Balance of PowerWatch Joe and Kailey LIVE every day on YouTube: http://bit.ly/3vTiACF.
Bloomberg Washington Correspondents Joe Mathieu and Kailey Leinz deliver insight and analysis on the latest headlines from the White House and Capitol Hill, including conversations with influential lawmakers and key figures in politics and policy. On this edition, Joe and Kailey speak with:
- Bloomberg's Laura Davison and Gregory Korte about Donald Trump picking JD Vance as his running-mate.
- Hoover Institution Fellow Lanhee Chen about what the Vance pick means for the Republican party.
- Republican Senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee about policy discussions at the Republican National Convention this week.
- Bloomberg Politics Contributors Rick Davis and Jeanne Sheehan Zaino about early takeaways from the RNC.
- Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy about what a Trump presidency would mean for his state and the energy industry.
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Roud Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Welcome to Day two of the Republican National Convention. Kaylee jd Vance looming.
Large in the hall last night, and we've got.
Some interesting speakers, including Donald Trump's former opponent Nicki Haley, will be hearing from later today.
Yeah, of course a late addition to the convention schedule, Trump extending the invitation over this past weekend and the aftermath of the attempt at assassination on him in Pennsylvania on Saturday. And this of course comes as we're all bracing for all of the speakers, frankly, to be speaking differently than they may have before that event occurred, which is a message of unity and perhaps bringing in Nicky Haley and or the aim is to bring in the primary voters who chose her over Donald Trump during the course of the primary campaign into the fold.
Reports as well. Ron DeSantis could be speaking. This is an interesting thing to watch evolve here as the Republican Party in this RNC try to harness unity following this assassination attempt on Saturday.
Kylee, Yeah, of course. The conversation we were all having yesterday prior to the selection of Jade Vance as the vice presidential nominee was whether or not in the spirit of unity, Trump might go for someone a little less intense with the rhetoric, shall we say, less of a bulldog and instead perhaps the decision was you get the bulldog to fight for you so that you yourself can speak unity.
Interesting.
We're going to watch this unfold in real time together with Bloomberg's best Laura Davison and Gregory Cordy joining us here at the table. Welcome to day too. It's great to have you both here, Laura. What are we in for in today's seceession?
So tonight is the second night. The theme is all about make America safe again. Last night was all about the economy. Tonight is it going to be about crime, border immigration? A lineup of speakers, most interesting, perhaps is Nicky Haley. This late add to the schedule. What I'm really watching for is what is the reaction in the room when Mitch McConnell came on to the floor yesterday, he was booed. It is possible that Nicky Haley also has a chili reception. The Republicans that are here are not necessarily her wing of the party. This is very much a Trump crowd, and so that could create put a little cast of shadow over the party unity message that they're at least trying to project forward well. Nicki Haley, of course, prior to the convention, released the delegates that she did win during the primary process and encourage them to vote for Donald Trump when she dropped out of the campaign, though all the way back in March, she did not encourage those who voted for her to do the same. She said Donald Trump needed to earn those votes. Do you expect, Gregory we might hear differently from her tonight, a suggestion perhaps that those votes.
Have been earned.
You know, it's remarkable to think about how we've gotten to this point where a year ago, talking about a dozen different candidates in the Republican Party all challenging Donald Trump for the nomination, some making the point a little more strongly than others that Trump was disqualified from the presidency. I remember Asa Hutchinson, Chris Christy, Nikki Haley became more aggressive on that line of attack as things went on, but most of the field was basically auditioning for what we have seen now. You know the veepsteaks and cabinet posts. But it is remarkable how much this party has unified around Trump, and of course the events of last weekend I think have only contributed to that momentum that this is a party. You feel it on the floor of this convention. This is a party it's very much united around Trump. Not that they weren't before, but there's a real feeling not just am munity, but of solidarity. And it's not an angry convention like maybe the twenty sixteen convention was. It's unified in a more optimistic way. It's just a sense I'm getting from this.
Well, that's something I'd love to hear from both of you about the issues where these two overlap and in some cases not. But when it comes to foreign policy, Jada Advance talked last night on Fox News about his views here.
He is I think what President Trump has promised to do is go in there, negotiate with the Russians in Ukrainians, bring this thing to a rapid close so that America can focus.
On the real issue, which is China.
That's the biggest threat for our country and we're completely distracted from it.
To key off of this, Laura, what happens to the war in Ukraine if Trump Advance win.
So the thing that's important to remember is that, especially as vice president, he has less say over some of you know, things like funding the war in Ukraine than he did as a senator. He's able to hold up those bills directly. But if you know, if Trump wins the presidency Ukraine, hope for additional funding, you know, all but disappears. You know, especially if Republicans take both chambers, you can pretty much take that off off the table as an issue in Washington.
You know.
Vance is very much cut from the same cloth as as Trump, saying, Look, I don't want to be involved in these wars. I don't want to focus on the Russia Ukraine border. I want to focus on the US Mexican bard veteran speaking he is, which is which is a real you know, this is really out of step where that you know, his colleagues and the Senate are on this issue. He's really an outlier there.
