Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Roun Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Roun Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

Given it is Tuesday, that means we are now exactly ten weeks out until election Day, seventy days for those of you who are accounting, and we can bet the candidates, we'll be spending a significant chunk of these next seventy days on the campaign trail, specifically in the key battleground states that ultimately will decide the outcome of this election. We're already seeing that this week with Trump and Vance in Michigan. They'll have to Pennsylvania later on this week as well.

Given it is Tuesday, that means we are now exactly ten weeks out until election Day, seventy days for those of you who are accounting, and we can bet the candidates, we'll be spending a significant chunk of these next seventy days on the campaign trail, specifically in the key battleground states that ultimately will decide the outcome of this election. We're already seeing that this week with Trump and Vance in Michigan. They'll have to Pennsylvania later on this week as well.

Well.

Well.

Kamala Harris and Tim Wallas are getting set to depart on a bus tour of Georgia that begins tomorrow. So let's get into all of this now with one of our reporters on the campaign trail who was actually here in Washington this week, or at least for these few days. Stephanieli covers politics for US at Bloomberg and is joining me in studio. So, Stephanie, I know it's only a matter of time before you're back out on the trail with these candidates, but it does feel like the pace is picking up. And we understand this is by design, at least on the Trump Vance campaign team, given all of the oxygen and energy present in the Harris campaign, they are starting to plan to spend more of their time.

Kamala Harris and Tim Wallas are getting set to depart on a bus tour of Georgia that begins tomorrow. So let's get into all of this now with one of our reporters on the campaign trail who was actually here in Washington this week, or at least for these few days. Stephanieli covers politics for US at Bloomberg and is joining me in studio. So, Stephanie, I know it's only a matter of time before you're back out on the trail with these candidates, but it does feel like the pace is picking up. And we understand this is by design, at least on the Trump Vance campaign team, given all of the oxygen and energy present in the Harris campaign, they are starting to plan to spend more of their time.

On the road.

On the road.

You're certainly right, And if we remember just two weeks ago, Trump had only spent maybe two days on the road, and so the pace that they're going is significantly more intense than they were just you know, earlier this month when it seemed like they were competing against Joe Biden for the presidency. And as you mentioned, of course, part of this is because of all the oxygen that Kamala Harrison her campaign is taking up, but also it's just, you know, it's ten weeks out until the election. We know that the Harris Walls ticket is going to be barnstorming day after day, and so it's just it's the name of the game really at this point.

You're certainly right, And if we remember just two weeks ago, Trump had only spent maybe two days on the road, and so the pace that they're going is significantly more intense than they were just you know, earlier this month when it seemed like they were competing against Joe Biden for the presidency. And as you mentioned, of course, part of this is because of all the oxygen that Kamala Harrison her campaign is taking up, but also it's just, you know, it's ten weeks out until the election. We know that the Harris Walls ticket is going to be barnstorming day after day, and so it's just it's the name of the game really at this point.

Yeah, it doesn't wait till after Labor Day, it seems in this cycle. It's getting going in this week before Labor Day. There's also the question though, of the resources to be able to keep this up over the next ten weeks. As we've talked a lot about the fundraising machine the Harris campaign has been to this point over half a billion dollars raised. How are we likely to see Trump advance events changing with finance financial considerations in mind, Perhaps not as many big rallies.

Yeah, it doesn't wait till after Labor Day, it seems in this cycle. It's getting going in this week before Labor Day. There's also the question though, of the resources to be able to keep this up over the next ten weeks. As we've talked a lot about the fundraising machine the Harris campaign has been to this point over half a billion dollars raised. How are we likely to see Trump advance events changing with finance financial considerations in mind, Perhaps not as many big rallies.

We've actually seen that play out, at least in these last couple of weeks when he has been picking up more of his campaign schedule. There's a handful of events every week that tend to be a smaller audience, maybe you know, at a sheriff's department or in just a smaller arena really where he can still gather supporters, but it doesn't necessarily associate with the cost of buying out an entire arena, filling out an entire you know, stadium with supporters. But this allows him to have a more personalized experience with some of his voters in these key swing states well.

We've actually seen that play out, at least in these last couple of weeks when he has been picking up more of his campaign schedule. There's a handful of events every week that tend to be a smaller audience, maybe you know, at a sheriff's department or in just a smaller arena really where he can still gather supporters, but it doesn't necessarily associate with the cost of buying out an entire arena, filling out an entire you know, stadium with supporters. But this allows him to have a more personalized experience with some of his voters in these key swing states well.

And it also becomes a question of the message he's bringing and the ticket is bringing as a whole to these states. We have seen Donald Trump openly questioning the advice of his own team when it comes to focusing on policy and not personal attacks against Harris or others. Well, Jady Vance does seem like he is talking more about policy. He's supposed to talk about economic policy, specifically in Michigan today he was talking about abortion and to Meet the Press interview over this past weekend. Are we seeing for all of the talk about Jade Vance possibly being able to serve as the attack dog for Donald Trump with his selection as his running mate, that actually it's Trump who's still the attack dog and Jade Vance is the one who's actually articulating policy.

And it also becomes a question of the message he's bringing and the ticket is bringing as a whole to these states. We have seen Donald Trump openly questioning the advice of his own team when it comes to focusing on policy and not personal attacks against Harris or others. Well, Jady Vance does seem like he is talking more about policy. He's supposed to talk about economic policy, specifically in Michigan today he was talking about abortion and to Meet the Press interview over this past weekend. Are we seeing for all of the talk about Jade Vance possibly being able to serve as the attack dog for Donald Trump with his selection as his running mate, that actually it's Trump who's still the attack dog and Jade Vance is the one who's actually articulating policy.

I think it's a really great point. And part of that is because some of the appeal of Donald Trump is his personality, right, It's the personalized attacks that he makes on his opponents, and that's something that his supporters really admire and like of him because he doesn't come off as a politician. So the fact that he's able to still do that while his running mate takes on some of more of that policy discussion does seem to be playing out, you know exactly how you mentioned it.

I think it's a really great point. And part of that is because some of the appeal of Donald Trump is his personality, right, It's the personalized attacks that he makes on his opponents, and that's something that his supporters really admire and like of him because he doesn't come off as a politician. So the fact that he's able to still do that while his running mate takes on some of more of that policy discussion does seem to be playing out, you know exactly how you mentioned it.

Well, speaking of how things are playing out, we of course saw a very energetic convention in Chicago last week for the Democrats culminating, and that's acceptance speech from Kamala Harris. Haven't seen much of her since then. She's not getting back out on the trail in physical form at least until tomorrow, and we still don't know if she's sitting down for that big interview she said she wanted to schedule before the month of August is out. There's only four days left there in August, Stephanie. When are we going to start seeing more from her?

Well, speaking of how things are playing out, we of course saw a very energetic convention in Chicago last week for the Democrats culminating, and that's acceptance speech from Kamala Harris. Haven't seen much of her since then. She's not getting back out on the trail in physical form at least until tomorrow, and we still don't know if she's sitting down for that big interview she said she wanted to schedule before the month of August is out. There's only four days left there in August, Stephanie. When are we going to start seeing more from her?

I mean, so part of that is that they said they would have its scheduled by the end of the month, so that might not necessarily mean that she does the sit down interview before then. But I think that you're right in that she hasn't been as out there. She hasn't been as accessible to the press as Donald Trump has been, and that's exactly what their campaign is focusing on the fact that she's you know, quote unquote hiding behind her advisors and not necessarily getting her message out there. And there's still a lot of questions about what policies she's standing behind, how to actually see them through, and so that's really what we're looking for you know, as we get into these last ten weeks of this election cycle. But time will tell, but it does seem like they are picking up their campaign schedule quite a bit.

