tv With All Due Respect Bloomberg April 28, 2016 8:00pm-9:01pm EDT
john: happy night of the living ted. indiana's judgment day, and the stop trump folks are trying one last mechanism. trump has been doubling down on his machismo. trump insinuated that hillary clinton would not be a viable candidate for president if she were playing the woman card. he pushed that at a rally with the legendary basketball coach, bobby knight. mr. trump: bobby called me up about a year ago, and he said to me, hey, donald -- he is the best, you don't get any better. tough.
would you say he was tough enough? not just tough, smart, tactical, he was a winner and still is a winner, believe me. >> let me first tell you that i was very selective with players during the time i was here. i will tell you one thing, that man who was just up here a minute ago, that son of a bitch could play for me. john: that son of a bitch. trump's campaign in indiana also has a tv ad featuring donald trump junior talking about how tough his dad is. mark, the testoster-on don, smart, tough, or somewhere in between? mark: somewhere in between. they recognize that they need to soft and him a little bit. this is the quintessence of letting trump be trump. this is the kind of personality he has.
he plays to his strength. women might find this appealing. i think they need to use a vodka and others. but he does not back down, he says what he believes about hillary clinton. when they try to make him back down, it is not going to work. john: well, that is great, fabulous. i said yesterday on our show that donald trump has a huge problem with women voters. if he doesn't solve that problem, he can't be president. i don't think anything he did in these instances is offensive, but he will have to remediate this problem to some degree. maybe he will do it later or now, but i remember mitt romney in 2012 refused to defend bain or the assaults on the obama campaign, and he got eviscerated.
i think trump needs to fix this problem. mark: millions of americans love hillary clinton. they love her personality, what she stands for, and the possibility of her being president, but there are tens of millions of women who do not feel that way. is this a nuanced thing? i think it may be. this is what trump is about and what he is like. john: and when i say he needs to fix this problem, i don't mean he needs to swing in 180 degrees to do pandering things to women, that's not the point. also, i don't think anything he did was offensive. i think there is this sense of, we are going to be tough, we are not going to back down, i am not going to make a mistake. mark: and factoring in the press's obsession with the gender gap is only one dimension.
now it is our turn to say it, lucifer in the flesh. that is the political phrase of the day. former speaker john boehner, a republican, called ted cruz last night at an event in california at stanford university that. that reminds us all how much some on capitol hill intensely dislike the senator from texas. while boehner called trump texting buddies, he did not hold back his feelings about cruz. he said, i have democrat and republican friends and get along with almost everyone, but i have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life, talking about ted cruz. this is how cruz responded. senator cruz: when john boehner called me lucifer, he is not directing that at me.
he is directing it at you. it is not anything i have ever said to him. i have not said much of anything. what boehner is angry at me for is standing with the american people and honoring my commitments. mark: the central question in the nomination race right now is whether the bounce of power is becoming increasingly resigned, or if the stop trump faction can hold its ground and maybe grow before trump can grab the nomination. trump got another congressional endorsement, this one from bill shuster. meanwhile, the already fragile alliance between ted cruz and john kasich, key to any success the stop trump movement might have, seems to be fraying even
more. when asked about the alliance in fort wayne today, cruz denied that there was any collusion between the campaigns. someone later tweeted, "i can't stand liars." john, the indiana primary is tuesday. is the stop trump movement growing or shrinking? john: i don't know it is shrinking, but it seems to me that there were people in neither movement, people who have been holding their fire slowly and gradually, and maybe there will be more after indiana if trump wins. right now, people are going to the trump capitulation side, and that's bad news for the stop trump movement. it is static. mark: it has to grow to stop him, because at its current size, it is not enough to slow
him down, wisconsin being the exception. you saw the congressional endorsement today. but a lot of people are poised to give up and throw in the towel on tuesday after trump wins indiana. john: could be true, but this has been pointed out -- the boehner comments about cruz, this stop trump movement is going to be hard to stop him. this group is now represented by ted cruz and john kasich. kasich has performed miserably, and cruz is disliked. boehner is the worst possible person to stop a locomotive train wreck of the front runner. mark: and they like interesting personalities. donald trump is a likable, interesting personality to a lot of people. ted cruz, not so much.