Okay, so Trump Advance obviously are aligned in their isolation is spent if you will, the populist bent and Vance is literally half the age of Donald Trump. At this point, Trump is seventy eight, Vance is thirty nine. So the question we also have is not just the implications for say, twenty twenty five through twenty twenty nine, assuming that this ticket wins, but beyond that, if Vance then is a contender in twenty twenty eight, if he is indeed vice president, might make him the most likely to win the Republican nomination. Obviously none of us know what happened, but is this essentially the solidifying of a maga Republican party that is going to live well beyond Donald Trump.
Yeah, you know, the two most disappointed people in Milwaukee yesterday were probably Doug Bergham and Marco Rubio, who were also sort of at the top of the short list for VP. The third most disappointed person has to be Ron de Santus, because Vance has now been tapped as the de facto era A parent. Now Trump hasn't said anything about that. Obviously, we're a long way from twenty twenty eight, but in the natural course of things. You would have to think that this would give Vance a considerable leg up to be the future of the party if he wants to be that.
And of course every politician does that.
You know, the congressman wants to be a senator, and every senator wants to be president. So absolutely, in terms of the ideological daylight between them, I don't think there's much. But even if there is, you know, vice presidents tend to subsume the policies of their present in the long term. I think Vance very crypto friendly, obviously very tech friendly. These are policy areas where Trump hasn't been particularly attuned to in the past, and this rounds out to take it in a little bit in some policy areas that Vance has the expertise.
Well.
I wonder if they bump into each other on some issues as well, like raising the minimum wage or anti trust. For what it's worth, we're probably making too big of a deal out of a running mate selection here. The long term implications are important, Gregory, but to the extent that it's going to impact Donald Trump's view on these issues, should we be paying attention.
I think the biggest interesting thing to watch is the divide between big tech which Vance has said he wants to break up, you know, the Amazon's, the Googles, all of these. He's teamed up with Elizabeth Warren on that little tech. Little tech is the world that that Vance comes from, you know, startups, you know these earlier stage companies where he wants to cut the middle here, it's very possible or you could see sort of a dividing line there of you know, cutting regulations for small companies while on the other hand, going after some of these bigger, more established tech companies.
All right, Laura Davison and Gregory Cordy here with us in Milwaukee, thank you so much. As we assess what the selection vice presidential nominee and Senator JD. Vance ultimately means. And this is something we spoke about yesterday with Governor Brian Kemp of Georgia. We asked for his reaction to Donald Trump's choice of vans here and what ultimately it means for swing states especially, and this is what he said.
Look, I think it's a good pick for President Trump. I mean, Senator Vance brings an element of youth to this race that we haven't seen. That's for sure. The guys, the United States Senator obviously qualified to serve a great messenger, which is I think very important when you think about what's going to be going on the next four or five months in this campaign.
Well, as we consider this selection, though, knowing that you represent one of the key swing states we are watching in this cycle, knowing Georgia is not bright red or bright blue, what does jd Vance bring to undecided voters in Georgia. How is he likely to influence that opinion when he, as we've talked about, may just be seen as a younger version of Donald Trump himself.
Well, I think it's not just what jd Vance brings to the race, but also what President Trump and other Republicans can do between now November to make sure that you know, you're getting those persuadable voters for me, and what I'm hearing every day is that you know, Americans and Georgians can afford another four years of Joe Biden. I think that is a message that jd Vance can deliver. It's certainly a message at President Trump and a lot of other Republicans, whether it be you know, people that we're trying to help win at the state House and state Senate level to hold our majorities in the General Assembly in Georgia are going to be talking about people.
That was part of our interview with Georgia Governor Brian Kemp yesterday, and we continue to push forward on this Day two of the Republican Convention. Now that JD. Vance is Donald Trump's running meet and especially traders are watching to see what this ticket actually means for the US economy and policy that will affect financial markets going forward. Lonnie Chen is with US now here in Milwaukee. He is a Hoover Institution fellow, also former policy director for the Romney Ryan campaign back in twenty twelve. I'd like to begin, Lonnie by asking you something I was just talking about with our colleague Gregory. According this idea that the Romney Republican Party, the Romney Ryan ticket of twenty twelve is very much not a Trump Vance ticket of twenty twenty four. And now that we have a selection of a thirty nine year old vice presidential nominee who could lead the party forward in this direction for many years to come, is this the end of that Romney Republican Party?
You know, look clearly contrast in style as well as substance. I would hesitate to say it's the end, because you still have some members of Congress I think who reflect a different point of view. I think we're in a transitional period and the Republican Party has changed from being a party, you know, country club Republicans, corporate Republicans, whatever you want to call them, to a party that's more working class and more populist, both in terms of definitionally how it transcends it how it transacts as politics, but also policy, and you're seeing the populous edges of that in this Trump Vance ticket. So I don't necessarily think that the Party of old is dead. I do think that it is a different part and it continues to become a different party. There may be a point at which that's true, but for now, at least, I think there is still some influence of these more traditional points of view on the party.