I mean, so part of that is that they said they would have its scheduled by the end of the month, so that might not necessarily mean that she does the sit down interview before then. But I think that you're right in that she hasn't been as out there. She hasn't been as accessible to the press as Donald Trump has been, and that's exactly what their campaign is focusing on the fact that she's you know, quote unquote hiding behind her advisors and not necessarily getting her message out there. And there's still a lot of questions about what policies she's standing behind, how to actually see them through, and so that's really what we're looking for you know, as we get into these last ten weeks of this election cycle. But time will tell, but it does seem like they are picking up their campaign schedule quite a bit.

So beginning with the bus tour in Georgia tomorrow and then assuming they might have a pace similar to the Trump Vance ticket beyond that after Labor Day.

So beginning with the bus tour in Georgia tomorrow and then assuming they might have a pace similar to the Trump Vance ticket beyond that after Labor Day.

It certainly looks like that would be the case. I mean, especially with the fact that there is only seventy or so days left. That really is the only way to get your name out there to voters.

It certainly looks like that would be the case. I mean, especially with the fact that there is only seventy or so days left. That really is the only way to get your name out there to voters.

Well, and of course it's not just about getting your name out there, it's about getting people to give you money as well. We talked about the kind of money that Harris has been bringing in, but Jadie Vance is starting to pull some money into given his ties to Silicon Valley. We understand some big named donors are organizing events for him both in New York and California in the coming weeks.

Well, and of course it's not just about getting your name out there, it's about getting people to give you money as well. We talked about the kind of money that Harris has been bringing in, but Jadie Vance is starting to pull some money into given his ties to Silicon Valley. We understand some big named donors are organizing events for him both in New York and California in the coming weeks.

Yeah, so one of the main reasons why Jade Vance was picked as the renting mate was just because of the ties that he has two really wealthy donors and the peal that he has with these folks. And so in the next two or three weeks. He has a couple fundraisers lined up, one of which in Los Angeles, California, with David Sachs, and another in New York with Jacob helperg who runs Pallenteer is a co founder, and so you know, just these names really signal that there is a shift among you know, big tech, you know, big Wall Street money coming in to support Trump. And that's something that their campaign has been really highlighting in the last couple of weeks, all.

Yeah, so one of the main reasons why Jade Vance was picked as the renting mate was just because of the ties that he has two really wealthy donors and the peal that he has with these folks. And so in the next two or three weeks. He has a couple fundraisers lined up, one of which in Los Angeles, California, with David Sachs, and another in New York with Jacob helperg who runs Pallenteer is a co founder, and so you know, just these names really signal that there is a shift among you know, big tech, you know, big Wall Street money coming in to support Trump. And that's something that their campaign has been really highlighting in the last couple of weeks, all.

Right, and of course over the last couple of weeks and this entire cycle thus far, Stephanie Lai has been covering the campaigns for US. Great to see you here in Washington. Thank you so much for joining me. Now, as we continue to talk about the messaging coming out of these campaigns and the way in which they are spending the money that they're raising, we know that Kamala Harris has a big ad buy that's going to be running through Labor Day and of course even more ad buys coming after Labor Day. One launching today though in some of these key swing states, is specifically about the economy. It's titled every Day, and its cites some of the things she said in her speech in North Carolina earlier this month, when she outlined policy proposals when it comes to affordable housing or price gouging. For example, here's a little taste.

Right, and of course over the last couple of weeks and this entire cycle thus far, Stephanie Lai has been covering the campaigns for US. Great to see you here in Washington. Thank you so much for joining me. Now, as we continue to talk about the messaging coming out of these campaigns and the way in which they are spending the money that they're raising, we know that Kamala Harris has a big ad buy that's going to be running through Labor Day and of course even more ad buys coming after Labor Day. One launching today though in some of these key swing states, is specifically about the economy. It's titled every Day, and its cites some of the things she said in her speech in North Carolina earlier this month, when she outlined policy proposals when it comes to affordable housing or price gouging. For example, here's a little taste.

I will be laser focused on creating opportunity for the middle class that advance their economic security, stability, and dignity. If you want to know someone cares about, look who they fight for. I'll try fights for bllionaires and large corporations. I will fight to give money back to working in middle class Americans.

I will be laser focused on creating opportunity for the middle class that advance their economic security, stability, and dignity. If you want to know someone cares about, look who they fight for. I'll try fights for bllionaires and large corporations. I will fight to give money back to working in middle class Americans.

But how is that kind of messaging resonating with voters, especially when she's part of this Biden administration. In the economy under Biden is something that a lot of voters don't feel thrilled about. So to get into this conversation. Now joining me in studio is Cliff Young. He is US Public Affairs President at ipso's polling and of course has been looking into the economy issue and other issues throughout this entire cycle. So you put out a piece last week, Cliff, and it's good to see you here in studio about Biden's inflation orphans. Does Kamala Harris easily adopt those inflation orphans? Are we seeing signs that she's having some success, more so with the economy question than Biden was.

But how is that kind of messaging resonating with voters, especially when she's part of this Biden administration. In the economy under Biden is something that a lot of voters don't feel thrilled about. So to get into this conversation. Now joining me in studio is Cliff Young. He is US Public Affairs President at ipso's polling and of course has been looking into the economy issue and other issues throughout this entire cycle. So you put out a piece last week, Cliff, and it's good to see you here in studio about Biden's inflation orphans. Does Kamala Harris easily adopt those inflation orphans? Are we seeing signs that she's having some success, more so with the economy question than Biden was.

Yeah, well, first and foremost, the primary issue is inflation in the economy. Inflation, inflation, inflation, and that was Biden's primary problem. He was weak in the polls. His numbers were weak because of that. And what we can say is we still don't know. I think we need to wait a bit to see how Harris does. But part of her jump in the polls is a function of these very constituencies being more enthusiastic towards her in respect to the inflation. So some effect in the short term right now, whether it's a long term effect, we don't know. What we can say definitively is that Harris and the campaign are on message well.

Yeah, well, first and foremost, the primary issue is inflation in the economy. Inflation, inflation, inflation, and that was Biden's primary problem. He was weak in the polls. His numbers were weak because of that. And what we can say is we still don't know. I think we need to wait a bit to see how Harris does. But part of her jump in the polls is a function of these very constituencies being more enthusiastic towards her in respect to the inflation. So some effect in the short term right now, whether it's a long term effect, we don't know. What we can say definitively is that Harris and the campaign are on message well.

And some of the things that they're saying are still rather vague policy ideas, but specific enough that you have folks here on Bloomberg, for example, questioning whether or all these are things that actually work in reality, like when it comes to price gouging or no tax on tips, which is something Donald Trump is floating as well, that many who are deficit wary say that could actually create a bigger fiscal issue, But how does it actually resonate with voters who may not be prioritizing those considerations, thinking more about their own kitchen table.

And some of the things that they're saying are still rather vague policy ideas, but specific enough that you have folks here on Bloomberg, for example, questioning whether or all these are things that actually work in reality, like when it comes to price gouging or no tax on tips, which is something Donald Trump is floating as well, that many who are deficit wary say that could actually create a bigger fiscal issue, But how does it actually resonate with voters who may not be prioritizing those considerations, thinking more about their own kitchen table.

These are populous measures. These are measures designed to win the election. What she's doing, what Harris is doing in the campaign, is doing, is showing the American populace, showing these orphans that they're empathetic towards them, that they're worried about those issues. And as I said before, part of or in part the jump in the numbers are a function of her reaching these constituencies.

These are populous measures. These are measures designed to win the election. What she's doing, what Harris is doing in the campaign, is doing, is showing the American populace, showing these orphans that they're empathetic towards them, that they're worried about those issues. And as I said before, part of or in part the jump in the numbers are a function of her reaching these constituencies.

