know, even the investors who believe in AI are well aware that this is going to be something that happens, but they view it as more of an inevitability. They see it as you know, technology is going to continue to develop and that you know, some jobs may become more efficient because they you know, are no longer you know, doing data entry and some of these other technology types of tasks that the technology can handle for them. But yes, certainly there's going to be you know a lot of changes to a lot of jobs, and some of it will be positive and some of it will be negative.

All Right, we'll leave it there, Katie, good stuff, Thank you so much for making time to chat with us. Katie roof Bloomberg Venture Capital reporter joining us from Los Angeles today as we take a closer look at this big funding round for open Ai, the company completing a deal to raise six point six billion in new funding.

All Right, we'll leave it there, Katie, good stuff, Thank you so much for making time to chat with us. Katie roof Bloomberg Venture Capital reporter joining us from Los Angeles today as we take a closer look at this big funding round for open Ai, the company completing a deal to raise six point six billion in new funding.

Charles Stewart, the third Distinguished Professor of Political Science at MIT. Professor, thank you very much for joining us here on Bloomberg Daybreak, Asia. I see in your notes that you say that vice presidential debates don't really move the needle much in general on elections. So what would the impact of this one have been?

Charles Stewart, the third Distinguished Professor of Political Science at MIT. Professor, thank you very much for joining us here on Bloomberg Daybreak, Asia. I see in your notes that you say that vice presidential debates don't really move the needle much in general on elections. So what would the impact of this one have been?

Well, I think a couple of things. One about this election maybe, and then but more importantly, maybe about the future. About this election, I think you know, the debate was helped to establish the characters a bit. It helped to establish Walls as kind of Minnesota nice and every man, maybe a little bit out of his league, but nonetheless a decent guy. For Vance, it established him as smart and perhaps not quite the kind of boogeyman that the Democrats have bade him out to be. So that might change how people perceive those candidates, but probably won't move certainly will not move the needle in the elections of their principles. I think probably the most important will be how these candidates fare for the future, for the twenty twenty eight or thirty two election. Where for on the Van side, I think the outcome is that he showed himself to be kind of up to the task of take of justifying Donald Trump's positions and has set himself up really as certainly an heir to his movement, and so people like Ron DeSantis in Florida have to be now kind of worried about what it's going to look like in twenty eight whereas on the other hand, and Wals didn't seem to have kind of the fire in the belly that Vans or most successful presidential candidates have. And so you know, I suspect the Democratic candidates and waiting, we are breathing a sigh of relief.

Well, I think a couple of things. One about this election maybe, and then but more importantly, maybe about the future. About this election, I think you know, the debate was helped to establish the characters a bit. It helped to establish Walls as kind of Minnesota nice and every man, maybe a little bit out of his league, but nonetheless a decent guy. For Vance, it established him as smart and perhaps not quite the kind of boogeyman that the Democrats have bade him out to be. So that might change how people perceive those candidates, but probably won't move certainly will not move the needle in the elections of their principles. I think probably the most important will be how these candidates fare for the future, for the twenty twenty eight or thirty two election. Where for on the Van side, I think the outcome is that he showed himself to be kind of up to the task of take of justifying Donald Trump's positions and has set himself up really as certainly an heir to his movement, and so people like Ron DeSantis in Florida have to be now kind of worried about what it's going to look like in twenty eight whereas on the other hand, and Wals didn't seem to have kind of the fire in the belly that Vans or most successful presidential candidates have. And so you know, I suspect the Democratic candidates and waiting, we are breathing a sigh of relief.

The tone was pretty surprising to me. I mean, a level of civility and a lot more focus on policy and a fair amount of agreement between the two. Did that surprise you at all?

The tone was pretty surprising to me. I mean, a level of civility and a lot more focus on policy and a fair amount of agreement between the two. Did that surprise you at all?

You know it did, But you know, maybe we're just kind of red. We're kind of used to the new normal. I was, you know, talking to my students today about this and how this debate was kind of similar to every debate that we've seen before, certainly you know, twenty twelve and before, and so you know, maybe there is something about, you know, the particular person of Donald Trump that has led to a certain type of debate, but that you know, candidates can be civil toward each other when when they're not Donald Trump.

You know it did, But you know, maybe we're just kind of red. We're kind of used to the new normal. I was, you know, talking to my students today about this and how this debate was kind of similar to every debate that we've seen before, certainly you know, twenty twelve and before, and so you know, maybe there is something about, you know, the particular person of Donald Trump that has led to a certain type of debate, but that you know, candidates can be civil toward each other when when they're not Donald Trump.

Yeah, there's a there's an elector out there that doesn't really want a nice guy in the office. Now, of course we're talking about vice president instead of president. But I remember talking to some very very intelligent Republican voters who said they want somebody who's going to shake things up. So when you look at what we got from the Minnesota governor about you know, sort of striking that image as an every man and a nice guy. Uh, is that what what voters on the Republican side? I mean, is it easy to reject that?