Well, do you worry that this economic populism some call isolationism is dangerous for the party for the country.
Well, I think there's some areas in which the policy prescriptions are not quite what I would advocate for. So we're going to have a big discussion over tax reform next year with the expiration of provisions and the tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and I think there will be a very real discussion, for example, around the corporate tax rate. This is one area where I think where I think the sort of Trump dvance view of the world, maybe more the advance view of the world differs from what we might expect traditional Republicans to argue for in a large tax reform package. It would not surprise me to see the corporate tax rate move in a direction opposite than what we saw in the twenty seventeen round of reform, just because the premium is going to be placed on individual tax reform, and given the deficit and debt posture we have, I have a really difficul time seeing that tax cut being completely unpaid for. So I do think that there are ways in which we are going to see some differences beginning to develop.
Well to the point our colleague Laura was making when it comes to say the tax conversation that ultimately is one that has to originate in Congress just to be signed by sure President whomever. Does Jdevance have less power to influence that as vice president than he would as a United States Senate.
Well, I don't think so at all.
Even though the conversation on tax in particular, will start in the House. The vice president, particularly if let's say a future President Trump empowers his vice president to be on point on these things, he will have a tremendous amount of influence over where this conversation goes. And given how divided and fractured the Congress is, how much we're seeing expertise leaving the Congress with long term members of Congress who have experience in tax and economic policy, leaving it does place a premium on leadership from the executive branch in my view, So I actually think that jd. Vance is in a terrific position to influence policy, whether it's economic policy or any of the other areas he's interested in.
Deficits ballooned under the Trump administration, and you'll then tell me that they ballooned more under the Biden administration. What are we going to do it all over again? And a Trump two point zero, It doesn't.
Seem like a lot of the constraints are there anymore. The political constraints have departed, right. I mean, there used to be some in our politics who are arguing in favor of fiscal discipline and talking about the value of entitlement reform, that conversation seems to be off the table. So I do fear that in the short intermediate run, we are looking at a situation where fiscal constraints have been lifted and there is very little too constraint spending, whether of the tax expenditure variety or direct spending or even bolstering of entitlement programs. So we're a very different world now that we were in in twenty twelve when I was helping the Romney Ryan ticket.
Well, we're in a different world in a lot of ways, including conflict that is outbroken in multiple theaters, including of course the war in Ukraine, which jd Vance has not expressed support for continuing to fund. In fact, when he was on Fox News last night, we played a little bit earlier in the program this idea that he was like, we need to focus on China. Forget about the conflict in Ukraine. China, he said, is the biggest threat facing the United States. I ask you this, as the son of immigrants from Taiwan, do you agree with that sentiment? What should we expect to see when it comes to China policy from the ticket?
First of all, I would hope as the greatest country on Earth. We could walk and chew gum at the same time, meaning that we could attend to both of these really significant issues. There is no question, though Senator Vance is absolutely right that China is the single biggest foreign policy and national security issue that we have to face over the next several years. I think if this administration continues, some of the policy work we saw in the first Trump administration will be in very good stead. I think one of the areas where I believe the Biden administration has really let down the American people is in having a more coherent set of strategic goals around our engagement with China, or lack thereof. So I do think that what this potential Trump administration will bring, I would hope, is a more coherent perspective on where we trying to get to with China, what's the eventual goal. And that also implicates issues like Taiwan, specifically human rights, if that's going to be an issue, and then most importantly, probably for the audience here, trade and economic issues.
NICKI Haley is speaking tonight, Yeah, at the convention. I suspect you might be in the hall. Will she channel Mitt Romney or Donald Trump.
I think she'll channel Nicki Haley. I mean she's managed. Yeah, no, I understand. But here's here's the thing. She has the capacity to unite, help unite the Republican Party. By the way, the Republican Party is the most united I've seen it in a while around around candidate and former President Trump. But I think Nicki Haley has the potential to speak to maybe that small sliver that's still disaffected, but she goes beyond that. She speaks to independence, she speaks to people who haven't made a decision in this election yet. And I think she's got a tremendous ability to speak to all of the issues we've talked about. I mean, seeing her as a presidential candidate up close during that election that we've just had. She's a very skilled communicator and potentially a very great asset to the Trump dance ticket.
Of course, she might be a little bit disappointed herself as she considers twenty twenty eight now that JD. Vance has been the vice presidential a lifetime away nominee. Surely it is, and as we have learned in recent days, literally anything possible can happen. And on that note, after the attempted assassination last weekend on Donald Trump. He has said himself he is reworking the speech he will give on Thursday, that he wants to focus on unity. I guess my question to you would be knowing and having watched Donald Trump for all these years, now, do you believe that unity message can actually stick for the next three and a half months.
We'll see if it does or not.
I mean, I think people are politicians tend to sort of go back to form pretty often in a comfort spot. But Donald Trump's not a typical politician, right, so.
He very well could.
He very well could not. Unusual, by the way, for a convention speech to be reworked up until the year I mean, so it doesn't surprise me that they're still looking at what to do with it. But he has an opportunity if he continues on this theme to truly move the country forward, and I think to gain the support of people who may have been skeptical of him before.