Well, speaking of a jump in the numbers, we got consumer confidence data today, obviously, something we watch very closely here at Bloomberg six month high in August, in part because of more optimism around inflation, in this idea that interest rates could becoming lower as well. Is there a historical relationship between where consumer confidences and the way in which effective and Harris is part of this administration perform in election cycles.

Well, speaking of a jump in the numbers, we got consumer confidence data today, obviously, something we watch very closely here at Bloomberg six month high in August, in part because of more optimism around inflation, in this idea that interest rates could becoming lower as well. Is there a historical relationship between where consumer confidences and the way in which effective and Harris is part of this administration perform in election cycles.

Yeah, there's a correlation. It's difficult to kind of line it up as a one to one relationship. But the more people feel optimistic, the more likely they are to support the party in power. The more pessimistic they are, the more likely they are to not support the party in power to support the opposition. And this is good for the Hairs campaign. Now, is it too little too late? We will see, But at least directionally speaking, it's good for the Hair aside, not as much for the Trump side.

Yeah, there's a correlation. It's difficult to kind of line it up as a one to one relationship. But the more people feel optimistic, the more likely they are to support the party in power. The more pessimistic they are, the more likely they are to not support the party in power to support the opposition. And this is good for the Hairs campaign. Now, is it too little too late? We will see, But at least directionally speaking, it's good for the Hair aside, not as much for the Trump side.

Well, on this idea of incumbency, there was an op ed published in the Washington Postmark This and Today that talked about how in one hundred and eighty eight years, we've only seen one current sitting vice president actually win the presidency. It was George H. W. Bush, And in this op ed, he says Bush succeeded where other modern vice presidents failed for one simple reason. Americans wanted a third Reagan term. Today, no one wants another Biden term, pointing out that Ronald Reagan left office with sixty three percent approval and Biden has fifty seven percent disapproval. The suggestion here is if voters wanted another Biden term, he would still be the Democratic nominee. How do you think about that? Is there a point there?

Well, on this idea of incumbency, there was an op ed published in the Washington Postmark This and Today that talked about how in one hundred and eighty eight years, we've only seen one current sitting vice president actually win the presidency. It was George H. W. Bush, And in this op ed, he says Bush succeeded where other modern vice presidents failed for one simple reason. Americans wanted a third Reagan term. Today, no one wants another Biden term, pointing out that Ronald Reagan left office with sixty three percent approval and Biden has fifty seven percent disapproval. The suggestion here is if voters wanted another Biden term, he would still be the Democratic nominee. How do you think about that? Is there a point there?

Yeah, there is a point. I think it's a great point. And indeed we have to juxtappose will vibes went out, will that enthusiasm, you know, mobiliking the base, the energy in the base, will that propel Harris forward? That's a question mark because right now, the fundamentals, per this article, the fundamentals are in Trump's favor, basically historically lower, almost historically low approval ratings, the primary issue being inflation, but Trump being stronger than Harris on inflation, and so therefore we need to wait and see a bit. I think the numbers are a bit overstated for Harris at this point. I think there'll be a burnoff. I think that we have to wait a couple of weeks, probably after Labor Day, let's say, into the end of that week. But yes, it really is the vibes versus the fundamentals. We would expect the fundamentals to win out, but we don't know.

Yeah, there is a point. I think it's a great point. And indeed we have to juxtappose will vibes went out, will that enthusiasm, you know, mobiliking the base, the energy in the base, will that propel Harris forward? That's a question mark because right now, the fundamentals, per this article, the fundamentals are in Trump's favor, basically historically lower, almost historically low approval ratings, the primary issue being inflation, but Trump being stronger than Harris on inflation, and so therefore we need to wait and see a bit. I think the numbers are a bit overstated for Harris at this point. I think there'll be a burnoff. I think that we have to wait a couple of weeks, probably after Labor Day, let's say, into the end of that week. But yes, it really is the vibes versus the fundamentals. We would expect the fundamentals to win out, but we don't know.

All right, fair enough, Well, I want to talk more about Donald Trump, because he actually sat down for an interview with doctor Phil in recent days. It's starting to trickle out today, and he specifically talked about bases of voters that may or may not turn out for him.

All right, fair enough, Well, I want to talk more about Donald Trump, because he actually sat down for an interview with doctor Phil in recent days. It's starting to trickle out today, and he specifically talked about bases of voters that may or may not turn out for him.

Take a listen, Christians for whatever reason, don't vote very much. You know, proportionately NRA people and people that feel very strongly about the Second Amendment, they're not voters. I don't know why. Maybe it's a rebellious straight and I said to the Christians, we got to win this election. If we win this election, I'll straighten everything out in less than four years by a lot.

Take a listen, Christians for whatever reason, don't vote very much. You know, proportionately NRA people and people that feel very strongly about the Second Amendment, they're not voters. I don't know why. Maybe it's a rebellious straight and I said to the Christians, we got to win this election. If we win this election, I'll straighten everything out in less than four years by a lot.

But as we think about some of these groups, Cliff in the way in which we've seen a messaging policy evolution from Donald Trump when it comes to say abortion, just in the last few days, suggesting he'd be great for reproductive rights, JD. Van saying Donald Trump has committed to him that he would veto a federal abortion ban. Does he risk alienating parts of his base, like evangelical Christians with that kind of turn on that policy Specifically.

But as we think about some of these groups, Cliff in the way in which we've seen a messaging policy evolution from Donald Trump when it comes to say abortion, just in the last few days, suggesting he'd be great for reproductive rights, JD. Van saying Donald Trump has committed to him that he would veto a federal abortion ban. Does he risk alienating parts of his base, like evangelical Christians with that kind of turn on that policy Specifically.

He's really worried about turnout. He's really worried about his base turning up. But he also is worried about the middle. And what he's doing right now is tacking to the middle. He's trying to be more moderate in tone. Whether that works, that's the million dollar question. But ultimately it's all going to be about turnout.

He's really worried about turnout. He's really worried about his base turning up. But he also is worried about the middle. And what he's doing right now is tacking to the middle. He's trying to be more moderate in tone. Whether that works, that's the million dollar question. But ultimately it's all going to be about turnout.

Well, so on this abortion issue specifically, we have seen it be a driving turnout force for Democrats and special elections and others. Certainly in the midterms in twenty twenty two. Can he arrest that with this kind of policy shift that he's seeming to try and turculate, leave it to the states. I'm not for a federal ban. Can he kind of stop that propellant force of women specifically being driven to the poor.

Well, so on this abortion issue specifically, we have seen it be a driving turnout force for Democrats and special elections and others. Certainly in the midterms in twenty twenty two. Can he arrest that with this kind of policy shift that he's seeming to try and turculate, leave it to the states. I'm not for a federal ban. Can he kind of stop that propellant force of women specifically being driven to the poor.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, he wants to eat his cake, his cack to excuse me, he wants to be on both sides of the fence. Obviously he's worried about those moderate women in suburbia that tend to be Republican. They are abortion orphans. Let's say if the theme is is orphans ultimately, but I would say the following it, I would say the primary issue stills inflation. Obviously, abortion mobilizes especially the Democratic base, and should be a worry in election of game adventures for Trump. But it's still about inflation. We haven't heard much from Trump talking about the economy inflation today.

Yeah, he wants to eat his cake, his cack to excuse me, he wants to be on both sides of the fence. Obviously he's worried about those moderate women in suburbia that tend to be Republican. They are abortion orphans. Let's say if the theme is is orphans ultimately, but I would say the following it, I would say the primary issue stills inflation. Obviously, abortion mobilizes especially the Democratic base, and should be a worry in election of game adventures for Trump. But it's still about inflation. We haven't heard much from Trump talking about the economy inflation today.