♪ mark: today was carly fiorina's first full day as a vice presidential candidate. she did a round robin of television interviews this morning, plus three events in the hoosier state with ted cruz, attacking donald trump and hillary clinton and talking up her new bff/running mate, ted cruz. here is an example of some of the things she said. ms. fiorina: hillary clinton has made her millions selling influence, and donald trump has spent billions fighting hillary clinton off.
they are the system. donald trump is big, powerful, and wealthy. what you have here is a fearless fighter. whoever conservative understands that there is too much money and power concentrated in the hands of too few. mark: a new ad in indiana is complete with this distinct, amusing ending. >> i'm ted cruz. >> i'm carly fiorina. >> and we approve this message. mark: adorable! john, how is carly fiorina doing so far as ted cruz's hypothetical running mate? john: she is, as far as i can see, doing about as well as she did as a presidential candidate,
which is to say not really making much of a mark. i thought yesterday she was mostly going to be a wash. i don't think she will hurt or help them much. there is nothing i have seen that changes my calculation of how much she will help. mark: all running mate combos are symbolic. and stagecraft. there is no substance. i still think the fact that they campaigned together so much has really taken the wow factor out of this. if they had not campaigned together, i think this thing would have more of an impact. seen this, done that. i think it is helping. i think it is energizing the cruz campaign, but it is not transforming the race. you can imagine picks that would transform the race.
john: that's one of my issues. if you are going to throw a hail mary, throw a hail mary. this is not a hail mary, this is a medium-like pass down the field. put someone who would really shocked the field on the ticket, who would have been a real game changer. mark: like julia child's or something. john: four julia-louis dreyfus. they are still 20 yards short of the goal line. so, bernie sanders and his team are sending out mixed signals about the future of his campaign. again, not for the first time. this is following four out of five defeats on tuesday. yesterday, the "new york times" reported the sanders campaign is laying off hundreds of staff members and focusing its resources in california, which votes on june 7. bernie's wife jane was on the cable shows today, saying that
her husband was "absolutely in it to win." fundraising, there are no problems. he reportedly has more than $17 million sitting in his bank account. mark, my question for you, given all that dough, why is sanders laying off staff, and what does it mean, and what impact does it have? mark: you could say they don't need as many people now. on the other hand, this campaign has mishandled big, symbolic moments. if you want to convince people that you are in it, you are still trying, you still have a chance, you cannot lay off this many people. you need to be able to explain it better than the way they did. they have raised a lot of money. there is a new "washington post" story saying they have spent a lot of money on consultants. it does not mean all that much in the scheme of things. it shows once again that as good as they have and in so many things, they have not handle this kind of thing very well. john: let's be clear, they have been very good on lots of things.
this campaign has been a miracle, what they have accomplished. they have done an amazing job. mark: amen. john: but it is the truth that the campaign had 1000 people working for it in iowa. they have gradually been ratcheting that number down, as most campaigns do, as the number of states received. now they are just leapfrogging from state to state and running out. it is the most natural thing in the world, in some ways. but if it is after the day you have lost four or five and you happen to be cutting your sstaff by half, you have to find a better way to tell the story. mark: and some of those people could have gone to california and done something maybe more useful in getting money to the consultants. john: again, explain it better. mark: all right. up next, on the gop race, donald trump's path to the nomination, after this quick break. ♪
mark: welcome back. joining us, an msnbc reporter joining us from los angeles, and katie, coupling donald trump in the studio. katie, there has been very little polling in indiana on the republican side. what is your sense on where trump stands for the events on tuesday? guest: people i have been talking out on the ground say there was data they were looking
at earlier in the week, internal polling, that showed trump on the rise, and that was before those victories early in the week, and before cruz stepped in it a little bit, calling it a basketball ring. there is a sense on the ground that there are a combination of things that are limiting cruz at this point. you guys were talking earlier in the show about carly fiorina. it is kind of a wild factor here, something else i have been hearing. mark: my interaction with the trump folks on tuesday we need to feel that they feel confident about indiana. guest: i have spoken to senior aides. they feel that they have an advantage because they went on the air before cruz did, and they have not spent quite as much money, so they count that as well.