So I think the political.
Opportunity is irresistible if you think about the ways in which they might position this speech or think about what the speech can do. So I don't want to make any predictions. I I'm not part of the process, but we'll see what happens.
Great conversation.
Thank you.
We're have to spend some time with you here at the convention. Lonnie Chen. We thank you for being with us on Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio. I'm Joe Matthew alongside Kaylee Lines with much more to follow coming up our conversation with Senator Bill Haggerty of Tennessee. It's coming up next on a special Balance of Power on Bloomberg Live from the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then roud Oro with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York State jo Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
We're here in Milwaukee and we sat down here just moments ago with Republican Senator Bill Haggerty of Tennessee, who joined us in studio, and we started by asking him about the impact of the selection of JD Vance's the vice presidential nominee on the race.
I think the business community needs to look at the overall ticket and look at the potential of what's going to happen in November, the momentum in the grounds well, and I think JD brings a tremendous amount to this. He's going to help President Trump win in November, and the policies that President Trump will implement. It If the business community just looks back to President Trump's prior administration, you think about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the impact on this sclerotic regulatory framework that's in place, this will give us a chance to go back in and make the United States a far more friendly business environment in general. With respect to Senator Vance's particular points of view and perspectives, I'm not going to comment on his behalf on those consolidate all of that, I'm certain with the President's platform going forward, but I do think that broadly speaking, JD is going to help the president in terms of so many support here in America.
He's going to bring.
People together that I think it's just an incredibly brilliant pick. You think about President Trump, who has actually been such a great defender of the forgotten men and women here in America, and JD's lived the life that they've experienced, and together, I think they're going to cut across demographic groups. I think it's going to be a massively impactful pick that will help see a change in November that the business community should welcome.
It's Kaylee's point though.
JD.
Advance's economic priorities include tariffs, a higher minimum wage, an anti trust, which doesn't sound like the economic policies of the Grand Old Party.
Is this the new Republican economic platform?
Well, the Republican Party certainly is moving in a way that is embracing the challenges that Americans feel today. If he's an embracing economic populism, well, I think that's one way to phrase it. But if you think about what Americans are experiencing, we've seen inflation that's really been through the roof gasoline prices, food price is up forty percent, over twenty percent, Real wages down four percent. And President Trump was in office before every demographic sector was moving up. They were improving blue collar better than white collar. So there's a real appetite and hunger to see that sort of success again. And I think that's exactly what you're going to see in terms of the policies that will emerge from the eventual Trump administration.
Do you think that that policy, especially when it comes to things like trade and tariffs that JD. Vans also has advocated for in addition to Donald Trump essentially cements that if they were to win in November, tariffs will be highed.
I think tariffs are certainly going to be on the agenda because what we have is a situation right now on a global basis where we do not have reciprocal trade. The term free trade has been misused so many times, and what we have here in America is one of the most open markets in the world if you look at our tariff rates, certainly compared to other nations that are trading partners. We have countries like China that don't play by the rules at all, and one of the most potent tools to deal with this is tariff's and I fully expect that I saw it in the previous Trump administration. I work very closely with Bob Leithheiser and his team, because the same team that put the Phase one tariffs in place on China worked closely with me on the free trade agreement that we.
Negotiated and got executed with Japan.
There are real issues there that need to be addressed, so I look forward to seeing it address myself.
I have to note that the national debt is not mentioned in the new Party platform when we talk about tariffs, the potential inflationary impact making the twenty seventeen Trump tax cuts permanent. You've seen all the economic reports, and we've even talked about them, yes, right here on Bloomberg with you, Senator, that this would add an enormous amount to the federal debt.
How do you square this? As someone we consider to be a traditional.
Republican, I have a very optimistic view about this, and I think that a lot of the CBO scoring doesn't take into account the fact that the policies, whether they be tax policies or regulatory policies that encourage capital investment, actually have the effect of growing the economy and in a dynamic way, have the effect of increasing the tax base. We saw this happen after the twenty seventeen tax cuts and JOBSAC was put in place. So I see real potential to grow the economy, and I also say this in President Trump and I have talked about this on numerous occasions.
There are great opportunities to cut spending. What we have in Washington is.
A huge spending problem, and coming in and taking a very focused and deliberate view toward some of the waste in mismanagement that I see across the board. It's going to be a combination of factors that will be required to begin to get our debt moving in the right direction. But as that begins to happen, I think that we'll see even further economic growth as confidence comes into the system.
I understand the argument that you and many of your colleagues make when it comes to the fact that you could see greater return from the growth that is spurred by tax cuts. Does that mean, though, that no payfores are necessary? If we could just get specific out what it is that you would cut in order to offset or where this will be paid for, other than just this general idea of growth, Oh.
There are plenty of places I think we could cut.