Well, we know that he wins on inflation. He also wins on the border consistently. We just have a minute left here, Cliff. Other than abortion, what is Kamala Harris winning on? What issues? Do voters trust her with?

Well, we know that he wins on inflation. He also wins on the border consistently. We just have a minute left here, Cliff. Other than abortion, what is Kamala Harris winning on? What issues? Do voters trust her with?

Healthcare is one, but obviously it's less important today than it was a number of years ago. The primary democratic issue today, which is the second issue in people's minds in Americans minds, are threats to democracy. She far out strips, far up paces Trump on that critical issue that's been a Biden theme, primarily a Biden theme. Obviously Harris is using as well.

Healthcare is one, but obviously it's less important today than it was a number of years ago. The primary democratic issue today, which is the second issue in people's minds in Americans minds, are threats to democracy. She far out strips, far up paces Trump on that critical issue that's been a Biden theme, primarily a Biden theme. Obviously Harris is using as well.

Yeah, and we heard some of that in her acceptance speech last week, when she talked about Donald Trump as an unserious man but described the consequences of him winning this election as quite serious. Cliff Young of ipso's always great to have you here in studio. Thank you so much.

Yeah, and we heard some of that in her acceptance speech last week, when she talked about Donald Trump as an unserious man but described the consequences of him winning this election as quite serious. Cliff Young of ipso's always great to have you here in studio. Thank you so much.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then rod Oro with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then rod Oro with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

We have our eye on geopolitics, not just what's happening in the Middle East, though certainly it's consequential and worth discussion, discussion. We will do that in just a moment, but I also want to talk about what's taking place in China this week. A visit from US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to Beijing will who'll be meeting with the Chinese foreign minister, potentially even with Chinese President Xijinping himself. China, for its part, says it's going to be bringing up issues related to Taiwan and tariffs. But the question is ever with visits like these, is whether or not there will be an actual tangible outcome to these kind of talks, or if they're just talking for the sake of doing so. Bloomberg's Ian Marlowe is here with me in our Washington, d C. Studio now to help answer this question. He's a senior reporter covering foreign policy for US here at Bloomberg. So, Ian, what is the aim of this trip? Are we going to see something firm that Sullivan will be taking away?

We have our eye on geopolitics, not just what's happening in the Middle East, though certainly it's consequential and worth discussion, discussion. We will do that in just a moment, but I also want to talk about what's taking place in China this week. A visit from US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to Beijing will who'll be meeting with the Chinese foreign minister, potentially even with Chinese President Xijinping himself. China, for its part, says it's going to be bringing up issues related to Taiwan and tariffs. But the question is ever with visits like these, is whether or not there will be an actual tangible outcome to these kind of talks, or if they're just talking for the sake of doing so. Bloomberg's Ian Marlowe is here with me in our Washington, d C. Studio now to help answer this question. He's a senior reporter covering foreign policy for US here at Bloomberg. So, Ian, what is the aim of this trip? Are we going to see something firm that Sullivan will be taking away?

I assume no. I assume we're going to see much of what we've seen over the last six months to a year with this administration, which is sending senior delegations over to try and to sort of maintain an acceptable level of instability to some degree, because the US and China do not agree across a range of fundamental issues. The point now is to just manage those differences. And I've been on some of these trips to China with the Secretary of State and they're much the same. They almost always say there's not going to be anything tangible or concrete coming out of it, but the goal is to keep the talks going. So I think that's to some degree what we're seeing here.

I assume no. I assume we're going to see much of what we've seen over the last six months to a year with this administration, which is sending senior delegations over to try and to sort of maintain an acceptable level of instability to some degree, because the US and China do not agree across a range of fundamental issues. The point now is to just manage those differences. And I've been on some of these trips to China with the Secretary of State and they're much the same. They almost always say there's not going to be anything tangible or concrete coming out of it, but the goal is to keep the talks going. So I think that's to some degree what we're seeing here.

I would be correct to say that this is the first time we're seeing a Biden administration official make a trip to China since Biden effectively made himself a lamb duck president right and announced he's not seeking reelection. I would just wonder how that might change the nature of these conversations when it's kind of a notion we might not be dealing with you a few months from now, so why would we cooperate and collaborate.

I would be correct to say that this is the first time we're seeing a Biden administration official make a trip to China since Biden effectively made himself a lamb duck president right and announced he's not seeking reelection. I would just wonder how that might change the nature of these conversations when it's kind of a notion we might not be dealing with you a few months from now, so why would we cooperate and collaborate.

At this point?

At this point?

Yeah, I think so. I think there's definitely, like with a lot of foreign policy at the moment, there's a bit of a sort of Trump proofing idea here that they're trying to solidify some gains to go through no matter who wins in November. But I think there's still always just with Jake Salvin, the National Security Advisor, I think there's a lot of He's been doing these meetings at a sort of regular cadence over the last few months, sorry, the last year or so, with these senior Chinese officials, and I think it's there is some stuff they do want to continue pushing. There is China's economic aid to Russia, which they worry has, you know, effectively given Russia more of a fighting chance in Ukraine. They're still angry about that, but they still aren't able to kind of twist China's arm to some degree to get them to stop that aid. That's the main thing, and then the other stuff is really just it's sort of the laundry list of things you see in these US China meetings, Taiwan tariffs and other things. So I think there is still stuff to discuss. It's just I don't think we're seeing any fundamental change in either side's position right now.

Yeah, I think so. I think there's definitely, like with a lot of foreign policy at the moment, there's a bit of a sort of Trump proofing idea here that they're trying to solidify some gains to go through no matter who wins in November. But I think there's still always just with Jake Salvin, the National Security Advisor, I think there's a lot of He's been doing these meetings at a sort of regular cadence over the last few months, sorry, the last year or so, with these senior Chinese officials, and I think it's there is some stuff they do want to continue pushing. There is China's economic aid to Russia, which they worry has, you know, effectively given Russia more of a fighting chance in Ukraine. They're still angry about that, but they still aren't able to kind of twist China's arm to some degree to get them to stop that aid. That's the main thing, and then the other stuff is really just it's sort of the laundry list of things you see in these US China meetings, Taiwan tariffs and other things. So I think there is still stuff to discuss. It's just I don't think we're seeing any fundamental change in either side's position right now.

All right, Well, that reminds me of some other talks that are happening in which we haven't really seen many changes in either side's position, which is the ongoing ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas and the other mediators including the US did have success in rescuing a hostage from Gaza today that was being held by Hamas, a fifty two year old man, a father of eleven. There are still one hundred more being held, either alive or otherwise ian. What is the feeling today on the likelihood of a deal to bring them home or are hostage? Family is only going to get the kind of closure or their own family members back that they need by these kind of individual rescue operations that we know are very complicated and have taken a lot of time to carry out.

All right, Well, that reminds me of some other talks that are happening in which we haven't really seen many changes in either side's position, which is the ongoing ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas and the other mediators including the US did have success in rescuing a hostage from Gaza today that was being held by Hamas, a fifty two year old man, a father of eleven. There are still one hundred more being held, either alive or otherwise ian. What is the feeling today on the likelihood of a deal to bring them home or are hostage? Family is only going to get the kind of closure or their own family members back that they need by these kind of individual rescue operations that we know are very complicated and have taken a lot of time to carry out.