i don't feel like they need indiana as much as they might have needed it if they had not come out of the five states on tuesday with so many delegates. i think they are feeling confident. indiana would be the cherry on top of their sundae, but it is not as if they are banking on it. mark: it's almost as if they feel liberated, john. john: i am surprised at how much the attitude of that world has changed. obviously, big things have happened. but boy, their attitude, we can win the states, no problem, california -- they have a lot of confidence that they are going to get there, close to 100%, at this point. mark: the notion was kasich says he is not going to campaign there, opening up possibilities for cruz. so much of the action is around indianapolis, because that is where the congressional districts touch. who are the target voters
between cruz and trump? guest: cruz is in a difficult spot, because he has this natural base in northeastern indiana, religious conservatives. that has been the backbone of his candidacy. the assumption is that his voters are going to be with him. then you have districts in the state that are heavily manufacturing-oriented, having been really hit hard by the recession. in previous cycles, those two groups might have voted the same way, but this time around they are basically trump voters. this leaves indianapolis suburban/urban voters, people who are mostly moderate and are part of the party establishment. it is pretty strong in indiana. it has been around a long time. those are the people inclined to go for kasich, and there are some who are strategic and say, fine, i am going to vote for ted cruz, but a lot feel like they cannot stomach that.
i am not convinced that cruz is going to get enough of those voters to make up the ground he needs, what the trump campaign is counting on. john: on the governor pence possible endorsements, what do you think about the trump campaign reaching out to him? guest: i know they are reaching out. i know there are two things the two have in common. pence is very outspoken on immigration and jobs leading -- on jobs leaving his state. carrier, for instance. trump has been hitting on carrier for some time, resonating in a state like indiana. plus, pence has things in common with cruz, he is evangelical. but there is this inevitability, i think we are starting to see that today. i think more folks are going to endorse him and embraced him as soon as they realize that he is probably going to get the nomination, and they want to get closer to the source of power. john: katy, you have been talking to governor pence. what have you heard in terms of
the pants primary? >> he is in a more difficult spot, but he is kind of being cautious with his political fortunes. he got in some tough fights, that lgbt writes law around the ncaa. the reality is that for him, in many ways, getting involved with this is exactly the wrong thing, and all he needed to do was be convinced to not endorse cruz by the trump vote. anyone who knows pence, and i covered his bid in 2012, knows that he lines up relatively well with ted cruz, and it would seem natural. the republicans here feel like if pence tipped his finger on the scale in favor of cruz, it
would make a difference, but as long as he stays on the sidelines, that's all the trump campaign needs. john: so your gut is that pence is going to stay neutral? mark: i think he will stay neutral. kristi was at that meeting with trump and pence, and christy said he made it clear. john: i told you earlier today, i was corresponding in indiana with someone who said he would only vote for daniels. daniels will not do that. mark: what is the stop trump movement -- are they on the air, contacting voters? how big of a deal are they on the ground? guest: they are on the air and they say they are contacting
voters, but i have to say that it is tough to see their presence here, whereas i felt the impact talking to folks that the cruz super pac and the cruz campaign, you can feel both presences here, and you can definitely feel trump's campaign. there is an ad with don junior talking about him being tough on the grandkids, but there is an ad showing trump with the drink kids saying he is not tough. that is something i bumped into without looking for it. that tells you something about the presence they happy or. i think it is a little firmer than people may have thought. the stop trump force is a little bit missing. we know there are stop trump
groups poling, so we should have information on where things have moved in the past couple of days either early tonight or tomorrow. mark: thank you both. appreciate it. we are going to keep this up with a different perspective. steve schmidt joins us when we come back. john: schmidtty. ♪ show me top new artist.