Look at some of the programs that were put in place with these multi trillion dollar, totally partisan bills that would pass back in twenty twenty one by the Democrats. You think about eighty billion dollars going to the irs to come and snoop on Americans. There are places we've already started to cut back on that. There are places like that that we can cut immediately, and I think we'll continue to dig in and find opportunities. President Trump will challenge each of his cabinet secretaries and agency edge to find those opportunities. I've lived this at a state level. I was Commerce secretary of my home state. We cut a tremendous amount of funding out, saved money, found waste and sclerosis, and took it out.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget had a palpitation when they saw this plan and ran the numbers themselves. And the message from Mia McGuinness, who I know, you know there, was you can't get to this with a billion here, a billion there. This will require entitlement reform. You have to get to Medicare and Social Security.
JD.
Vance doesn't want to touch security and Donald Trump has said that he will not either.
Do you.
Well, here's what I think people miss. We're talking about mandatory versus discretionary spending. And most of my colleagues and I spend all of our time on discretionary spending. But there is a huge chunk of mandatory spending that has nothing to do with Medicare, MEDICAI or social Security, and even more was added to it through the twenty twenty one partisan Reconciliation bills. We need to go and take an extremely hard look at these mandatory spending obligations that we have that have nothing to do with people's retirement, their social security, their Medicare and medicaid, and begin to address that. We can make significant headway again on both the mandatory side as well as the discretionary side, and still abide by the pledge not to touch Medicare, Medicator, social security.
I'd also like to ask you about cryptocurrencies, given your role on the Banking Committee, but also knowing that Senator jd Vance is from Ohio, a state in which the chairman of the Banking Committee, Shared Brown, is in a tough re election fight against a pro crypto candidate Burnie, and I wonder if jd Vance entering the race puts crypto more into the actual four of this election cycle. How do you expect it to play in, not just in the race that could define the next chair of ranking member of the Banking Committee, but more broadly, well, I.
Certainly hope it puts it into play.
I think crypto Actually, cryptotechnology is a defining point in this election. If you like centralized control over your financial transactions, that's exactly where Shared Brown and the Democrats and this White House administration have been. They have been incredibly hostile toward crypto technology. If you like a decentralized option that allows for more freedom and liberty and also supports some of the greatest technology innovations that I've seen since the development of the Internet, I think you're going to be supporting President Trump and JD Vance. JD has a great deal of experience in Silicon Valley. I think he possesses the great capacity to see this potential here. President Trump and I have spent a significant amount of time talking about the cryptotechnology industry, the potential that it holds for America. I can tell you both, gentlemen, want to see this industry here in America as it evolves. We want to see this innovation happening here because I think it has great potential, great potential.
We don't want to see it go offshore.
And what we need is a regulatory constructor that will allow that, not push it away. And right now what you have is a choice that would crush the industry that's what comes from the SEC. Right now, that's what comes from rankly Democrat members of my own Senate Banking Committee. In this administration, we need to move toward the policies that I'm certain we're going to adopt in the Republican administration that will be very favorable toward this industry.
Senator, we have to ask you, of course, about Donald Trump's well being after what happened last weekend. We were reporting that he was making a lot of phone calls the day after on Sunday, and you indicated earlier that you were on the other end of the line on those calls.
What did you talk about?
I talked to them Sunday evening for I know, twenty twenty five minutes, and he was immediately talked about how divine intervention played a role in this, and if you think about how close he came to being assassinated, it's just I fully appreciate the hand of God that that watched for him. But he immediately talked about the father of two, the firefighter that lost his life, that leaving a family without without a dad, those that were injured on stage there that day.
He has very real concern for that.
I was with Kid Rock that night, and we got on stage together and really fired up the crowd to go to the go fundme site to support those people, their families and in a terrible time for them. President Trump was not surprising to me at all. He's always been that way in terms of his care and concern for others. That's that was the top of the conversation, and then we talked about how things are going to move forward. And I really think that the public is shocked by what happened.
I think it shocked us all to our core, and we need resilience, we need strength.
And when he came up with his fist raised in the air, I think that's a picture that's going to be one of the most iconic in the world. America needs a strong leader right now. The world needs a strong leader right now. I speak with world leaders very often. Given my role in the Foreign Relations Committee and the fact that I served in the previous administration as a diplomat. There is a great need for a strong America right now, and I think President Trump is moving right into that lane.
It was Senator Bill Haggerty of Tennessee, the Republican with us here in Milwaukee on what is day two of the Republican National Convention. Really interesting conversation that we typically have in Washington about economic policy. He's gearing up for the next day here, looking forward to a conversation about crypto that might be a little different than the one happening now.
Absolutely, Donald Trump has really tried to position himself to be a pro crypto candidate to a large extent. We thought that may have begun with the vagk Ramaswami actually when he dropped out of the primary process and got Donald Trumps Heyer. But potentially that's something that grows with the addition of jd Vance to the ticket, that's for sure.
So we assembled our panel. Rick Davis at Stone Court Capital is with us, alongside Genie Schanzino at Iona University, Bloomberg Politics contributors. What do you make of all this talk about divine intervention? It seems to have gripped this convention.