Yeah, the US has been putting a lot of pressure on Israel to try and bring home a deal here there is the complicating factory that they're dealing both with a country that has a very complicated internal political dynamic. You know, Netnyaho has a fragile coalition, some of whom some of the members of whom do not want a ceasefire at all. And the other side of the table there is a terrorist group, some of whom Israel has assassinated over the last several months. So it's a fragile dynamic that I believe ever since Biden kind of stepped out and owned the ceasefire process, you know, laying out this three stage proposal that he said Israel had agreed to and then it was just on Hamas to agree to. Ever since that, the US has been very positive, sort of endlessly optimistic about the deal and the potential of a deal. So we hear language like a bridging proposal, or it's a final bridging proposal. We just need to close the gaps on certain things. But really you're talking about two sort of you know, fundamentally opposed, you know, parties that are at war, some of whom have hostages, the other whom's assassinating the negotiators for the other. And I think we're still quite far. I mean, it's a sense that there is a sense in Washington that this deal is still not likely to come to fruition anytime soon. And to some degree it's you know, for net Yahou, keeping the negotiations spinning out while he's also doing military operations is sort of to their benefit some degree. The only pressure he feels, to some degree, faces is on the hostages and from the hostage families within Israel.

Yeah, the US has been putting a lot of pressure on Israel to try and bring home a deal here there is the complicating factory that they're dealing both with a country that has a very complicated internal political dynamic. You know, Netnyaho has a fragile coalition, some of whom some of the members of whom do not want a ceasefire at all. And the other side of the table there is a terrorist group, some of whom Israel has assassinated over the last several months. So it's a fragile dynamic that I believe ever since Biden kind of stepped out and owned the ceasefire process, you know, laying out this three stage proposal that he said Israel had agreed to and then it was just on Hamas to agree to. Ever since that, the US has been very positive, sort of endlessly optimistic about the deal and the potential of a deal. So we hear language like a bridging proposal, or it's a final bridging proposal. We just need to close the gaps on certain things. But really you're talking about two sort of you know, fundamentally opposed, you know, parties that are at war, some of whom have hostages, the other whom's assassinating the negotiators for the other. And I think we're still quite far. I mean, it's a sense that there is a sense in Washington that this deal is still not likely to come to fruition anytime soon. And to some degree it's you know, for net Yahou, keeping the negotiations spinning out while he's also doing military operations is sort of to their benefit some degree. The only pressure he feels, to some degree, faces is on the hostages and from the hostage families within Israel.

But do you think that's also true of other Middle East players? Largely the idea that because all of these different actors are still either physically or otherwise at the negotiating table that is preventing further escalation when it comes to Israel and Hesbala, even though we did see those preempti strikes from Israel over the weekend, or Israel and Iran directly for that matter, how does that wider backdrop of the other proxies and players fit into these ongoing conversations around a ceasefire with the moss.

But do you think that's also true of other Middle East players? Largely the idea that because all of these different actors are still either physically or otherwise at the negotiating table that is preventing further escalation when it comes to Israel and Hesbala, even though we did see those preempti strikes from Israel over the weekend, or Israel and Iran directly for that matter, how does that wider backdrop of the other proxies and players fit into these ongoing conversations around a ceasefire with the moss.

Yeah, I mean, I think the US believes that the ceasefire deal and negotiations remains sort of the primary driver, the only thing that can sort of end the sort of endless cycle we've seen of escalation on Israel side, escalation on Iran's side and through its proxies. So it remains the sort of core focus. But at the same time, there's now this sort of freezon of danger around the region, of these of this sort of looming retaliation from Iran that we haven't fully seen for the assassination of the Hamas political chief in Tehran, which was quite bold obviously and was bound to lead to something. So I think at the moment there is still this general sense that the region remains on edge, But to be honest, it has remained on edge. You know for almost a year now, since since October seventh, and both sides have managed to calibrate their responses to the point where there isn't this sort of like dangerous escalatory cycle that gets out of control and then you see sort of Israel and Iran in direct confrontation in the US getting pulled into that. So I think that that remains a possibility, but I think a lot of people are sort of confident that it's been managed to some degree.

Yeah, I mean, I think the US believes that the ceasefire deal and negotiations remains sort of the primary driver, the only thing that can sort of end the sort of endless cycle we've seen of escalation on Israel side, escalation on Iran's side and through its proxies. So it remains the sort of core focus. But at the same time, there's now this sort of freezon of danger around the region, of these of this sort of looming retaliation from Iran that we haven't fully seen for the assassination of the Hamas political chief in Tehran, which was quite bold obviously and was bound to lead to something. So I think at the moment there is still this general sense that the region remains on edge, But to be honest, it has remained on edge. You know for almost a year now, since since October seventh, and both sides have managed to calibrate their responses to the point where there isn't this sort of like dangerous escalatory cycle that gets out of control and then you see sort of Israel and Iran in direct confrontation in the US getting pulled into that. So I think that that remains a possibility, but I think a lot of people are sort of confident that it's been managed to some degree.

All Right, Ian, thank you so much for being here. Ian Marlow is a senior reporter covering foreign policy for US here at Bloomberg, and we want to ge continue this conversation now and bring in Carmel arbit two Balance of Power here on Bloomberg TV and radio. She is a senior fellow for the Middle East Programs at the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council. Carmel, welcome back. It's always good to have you. I'd like to begin with just a point that Ian was just making about how the US has seemed endlessly optimistic about the prospects for a ceasefire agreement getting done. We've had a number of head fakes. It feels like and it never actually results in a finalized deal in which all parties agree. So do you see that as the Biden administration the US being disingenuous with the actual state of play, or is it that they do feel like they keep getting close and then the rug gets pulled out from under them.

All Right, Ian, thank you so much for being here. Ian Marlow is a senior reporter covering foreign policy for US here at Bloomberg, and we want to ge continue this conversation now and bring in Carmel arbit two Balance of Power here on Bloomberg TV and radio. She is a senior fellow for the Middle East Programs at the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council. Carmel, welcome back. It's always good to have you. I'd like to begin with just a point that Ian was just making about how the US has seemed endlessly optimistic about the prospects for a ceasefire agreement getting done. We've had a number of head fakes. It feels like and it never actually results in a finalized deal in which all parties agree. So do you see that as the Biden administration the US being disingenuous with the actual state of play, or is it that they do feel like they keep getting close and then the rug gets pulled out from under them.

Thanks so much. I think it's a combination of the two. The Biden administration has made clear that it is deeply committed to bringing about this ceasefire, and so they're very invested in that outcome and are bringing that optimism to the table to try to cajole the parties along. I think every time they think they get closer or they find a resolution on one issue, another issue comes up. Eventually there's going to be a cease fire, without a doubt. The question really is one of timing. One negotiator described the process at this moment as artificial respiration. I think that's a little negative, but reflects how negotiators are feeling that they're breathing and chugging along here, but that it's not achieving the breakthrough that they had hoped for at this stage.

Thanks so much. I think it's a combination of the two. The Biden administration has made clear that it is deeply committed to bringing about this ceasefire, and so they're very invested in that outcome and are bringing that optimism to the table to try to cajole the parties along. I think every time they think they get closer or they find a resolution on one issue, another issue comes up. Eventually there's going to be a cease fire, without a doubt. The question really is one of timing. One negotiator described the process at this moment as artificial respiration. I think that's a little negative, but reflects how negotiators are feeling that they're breathing and chugging along here, but that it's not achieving the breakthrough that they had hoped for at this stage.

So if you do operate under this assumption that eventually there will be a cease fire. It is just a question of when. What would your bet be on when at this time? Kermeal, because the longer this draws on, the closer we get to an election here in the US and a new player potentially coming in who could completely change the game theoretically, at least the policy position of the US and the way in which they're trying to exercise leverage in all of this. Is this something that realistically can happen before November.

So if you do operate under this assumption that eventually there will be a cease fire. It is just a question of when. What would your bet be on when at this time? Kermeal, because the longer this draws on, the closer we get to an election here in the US and a new player potentially coming in who could completely change the game theoretically, at least the policy position of the US and the way in which they're trying to exercise leverage in all of this. Is this something that realistically can happen before November.