happens. we are here with steve schmidt, the star of "schmidt happens." mr. schmidt, you have experience with vice presidential rollouts, famously in 2008. tell us about how you think the hypothetical running mate role out of carly fiorina was handled yesterday by senator cruz. >> it was handled fine, but it is not going to make much of a difference, because his momentum in the campaign has stalled. it is what it is. he is trying to change the storyline from the trump's domination of the storyline, trying to get energy ahead of indiana, so i think it went fine. but carly fiorina is not a surprise. when it talked about how they were going to unveil the running mate, i think a lot of people
who follow this stuff would bet with very long odds that it was likely to be carly fiorina. at the end of the day, i think the net effect is that nothing hurt her as we wrap up this week and go into next week. mark: i thought one of the biggest things of the week was overshadowed. tuesday night, when trump was asked, are you the presumptive nominee, and he said, yeah, i am. he clearly wants those two guys out of the race. if he wins indiana and they don't get out, which is possible, what will he do? what steps can corey lewandowski take? guest: the title of prisms of nominee is not want to take, it is to be the stone. it should be bestowed by the titular head of the party. in 2008, when it was clear that mccain would be the presumptive nominee, he had a meeting with the president of the white house. in this case, the titular head of the party is either mitt romney, the past nominee, or paul ryan, the ranking
republican in the country, or perhaps it could be reince priebus. or it could be a combination of priebus, ryan, and mitt romney's saying that donald trump will be the nominee of the republican party. mark: is it possible that any of those three guys could or would say that, or would send that kind of signal, until trump goes mathematically over? guest: i think reince priebus and speaker ryan, i don't think they would unnecessarily damage the person who would be the nominee of the party. piling on the obvious when he is on the precipice of hitting that magic number of 1237 serves nobody's purpose. mark: so he wins indiana, can you imagine a world where trump calls priebus and says, i'm getting this. you and i should meet, and you should send a signal that says this things over. guest: it would be totally appropriate for him to do so. i think priebus would check with the republican national
committee. but if you check where trump is today, roughly 1000 delegates, he is going to win new jersey, winner take all. let's be stingy with california. let's say he gets 150 out of the 172 in california. so he is at 1200 free indiana. if he wins indiana, he is clearly going to be the nominee on the first ballot in cleveland, and the party should begin to the stove the trappings that it would on any nominee. john: but on the last show you talked about republicans who say that trump is unqualified to be president.
the never trump movement, regardless of if he gets 1237 or not, there are people in the never trump movement who are not going to vote for him. if you go to the convention, mitt romney does not show up, john mccain has said he will not show up -- he could change his mind. there are other leaders who have made it pretty clear that they will not vote for him, let alone endorse him. how do you manage that? some of the party will acquiesce and capitulate, but what do you do about that? guest: once he becomes the nominee, we are going to see the dissonance between what people have been saying which is, never trump, i will never support donald trump, but i intend to support the nominee of my party. that moment is, i think, quickly arriving, and i think you will see some republicans who say, no, i will not be able to support the nominee. i think he is unfit. not a real republican.
but i don't think that is going to be a majority. i think the prominent members of the elected leadership of the republican party, the number that will not support him, is going to be few and far between. you have an elected class in washington that is terrified of the tea party movement, and there were not exactly profiles encouraged of standing up to the excesses among the elected republican leadership, and the notion that these elected congressmen are senators are going to take on the trunk constituency by attacking donald trump when they have not been able to attack him while he is trying to get the nomination, after he becomes the clear nominee, i think it is fanciful. it's just not going to happen. john: so are mitt romney and john mccain going to the convention? how do you manage that dissonance? none of the past nominees,
george w. bush is not going to be there, what do you do when you're donald trump and you are trying to bring the party together, and that happens? mark: if trump wins on tuesday, they are going to go back to all these people who said, i am not going to vote for trump, but he is not going to be our nominee. i think they are going to about 80-20, 90-10 and say, look, he is our nominee. bush 41, for instance, what's he going to do? say he won't vote for the nominee of his own party? once he gets bush 41, which i think will happen relatively soon after trump is the nominee -- if they don't show up in cleveland and protest, what does it matter? guest: here's the other thing. once you are the nominee, typically you indict all that is wrong in the world and america, particularly on the other party. donald trump is not like that. he is going to indict the failures of both parties,