Yeah, I thought that was such a fascinating part of your discussion, because this is something we are hearing from not just Republicans. I mean, if you guys have watched these rallies, and Donald Trump himself said the other day he seldom turns his head. They seldom put up graphics like they did just some moments before he was shot at. And he believes, and so do many Republicans and Americans, that it was some kind of divine intervention, and he has talked about that openly, and I suspect that's a theme we're going to hear, just like you heard from Senator Haggerty going forward in his talk and in his speech on Thursday night, about what he is going to do with the fact that he feels like he had a divine intervention that saved him and what he hopes to take from that. So I thought that part of the discussion was just fascinating. And then of course the economic aspects as well.
Yeah, well, just on the divine intervention idea, you heard that from the speakers last night, Congressman Marjorie Taylor Green talking about the hand of God being on Donald Trump. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina said similar things as well. But on the economic policy, to Genie's point is, we had the conversation with the senator something we've continually asked as we talk about things like tariffs, which were talked about quite extensively last night, which of course, was Day one focused on the economy. We know that there is a repercussion of higher tariffs, which is higher costs, which is something that Republicans have also been talking about higher costs under the Biden administration. How do we think about the way that these things kind of run in a circle And for a voter, do higher tariffs sound as good as practice in practice as they or the idea of them said, as they actually will be in practice in the reality? Is this a good message for Republicans to be running with.
Yeah.
I think one of the things that Senator Haggerty pointed out is this sort of economic populism. I kind of call it economic realism, because the Republican Party is now the party of working class, multicultural voters, right, and so when you think about what a tariff means to them, we're not the party of the country club corporate executives anymore. So tariffs to the corporations has a different impact than tariffs to individuals. And sure it is a tax on individuals, but when you look at the people supporting Donald Trump, they haven't had the run up in finances that a lot of people have had over the course of the various corrections that we've had, and so they're not so much worried about.
What the future holds.
They're worried about today. And you hear all the time in the focus groups about I had more money in my pocket under Donald Trump than I do under Joe Biden. And so when you say tariffs, they read that as pertecting my economics, not squandering them, and so I think not being honest with them, I think they've already made this case, right. I mean, I don't think anybody's actually selling to them that tariffs are somehow going to increase their pay but they're not paying those taxes. I mean, the reality is they pay them in a really regressive way cost of goods. And the fact that that's run up so much without a strong tariff regime under the Biden administration, you know, it causes voters a question whether or not all this talk about tariffs is going to make a difference to them.
It's amazing what you just said.
Republican Party is the party of working class, multicultural Americans.
I thought you were the Democrat here.
No, that's right, and that's why I think to get back to the conversation about somebody like Nikki Haley and the establishment part of the party. That's not who they are appealing to.
But to see that as being the case because Joe Biden's lost in that.
World, you know, I think that's where they are headed. I don't know if they have fully been able to embrace that, but you know what I think of is this division between the reality of the numbers and the public opinion polls and how people feel. And you talk to any economist, they will tell you numbers are pretty good. The market's been strong, unemployment out of fifty year low, inflation is moving in the right direction. There are all of these very positive macro science and it's not felt on main street. And that's one of the challenges for Joe Biden and the Democrats. They have not been able to reach people with these positive numbers. People feel like things are bad, and they are embracing that argument. Sure, there's a lot of things to do, but I think to your question, there is something that is not honest about this populist argument that they are selling, but that many people on main street are buying.
It strikes me, as you talk about Joe Biden that we are now about an hour into this program from Milwaukee, and haven't talked about the sit down interview he gave with Luster Holts on NBA see last night. Does that suggest Genie? And we'll do so more in the next hour. I promise our listeners and viewers that he didn't accomplish what he intended to with that interview. He didn't steal back the narrative from Donald Trump.
It not only suggests he did not steal back the narrative from Donald Trump. I think the problem for Joe Biden now is we sort of can only hope that he does no harm when he goes out to these interviews. He didn't do much harm last night. He was very defensive, I thought with Lester Holt, and so you know, whereas many Democrats are looking for a moment where he can embrace a huge tragedy in American politics with soaring rhetoric, that's not what we can expect at this point. So to your question, he didn't steal the narrative. Far from it. He sort of just I guess tred water is the best way.
To say it.
Oh, we'll have more analysis of that interview with Jeanie Shanzano and Rick Davis, our political panel Bloomberg Politics contributors.
If you're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast, kens just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Evocar Play and then roud Otto with the Bloomber Our Business app, listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts. A watch us live on YouTube.
Big news yesterday was the selection of Senator JD. Vance from Ohio as Donald Trump's running mate. We want to get more on that now, and head over to Bloomberg's Tyler Kendall, who has more details on the junior senator.
Hey Tyler, Yeah, Hey Kelly, our Bloomberg audience. My first note.
JD.
Vance is a venture capitalist and a member of the Senate Banking Committee, where he's largely taken a more populist view when it comes to the economy and business. And when we analyze the type of legislation that he has shepherded through that committee, it includes bills that would make it more difficult for big lenders to get bigger. He's also been keen to cut down on credit card fees and in one move, partnered with Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, on a bill to claw back executive compensation in the event of a bank failure. Now he is a staunch defender of big oil and has pushed big banks against ESG policy commitments. For a sense, here was Vance when the nation's largest Wall Street CEOs last testified on Capitol Hill.