I think it's certainly possible for it to happen by November, but there are significant factors that are pulling both parties away from achieving agreement. You have, on the one hand, Natayah, who sees the prospect of a Trump administration as a positive outcome for him, who might want to take that gamble as he thinks through negotiations and what types of concessions he might have to make. On the other hand, you have Sinoar, who sees the prospect of a regional war is strengthening his hand. And so you have two leaders who have really conflicting political interests, whose negotiators who are working for them keep coming closer and closer to an agreement. And yet the leaders themselves keep pulling back, so I think it is certainly in the realm of possibility. What we're hearing is that they keep getting closer. And the two main sticking points right now are over Israel's continued military presence in Gaza, which is key for Nata Naho and something that Hamas and Egypt really are opposed to. But we continue to see forward momentum on questions like the identity and number of hostages that will be released, or the identity and number of Palestinium prisoners that will be released. So we see them getting very close. It's possible, but the timeline really is a big question.

I think it's certainly possible for it to happen by November, but there are significant factors that are pulling both parties away from achieving agreement. You have, on the one hand, Natayah, who sees the prospect of a Trump administration as a positive outcome for him, who might want to take that gamble as he thinks through negotiations and what types of concessions he might have to make. On the other hand, you have Sinoar, who sees the prospect of a regional war is strengthening his hand. And so you have two leaders who have really conflicting political interests, whose negotiators who are working for them keep coming closer and closer to an agreement. And yet the leaders themselves keep pulling back, so I think it is certainly in the realm of possibility. What we're hearing is that they keep getting closer. And the two main sticking points right now are over Israel's continued military presence in Gaza, which is key for Nata Naho and something that Hamas and Egypt really are opposed to. But we continue to see forward momentum on questions like the identity and number of hostages that will be released, or the identity and number of Palestinium prisoners that will be released. So we see them getting very close. It's possible, but the timeline really is a big question.

Well, and to ask you a different version of the question, I just asked Ian, to what extent do you feel that these conversations as close as they may be getting, or the ebbs and flows, or what is actually preventing the retaliation that's been expected by Iran and Hesbela for well over a month now and reaction to the assassinations of a Hesbela and Hamas leader back in July and quick succession. We obviously saw Israel trying to thwart an attempt by Hesbela. They say over this past weekend, But I can't imagine that was really it carmeal. How does the action of Hesbela and Iran moving forward have a through line to what's happening with Hamas and Israel and the mediators at the table.

Well, and to ask you a different version of the question, I just asked Ian, to what extent do you feel that these conversations as close as they may be getting, or the ebbs and flows, or what is actually preventing the retaliation that's been expected by Iran and Hesbela for well over a month now and reaction to the assassinations of a Hesbela and Hamas leader back in July and quick succession. We obviously saw Israel trying to thwart an attempt by Hesbela. They say over this past weekend, But I can't imagine that was really it carmeal. How does the action of Hesbela and Iran moving forward have a through line to what's happening with Hamas and Israel and the mediators at the table.

Yeah, so their regional conflict has been eating up slowly and continually. So what we saw over the weekend was kind of a moderated escalation where there was a significant strike by Israel but yet limited in range. It really focused on the border areas and similarly in attack by Hesbula that was larger than what we've seen in the past. At the same time, we haven't seen either country push forward into a full blown war. The US and regional allies are really committed to keeping the temperature low to moving forward with the ceasefire. Israel has significant constraints as it deals with the multi front war. It is in the interest of everyone to try to keep this quiet. That being said, it's not going to go away. This isn't going to just resolve itself on its own. I think what we're going to continue to see is this kind of wiet staging of escalation over time that we're already in but not necessarily a full boil all at once.

Yeah, so their regional conflict has been eating up slowly and continually. So what we saw over the weekend was kind of a moderated escalation where there was a significant strike by Israel but yet limited in range. It really focused on the border areas and similarly in attack by Hesbula that was larger than what we've seen in the past. At the same time, we haven't seen either country push forward into a full blown war. The US and regional allies are really committed to keeping the temperature low to moving forward with the ceasefire. Israel has significant constraints as it deals with the multi front war. It is in the interest of everyone to try to keep this quiet. That being said, it's not going to go away. This isn't going to just resolve itself on its own. I think what we're going to continue to see is this kind of wiet staging of escalation over time that we're already in but not necessarily a full boil all at once.

Carmille, I also want to ask you about something that the Trump campaign is paying a lot of attention to this week, which is the third year mark of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan yesterday, of course, marking three years since thirteen US service members were killed in the suicide bombing at the airport there. I asked Jennifer kavanav Defense Priorities last night about whether or not it is a fair characterization to describe the events we have seen take place over the last three years, including these escalating tensions in the Middle East, if part of the blame does lie on that rather chaotic withdrawal from the US that we saw back in twenty twenty one. This is what she told me, and then I'd like your take.

Carmille, I also want to ask you about something that the Trump campaign is paying a lot of attention to this week, which is the third year mark of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan yesterday, of course, marking three years since thirteen US service members were killed in the suicide bombing at the airport there. I asked Jennifer kavanav Defense Priorities last night about whether or not it is a fair characterization to describe the events we have seen take place over the last three years, including these escalating tensions in the Middle East, if part of the blame does lie on that rather chaotic withdrawal from the US that we saw back in twenty twenty one. This is what she told me, and then I'd like your take.

Certainly, how left much to be desired in terms of its organization and communication with allies and partners, But it hasn't really damaged US relationships with any of its European or Asian all alex Air partners. It didn't really have any ramifications in the Middle East, And in terms of the kind of broader terror threat that people have warned about, that too hasn't really affected US national security, and in fact, the intelligence apparatus has shown its proficiency in detecting these attacks ahead of time. So I think it's a little bit of a red herring.

Certainly, how left much to be desired in terms of its organization and communication with allies and partners, But it hasn't really damaged US relationships with any of its European or Asian all alex Air partners. It didn't really have any ramifications in the Middle East, And in terms of the kind of broader terror threat that people have warned about, that too hasn't really affected US national security, and in fact, the intelligence apparatus has shown its proficiency in detecting these attacks ahead of time. So I think it's a little bit of a red herring.

Pil if you agree with that, and if we're assigning blame here to what extent you believe that this was just a Biden administration problem versus responsibility that may lie with Donald Trump himself having agreed to the pull out with the Taliban during his administration.

Pil if you agree with that, and if we're assigning blame here to what extent you believe that this was just a Biden administration problem versus responsibility that may lie with Donald Trump himself having agreed to the pull out with the Taliban during his administration.

Yeah, I think there's plenty of blame to go around, and both administrations are complicit in the withdrawal from Afghanistan and the events that transpired afterwards. As you said, the Trump administration had drawn down troops and committed to the withdrawal on the timeline that Biden then executed. I think what we're seeing right now in an election season is that the Trump administration, excuse me, the Trump campaign sees an opportunity here to really seize on this issue, to point to one of the kind of gaffes of the Biden Harris administration as a way to gain political leverage. But there's plenty of blame to go around for both campaigns on this issue.

Yeah, I think there's plenty of blame to go around, and both administrations are complicit in the withdrawal from Afghanistan and the events that transpired afterwards. As you said, the Trump administration had drawn down troops and committed to the withdrawal on the timeline that Biden then executed. I think what we're seeing right now in an election season is that the Trump administration, excuse me, the Trump campaign sees an opportunity here to really seize on this issue, to point to one of the kind of gaffes of the Biden Harris administration as a way to gain political leverage. But there's plenty of blame to go around for both campaigns on this issue.

But when it comes to what they are actually being blamed for to kind of the point I was asking Jennifer about as well. How much do you think of the intensified conflict, the outright conflict of course between Israel and a moss the trading a fire with other Iranian proxies, the general higher tension in the Middle East as a whole is because of the pullout from Afghanistan, or do you think that these things actually are not as related as they may be made out to be.