Yeah, there's a there's an elector out there that doesn't really want a nice guy in the office. Now, of course we're talking about vice president instead of president. But I remember talking to some very very intelligent Republican voters who said they want somebody who's going to shake things up. So when you look at what we got from the Minnesota governor about you know, sort of striking that image as an every man and a nice guy. Uh, is that what what voters on the Republican side? I mean, is it easy to reject that?

Well? I think you know, all these both of these candidates are appealing to their base, but also they need to appeal to the middle in order to win election. That's always the you know, always the tension in a campaign. And so even though you know, the brand right now for Trump and for Vans is really kind of digging in and you know, being aggressive, you have to appeal to people who don't quite like the aggression. And so I think that's the balancing act certainly that Vance was trying to play last night. It seems to me that that would be the most consistent thing to make sense of it is that you know, he's trying to appeal to the so called you know, soccer mom's suburban housewives, that he knows he's going to have to get a few of those in order to win the election.

Well? I think you know, all these both of these candidates are appealing to their base, but also they need to appeal to the middle in order to win election. That's always the you know, always the tension in a campaign. And so even though you know, the brand right now for Trump and for Vans is really kind of digging in and you know, being aggressive, you have to appeal to people who don't quite like the aggression. And so I think that's the balancing act certainly that Vance was trying to play last night. It seems to me that that would be the most consistent thing to make sense of it is that you know, he's trying to appeal to the so called you know, soccer mom's suburban housewives, that he knows he's going to have to get a few of those in order to win the election.

How would you evaluate how the moderators performed and at one point what appeared to be a little bit of fact checking? Did they do a good job.

How would you evaluate how the moderators performed and at one point what appeared to be a little bit of fact checking? Did they do a good job.

Only a little bit of fact checking? You know, I you know, they were not as aggressive on fact checking as certainly the ABC moderators were a couple of weeks ago. But there's a fair argument to be made that it's up to the candidates to do the fact checking. I mean, I think that a lot of the electorate would liked the moderators to do the fact checker because they believe the moderators can kind of go for the jug eater. But you know, the election is not about the moderators. The election is about the candidates. And I think it's a fair argument to be made that if one of the candidates is misrepresenting or lying, then what we should be seeing is the to the other candidate calling them on it. And so if there wasn't heavy fact checking yesterday. You know, it could be as much on the candidates, and I think particularly on on Waltz as it is on the moderators.

Only a little bit of fact checking? You know, I you know, they were not as aggressive on fact checking as certainly the ABC moderators were a couple of weeks ago. But there's a fair argument to be made that it's up to the candidates to do the fact checking. I mean, I think that a lot of the electorate would liked the moderators to do the fact checker because they believe the moderators can kind of go for the jug eater. But you know, the election is not about the moderators. The election is about the candidates. And I think it's a fair argument to be made that if one of the candidates is misrepresenting or lying, then what we should be seeing is the to the other candidate calling them on it. And so if there wasn't heavy fact checking yesterday. You know, it could be as much on the candidates, and I think particularly on on Waltz as it is on the moderators.

Was there anything particularly substantive in the comments about a foreign policy from from the two.

Was there anything particularly substantive in the comments about a foreign policy from from the two.

You know, that was interesting because yesterday, certainly the top of the news was about foreign policy in the Middle East, and so it was understandable that the debate began there. It struck me that both both Fans and Waltz, you know, kind of laid out firm positions for America's place in the role in the Middle East. U They both kind of set up, i would say, again on brand explanations for what their parties would do. Donald Trump would be mean and would get the rest of the world to toe the line. The Democrats will work with their allies, to with our allies to deal with the tough issues around the world. So I think, with respect the tone, the two candidates, you know, kind of set the stage to really display their party's brands. But I don't think there was anything new last night, No headlines about developments on foreign policy, for sure.

You know, that was interesting because yesterday, certainly the top of the news was about foreign policy in the Middle East, and so it was understandable that the debate began there. It struck me that both both Fans and Waltz, you know, kind of laid out firm positions for America's place in the role in the Middle East. U They both kind of set up, i would say, again on brand explanations for what their parties would do. Donald Trump would be mean and would get the rest of the world to toe the line. The Democrats will work with their allies, to with our allies to deal with the tough issues around the world. So I think, with respect the tone, the two candidates, you know, kind of set the stage to really display their party's brands. But I don't think there was anything new last night, No headlines about developments on foreign policy, for sure.

Professor thank you for joining us here on the program. Professor Charles Stewart, the third Distinguished Professor of Political Science, said, mit.

Professor thank you for joining us here on the program. Professor Charles Stewart, the third Distinguished Professor of Political Science, said, mit.

This has been the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia podcast, bringing you the stories making news and moving markets in the Asia Pacific. Visit the Bloomberg Podcast channel on YouTube to get more apt episodes of this and other shows from Bloomberg. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, or anywhere else you listen and always on Bloomberg Radio, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app.

This has been the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia podcast, bringing you the stories making news and moving markets in the Asia Pacific. Visit the Bloomberg Podcast channel on YouTube to get more apt episodes of this and other shows from Bloomberg. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, or anywhere else you listen and always on Bloomberg Radio, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app.