If you guys are going to use the financial power that you've accumulated to go to war against the values of our voters, impoverish our constituents who rely on cheap energy, and destroy the jobs of people who work in the energy sector. Why should we listen to you when you come and ask us for a tax break or for reasonable regulations.
Vance has, though largely been opposed to more financial regulation. For example, he's against the new proposed rule for higher capital rule requirements for big banks. But Joe and Kelly interesting to point out that he has actually applauded the FTC's Lena Kon and the Biden administrations push for more regulation and cracking down when it comes to big tech.
Tyler, thank you so much with us live in Milwaukee, Bloomberg's Tyler Kendall on day two here at the RNC, and we're joined now by Governor Mike Dunleavy of Alaska. Governor is great to see you. Thank you for joining us here in Milwaukee. We're all sweating a little bit here. It's not quite elastic weather. I hope you're enjoying it so far. What do you make of this pick?
JD. Vance?
So many of us were surprised by it not being a surprise name yesterday.
This has been something long in the works.
Oh well, I think I think the President is picking somebody that will carry forth his agenda after he leaves office and while President Trump is in office. Obviously JD. Vance will be a close confidant to the President. He's younger. That'll probably appeal to younger Americans. But I think, you know, I have confidence in the President that he knows what he's doing. I don't know JD that well. I know he's a senator from Ohio, but hope to get know here in the future.
Off the November fifth, Well.
He's only been a Senator from Ohio for about a year and a half. He is a political newbie, and I wonder, as a sitting Republican governor, what you think about the idea of a governor who has executive leadership running one of the states in the United States of America. Why that selection may not have been made.
Well, keep in mind President Trump was not elected in the office before he was elected president. And sometimes when you get a perspective outside of government, and I've been outside of government, I've been inside of government. Sometimes when you get a perspective outside of government, you carry a perspective of the people into government as opposed to being a career government official, and you know, looking at the world from that perspective. So I think that's what probably factored, you know, at least partly into the decision by the president bring.
Us your a unique perspective on energy coming from Alaska and what a Trump two point o would mean, because the Biden administration is reminding us on the daily that our output right now, we're pumping more oil and gas than ever in the history of the United States. Yet there seems to be this idea that Trump would be friendlier to the energy sector than Joe Biden.
What would in.
Fact change I think he will, I think if the lot for it tell us specifically, well, I mean President Biden has called for a moratorium shipping gas overceipts. That's not going to happen on the president'ry.
So that's lifted immediately in.
Terms of anwar, which was the National Whilife Refuge in Alaska on the North Slope where there is oil in his gas. Under the twenty seventeen law that was passed, those leases went up for sale. The Biden administration illegally, and it is true it's illegally shut those leases down. That'd be lifted, I believe under President Trump. And then taking up upwards of thirteen million acres of then pra National Patrolling Reserve off the table for oil and gas. I think that'll go back on the table. President Trump was the best president in the history of Alaska from my perspective. When I came into office and I had my first meeting with President Trump, he said to me, what can I do to help Alaska? And that was every single meeting, and he probably did more than any other president in the history of the state. President Biden. Under his administration, there are approximately sixty five actions by the federal government against Alaska, taking land off the table for oil and gas exploration, closing down the Tongest National Force, not going through with a land exchange to help some of our indigenous people in King Kove be able to get a road out so their people don't have to fight weather with their planes. The list goes on and on or not. But under our president that we have right now, President Biden, sixty five actions. That's more actions against a state than the federal government has against places like Iran.
It's incredible if we could just continue the energy conversation for a moment longer. What we have heard a lot from Donald Trump and those close to him is this idea that it's just deregulation on leasha American energy, if you will, and he spoke a bit to that idea. But when we think about these oil and gas companies, which we're very familiar with here at Bloomberg, they have to be incentivized to actually spend their capital. Capital discipline has been the name of the game for years. It's about returning it to shareholders, not necessarily investing in new production in a world that is trying to transition to green energy. So beyond just deregulating, does more need to be done to incentivize these business businesses to actually drill more in places like.
Less If we truly deregulate, that is going to save money. You won't have to spend as much money potentially on primitting and a litigation to the concept of transition. I really believe that that concept disappeared several months ago with the advent of new chips from the video, the Blackwell chip, the whole AI movement. You're going to need three to six times as much energy as you have now to power those server factories. So I think it's going to be additionality, not transition. They're going to see more discussion about additionality more when than solar, more oil and gas, more nuclear, more any type of energy possible. And I think the locals and the countries that win the energy war and that respect are going to win the supercomputing in the AI world war too.
If you were the energy secretary, and you can respond to that as you want, how would you reproach nuclear? This is something actually we talk about a lot on Bloomer because of the incredible boom and data centers and AI and the massive amounts of power required. We're talking about now potentially opening data centers on the sites of nuclear power plants. What does the future hold for americanment and nuclear?