But when it comes to what they are actually being blamed for to kind of the point I was asking Jennifer about as well. How much do you think of the intensified conflict, the outright conflict of course between Israel and a moss the trading a fire with other Iranian proxies, the general higher tension in the Middle East as a whole is because of the pullout from Afghanistan, or do you think that these things actually are not as related as they may be made out to be.

Yeah, I would actually really differentiate between what happened in Afghanistan and the timing of what happened and what's going on right now between Gaza and Israel, because what you have are two really distinct conflicts in some largely distinct territory regionally, where we've seen kind of the US fight against terror and broader interests in the Middle East that it has sought to disengage from overtime have been unsuccessful. But that's really the extent of the through line that I would see there. I think what you have instead is a conflict between Israel and the Palestinians that has been going on since the establishment of the Jewish state that is being fueled by or run and by other neighbors in the region. And at the same time, a conflict that happened in Afghanistan, a war that has been winding down, and the control of the Taliban that has continued to subjugate the rights of people in Afghanistan.

Yeah, I would actually really differentiate between what happened in Afghanistan and the timing of what happened and what's going on right now between Gaza and Israel, because what you have are two really distinct conflicts in some largely distinct territory regionally, where we've seen kind of the US fight against terror and broader interests in the Middle East that it has sought to disengage from overtime have been unsuccessful. But that's really the extent of the through line that I would see there. I think what you have instead is a conflict between Israel and the Palestinians that has been going on since the establishment of the Jewish state that is being fueled by or run and by other neighbors in the region. And at the same time, a conflict that happened in Afghanistan, a war that has been winding down, and the control of the Taliban that has continued to subjugate the rights of people in Afghanistan.

All right, Canriel'll always appreciate your insight. Thank you so much for joining us. That's Carmel Arbit of the Atlantic Council joining us here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio. And we still have much more ahead. We'll reassemble our political panel next on Bloomberg.

All right, Canriel'll always appreciate your insight. Thank you so much for joining us. That's Carmel Arbit of the Atlantic Council joining us here on Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio. And we still have much more ahead. We'll reassemble our political panel next on Bloomberg.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Amocar Play and then roun Otto with the blue Burn Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Amocar Play and then roun Otto with the blue Burn Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.

I'm Kaylee lyin slam solo. Today is Joe Matthew takes this Tuesday off. Welcome back to Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio. And it is on this Tuesday that a new ad is running in battleground States now by the Harris Campaign, titled Every Day. It focuses on the economy, specifically and includes some of the policy proposals that Kamala Harris outlined in North Carolina earlier this month. When it comes to price gouging and housing, here's a little bit of it.

I'm Kaylee lyin slam solo. Today is Joe Matthew takes this Tuesday off. Welcome back to Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio. And it is on this Tuesday that a new ad is running in battleground States now by the Harris Campaign, titled Every Day. It focuses on the economy, specifically and includes some of the policy proposals that Kamala Harris outlined in North Carolina earlier this month. When it comes to price gouging and housing, here's a little bit of it.

I will be laser focused on creating opportunities for the middle class that advance their economic security, stability, and dignity. If you want to know what someone cares about, look who they fight for. I'll try fights pavillionaires and large corporations. I will fight to give money back to working and middle class Americans.

I will be laser focused on creating opportunities for the middle class that advance their economic security, stability, and dignity. If you want to know what someone cares about, look who they fight for. I'll try fights pavillionaires and large corporations. I will fight to give money back to working and middle class Americans.

So she says she'll be fighting for working class, middle class Americans. But a lot of these ideas still are quite broad in nature. We don't have many specifics on how exactly she does that. Granted, specifics are missing in some of the policy platforms of the Republican ticket as well. So let's bring in a Republican and a Democrat now to discuss a Republican panelist today, Rick Davis, Bloomberg Politics contributor and stone Court Capital partner, together with Democratic Strategistim Jim Kessler, who is the executive vice president at Third Way. Rick, I'll come to you first, as you've obviously had plenty of experience putting campaign ads together as well. Is this a message that is going to resonate considering the audience where it is targeted, the battleground states that ultimately will decide the outcome of this election or those do those voters, the ones who could swing either way, those just thousands realistically we're talking about niche of those states needs something more specific.

So she says she'll be fighting for working class, middle class Americans. But a lot of these ideas still are quite broad in nature. We don't have many specifics on how exactly she does that. Granted, specifics are missing in some of the policy platforms of the Republican ticket as well. So let's bring in a Republican and a Democrat now to discuss a Republican panelist today, Rick Davis, Bloomberg Politics contributor and stone Court Capital partner, together with Democratic Strategistim Jim Kessler, who is the executive vice president at Third Way. Rick, I'll come to you first, as you've obviously had plenty of experience putting campaign ads together as well. Is this a message that is going to resonate considering the audience where it is targeted, the battleground states that ultimately will decide the outcome of this election or those do those voters, the ones who could swing either way, those just thousands realistically we're talking about niche of those states needs something more specific.

That's a good question, Kaylee. I think that one of the things that this represents is the big pivot away from the national campaign that Kamala Harris has been running, the big convention consolidation of power within the Democratic Party, and really finally targeting even more so the suburbs in key cities around these targeted six states, seven states, you know, places like Pittsburgh suburbs, Philadelphia suburbs, Maricopa County, Arizona. And they are talking to an issue that a lot of voters have concerns about it, especially those voters that might be willing to vote Democrat, who maybe are independent or unaligned voters. And that is on housing, and that is probably one of the areas where she's actually presented the most specific kind of proposals that she's talked about. Two Thursdays ago during her announcement of her economic plan, and so this might be the one area where she's got a little teeth to bear, and I think that that gives her substance. It gives her something that sounds like she's got well thought out proposals that don't really sound too cradic in nature. And so I think she's trying to do a lot of things at one time. But you're right, they are chasing tens of thousands of votes in these key locations, and this is where the rest of the campaign is going to be seen, not by the rest of the country, but by these suburban locations around these major cities in the key swing states.

That's a good question, Kaylee. I think that one of the things that this represents is the big pivot away from the national campaign that Kamala Harris has been running, the big convention consolidation of power within the Democratic Party, and really finally targeting even more so the suburbs in key cities around these targeted six states, seven states, you know, places like Pittsburgh suburbs, Philadelphia suburbs, Maricopa County, Arizona. And they are talking to an issue that a lot of voters have concerns about it, especially those voters that might be willing to vote Democrat, who maybe are independent or unaligned voters. And that is on housing, and that is probably one of the areas where she's actually presented the most specific kind of proposals that she's talked about. Two Thursdays ago during her announcement of her economic plan, and so this might be the one area where she's got a little teeth to bear, and I think that that gives her substance. It gives her something that sounds like she's got well thought out proposals that don't really sound too cradic in nature. And so I think she's trying to do a lot of things at one time. But you're right, they are chasing tens of thousands of votes in these key locations, and this is where the rest of the campaign is going to be seen, not by the rest of the country, but by these suburban locations around these major cities in the key swing states.

Well.

Well.

And it is worth pointing out in these key swing states that Donald Trump and Jade Vance are spending a great deal of time in them this week. In fact, Jade Vance is speaking in Michigan right now, also on the subject of the economy. But Jim, before we heed back to what the Republicans are proposing and think more about Harris and the language we just heard her use in this ad talking about being for the middle class, it does sound pretty similar to the message we've gotten from the president she has served with over the last three and a half years. Joe Biden, how often have we heard him say the middle class built America and unions built the middle class. Kamala Harris trying to paint herself as union friendly as well. Is she creating enough distance separation between the economy she would like to create in the policy proposals she would like to use to do it versus the one Joe Biden has created, knowing that he didn't very well get good marks on that while he was still in this race.

And it is worth pointing out in these key swing states that Donald Trump and Jade Vance are spending a great deal of time in them this week. In fact, Jade Vance is speaking in Michigan right now, also on the subject of the economy. But Jim, before we heed back to what the Republicans are proposing and think more about Harris and the language we just heard her use in this ad talking about being for the middle class, it does sound pretty similar to the message we've gotten from the president she has served with over the last three and a half years. Joe Biden, how often have we heard him say the middle class built America and unions built the middle class. Kamala Harris trying to paint herself as union friendly as well. Is she creating enough distance separation between the economy she would like to create in the policy proposals she would like to use to do it versus the one Joe Biden has created, knowing that he didn't very well get good marks on that while he was still in this race.

I think there's some cheap differences between the way Harris talks about the economy and Biden. One is it just feels a lot more modern when Harris is talking about it and Biden's going back to you know what his dad used to tell him when you know, in the nineteen forties and nineteen fifties, Like I just felt very nostalgic. I am struck by how Harris's language and proposals are very centrist Democratic with a populist chaser there. So opportunity, economy, those were not Biden words. Those are Harris words. You know, security and stability for the middle class. Again, there's a Harris words. There's aren't Biden words. And you know, in terms of policy specifics, if you go back to twenty sixteen, Hillary Clinton had two hundred and sixty four policy ideas on a website, everything from Alzheimer's to Zeka. Donald Trump had seven. So you know, this is not a quantity game out there. It's really about quality.

I think there's some cheap differences between the way Harris talks about the economy and Biden. One is it just feels a lot more modern when Harris is talking about it and Biden's going back to you know what his dad used to tell him when you know, in the nineteen forties and nineteen fifties, Like I just felt very nostalgic. I am struck by how Harris's language and proposals are very centrist Democratic with a populist chaser there. So opportunity, economy, those were not Biden words. Those are Harris words. You know, security and stability for the middle class. Again, there's a Harris words. There's aren't Biden words. And you know, in terms of policy specifics, if you go back to twenty sixteen, Hillary Clinton had two hundred and sixty four policy ideas on a website, everything from Alzheimer's to Zeka. Donald Trump had seven. So you know, this is not a quantity game out there. It's really about quality.

Well, okay, if it's not about quantity but quality, what about the quality of ideas that actually are the same that both candidates seem to be agreeing with, Like, for example, Jim no tax on tips. It was Donald Trump's idea first before it became Kamala Harris's. What distinction will voters actually make in that regard if both candidates are saying similar populist.

Well, okay, if it's not about quantity but quality, what about the quality of ideas that actually are the same that both candidates seem to be agreeing with, Like, for example, Jim no tax on tips. It was Donald Trump's idea first before it became Kamala Harris's. What distinction will voters actually make in that regard if both candidates are saying similar populist.

Things, right, And I just want to be clear, I don't love that idea from either candidate. Okay, this is what Rick Davis was talking about. This is Nevada. You know in some other places, but Nevada is very tip centric state. Okay, So it's like, how are you getting some younger voters, how are you getting service workers who are who are relying on tips that are swing voters, low propensity voters, and low information voters. So I do think some of these ideas are like a direct play for voters, and others are more broad economic ideas.

Things, right, And I just want to be clear, I don't love that idea from either candidate. Okay, this is what Rick Davis was talking about. This is Nevada. You know in some other places, but Nevada is very tip centric state. Okay, So it's like, how are you getting some younger voters, how are you getting service workers who are who are relying on tips that are swing voters, low propensity voters, and low information voters. So I do think some of these ideas are like a direct play for voters, and others are more broad economic ideas.

Well.

Well.

Novada of course one of the sun Belt states that it does seem if polling is to be believed, Harris stands a better chance than Joe Biden did of carrying them. He was very focused on the rest Belt and it is another sun Belt state. Rick. We will see Harris and Walls spending a few days this week, beginning tomorrow, a bus tour in Georgia that will run through Thursday. What is the messaging that would actually put them over the finish line in a state that, according to the New York Times Sienna latest poll, Trump is up by four It is within the margin of error. He does have a little bit of beef if you will with Governor Brian Kemp. How in play is Georgia really for Harris? What would it take for her to win? It is this economic messaging and she's going to.

Novada of course one of the sun Belt states that it does seem if polling is to be believed, Harris stands a better chance than Joe Biden did of carrying them. He was very focused on the rest Belt and it is another sun Belt state. Rick. We will see Harris and Walls spending a few days this week, beginning tomorrow, a bus tour in Georgia that will run through Thursday. What is the messaging that would actually put them over the finish line in a state that, according to the New York Times Sienna latest poll, Trump is up by four It is within the margin of error. He does have a little bit of beef if you will with Governor Brian Kemp. How in play is Georgia really for Harris? What would it take for her to win? It is this economic messaging and she's going to.

Have to replicate some of the magic that Joe Biden put onto the state in twenty twenty. It's not a dissimilar election, not a dissimilar electorate. She has to sow discontent with Republican voters. Obviously mentioned Donald Trump has a love hate relationship with the GOP in Georgia, and so she's going to have to do what she can to suppress that vote, keep Republicans thinking maybe Trump's not the guy for them, and then at the same time do everything she can to boost her base, because the reality is this is going to be a base election in Georgia. More so than tipping the balance with some suburban voters around Atlanta. She's going to need a bigger, bigger turnout, especially amongst African American voters that have really supplied the wins in the past when they've had them for Democratic Canada statewide.

Have to replicate some of the magic that Joe Biden put onto the state in twenty twenty. It's not a dissimilar election, not a dissimilar electorate. She has to sow discontent with Republican voters. Obviously mentioned Donald Trump has a love hate relationship with the GOP in Georgia, and so she's going to have to do what she can to suppress that vote, keep Republicans thinking maybe Trump's not the guy for them, and then at the same time do everything she can to boost her base, because the reality is this is going to be a base election in Georgia. More so than tipping the balance with some suburban voters around Atlanta. She's going to need a bigger, bigger turnout, especially amongst African American voters that have really supplied the wins in the past when they've had them for Democratic Canada statewide.

Well, So, when we consider what plays to the base, Jim, it does bring us to the abortion issue, something that we have seen does drive turnout, at least it did in twenty twenty two, it has in special elections in the states in which the abortion question has been on the ballot. It also seems to be one that Donald Trump is trying to get more moderates in his corner on as well, with this kind of characterizing himself now as someone who will be great for women's and reproductive rates. Jade Van's saying that Donald Trump has committed to him that he would veto a federal abortion band. Do you think these voters who may actually vote on this issue, a group of them who are driven to the polls on this issue, will buy into that at all.

Well, So, when we consider what plays to the base, Jim, it does bring us to the abortion issue, something that we have seen does drive turnout, at least it did in twenty twenty two, it has in special elections in the states in which the abortion question has been on the ballot. It also seems to be one that Donald Trump is trying to get more moderates in his corner on as well, with this kind of characterizing himself now as someone who will be great for women's and reproductive rates. Jade Van's saying that Donald Trump has committed to him that he would veto a federal abortion band. Do you think these voters who may actually vote on this issue, a group of them who are driven to the polls on this issue, will buy into that at all.

If you're driven by this issue, you are not going to buy into the change of position essentially of JD. Vans and Donald Trump. If you go back in time six weeks, there were two issues bedeviling each campaign. For the Biden campaign it was age and for the Trump campaign it was the Dobbs decision and abortion. Harris has solved the age issue, Republicans have not solved the abortion issue, and Democrats have generally overperformed the polls and expectations in every election since Dobs a few exceptions, but in almost everyone. So I think Republicans have a right to be afraid.