You know, nuclear has had a troubled past, and unfortunately some of the President Scott, I think is unwarranted. There's probably been fewer individuals killed or died as a result of the nuclear accidents and almost any other type of energy put forward in terms of accidents. But if I were the Energy secretary and we're dreaming here for a moment, I would facilitate a consortium among states, among private industry provinces in Canada and maybe other countries to come up with a calendar, for example, on small nukes, to say how many small nukes can we get in the hopper, to permit to design, and to get a whole industry set up behind creating new nuclear facilities across the country. I think that's one of the things that the nuclear industry wants is they want to know, if we're going to begin a process of creating a whole new industry on small nukes, do we have the commitment to actually fund those nukes, pay for those nukes, and cite those nukes in various places.
So I think that would be a big step.
Governor. I just picked up on the words you use there. We're dreaming here, are you saying that is another way to say we're speaking hypothetically or because you actually do dream of being Energy secretary.
No, no, no, that was high, that was hypothetical. I'm just saying for the moment here.
So if Donald Trump offered you that job, well.
I'd have to have discussions with the President. But you know, I'm looking forward to working with the president, helping the president and moving this great country forward and Alaska forward.
Have you spoken with him since Saturday?
I spoke with this campaign folks, and I sent him a text. But you know, I also understand that after such a traumatic moment, the President's going to need to talk with his in a circle on his family more so.
Than Focusspond was he texting over the weekend?
He was texting with some I got a text back immediately from a campaign chair, So we're in contact.
Yeah.
Well, as we continue to grapple with the aftermass of this weekend, pretty much every person we have talked to, elected official or otherwise has talked about how the tone of this convention needs to be different as a result, much more toned down rhetoric, the lowering of the temperature across the board, more a message of unity. And I just wonder, given what you see in your state or just in your position as a governor, if you see in America that is truly capable of that right now, given how deeply rooted our division seemed to be.
I do I think what happened. Yes, they shook everyone to the core. I really do believe that. And I was on the floor yesterday on the convention, and I did not pick up from anyone that there was an attitude or an atmosphere of vindictimness or quote going after folks. Quite the opposite. I think people were excited about the possibilities of another Trump administration coming in here in November fifth. The discussions were very I think positive, And you know, I'm an individual that doesn't really tolerate that type of talk. To be honest with you, I'm not part of that. Don't want to be part of that. And I think I think the country, I hope the country is at a point now where we start to focus more on policies as opposed to personalities.
Well, it's a night's theme, today's crime and immigration. If there's any one of these four days where the rhetoric could get hot, where the red meat's going out the crowd, I presume it will be today.
Do you agree?
Possibly?
Possibly, But I mean those two topics, crime and immigration, I think are topics that are near and dear to most Americans. Hearts, and we are a country of immigrants. We are a country of immigrants. But I believe in a strong wall with many doors.
I believe that we.
Should have a strong wall in which we have immigration, in which we're bringing people in this country that want to be Americans are going to contribute to America. Unfettered wide open borders. I think it's a catastrophe for any sovereign in the world, especially this country. And in terms of crime, I think over the last couple of years, we've seen our cities burn, We've seen the homeless issue escalate. I think it's problematic, and I do think a change in administration will bring changes on the ground.
Well, it's interesting to hear you say this as the governor of Alaska, which is perhaps furthest removed from the southern border, at least in a physical sense as any state can be. To what extent would you say this is the dominant thought? Well, we don't people that you governed, or is it a different issue?
We are far away, But unfortunately for Alaska, we've had more depths per capita through fetanyl than any other state in the country, and that fentanyl is coming through the southern border. So just that alone, if we can somehow impact that effect that in a positive way to reduce that flow, it's going to help Alaska, it's going to help every country in the state in the United States, probably Hawaii as well, even though Hawaii is in the Middle Pacific. But unfettered borders doesn't help anyone. And as I mentioned, in Alaska's case, the fetanyl coming of the border hurts us as well.
Is that so much a border issue, if I could ask you quickly, or is that actually a China issue at the route?
Probably a combination of both. Probably a combination of both. But if you have a southern border in which there are thousands and thousands and thousands of people coming over, not checked, unfettered getting into the country, and you have cartels in Mexican come, it doesn't take you know, it doesn't take a genius, but two two together that you're going to have some drug problems.
It's really interesting to hear that that's a long journey from the southern border to Alaska. Talk to us about the path that it takes and the policy needed to stop this just.
It's the same way it gets the Minnesota or main You can drive to Alaska, you have to go through Canada. You can fly, you can mail it, you can take it on ships. There's these people are very creative. As a response to this, we just passed the bill that I signed a week before I came to the Convention that increased the penalties for dealing drugs that result in a death to a second degree murder charge. Because we have to get serious about this. Everybody knows somebody that knows somebody that has been impacted by drugs. Everybody knows somebody that knows somebody in which they may have had a loved one that overdosed on some of these on some of these drugs and cut short very promising lives for these people. We've got to do something about it. The border is part of that solution. Discussions with China is part of that solution as well.
Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast.
Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at Noontimeeastern at bloomberg dot com,