multiple administrations going back to the 1980's. i think the last thing -- the last successful president we had was ronald reagan in this country, well, he is going to indict the leadership of both parties and say there is upside to doing that with the millions of democratic voters who are as upset as republican voters that can cross over in that reagan democrat base. john: you are saying for him, party unity made be overrated. that's how it works for the republican party. if you are making a bipartisan indictment that attacks both the republican establishment and democrat establishment, you will have a lot of republicans rally around the message. guest: what you will see with him is saying he wants everybody to be on board and on the team, but he will not go out of his way to make a norma's
concessions. one of the things that would be smart is to reach out to paul ryan upon winning indiana and say, what does the legislative package i sent up to the congress on january 21 look like? what does the first 100 days of legislation that you can pass -- i would like you to partner with me in helping draft those legislative packages. that's how he does the reach out to those establishment republicans, through paul ryan. but getting the favor of the washington lobbying class, the political establishment, it's not really important. mark: i said before i thought he would get bush 41. who are people who you are worried would follow romney's course, say they would vote for hillary or sit out? who might follow romney's path that if you were trump, you would be concerned about? guest: what he wants to avoid is a mass of national security figures who are respected -- mark: select petraeus, who said
he wouldn't vote for him. guest: general petraeus, dan mcchrystal, the generals of our era. but you go back to henry kissinger, foreign policy people from the last generation or so. if they raise a temperament issue -- mark: i will tell you right now. let me look at this camera. in brooklyn right now, they are going hard on the people steve mentioned. clinton will try to get endorsements from the people you mentioned early on to break trump. john: coming out of that, is it imperative that trump puts someone on the ticket with national security experience? guest: it's not imperative, but he could send an important signal with who he picks to be the vice president. i think it's absolutely blue skies, open space about whom or what credentials that person is
going to have if he gets on the ticket. is he going to be a governor, someone outside of politics, someone out of the military? john: i think it will be someone with national security experience. that is the one thing he does not have in his portfolio. guest: the key will be the debates in the fall. we will have 390 minute debates. i think they will be the most watched global television program, probably the most watched global television program since the moon landing. and we will determine who the president is. john: you are awesome. schmidt just happened. that was some serious schmidt that just happened. up next, we go down to washington for a report from the round table, and we will preview
certain that she will be the nominee van trump at this point, given all the changes we have seen in the last 24 hours from the sanders campaign, but trump has had a good week. he had refreshing victories on tuesday, and we are hearing more and more from republicans across the country that they see him as the inevitable nominee, that this deal is basically almost done. mark: ms. johnson, a very interesting article today about how the democrats are getting a head start in battleground states, hiring staff, building up infrastructure. the republican pushback did not blow me away, but the rnc has argued there is a little bit of a turnkey operation. how much behind do you think the republicans actually are in thinking about a general election plan and building infrastructure? guest: i think the bigger factor
on the republican side, other than the infrastructure on the ground and the ground game, is going to be how enthusiastic people are about the ticket. i think that is the real question mark, because you can have all the infrastructure and ground game in the world, but if people are not excited about the ticket, they are not going to vote. i think there is a question mark as to whether either of the potential tickets could generate enthusiasm among republicans, conservatives, and independents to overtake clinton in the general. john: i'm going to stick with you. it seems to me that over the course of the week, you have had ted cruz with this alliance, the carly fiorina alliance, kasich not messaging the alliance well,
a lot of confusion between the camps. it seems to me like utter chaos. not only a desperate moment for the stop trump forces, but totally rank incompetence left and right. am i being overly harsh? guest: it is one big happy family, john. no, i think people have been generous in calling it a stop trunk movement. it has been a series of independent efforts with no coronation from the outset. to think that the candidates themselves who are barely running campaigns on their own would be able to do something together, i think is too much to ask. but there has really not been a coherent stop trump movement with any strategy at all. i think it has been independently organized efforts that work together. when they have, as in wisconsin, it is by accident. john: i am going to ask about the democrats, because i saw a very good piece that reads "clinton is the insider surviving in the year of the outsider." it is clearly the year of the outsider, and hillary clinton is clearly surviving, so explain that.
how is that the case? she is the ultimate survivor, yet she has survived. guest: that's right. all year long in both parties, we have seen this outsider energy take shape in the grassroots. what hillary clinton has been able to do is convince democrats that they may be angry, but they are angry at institutions outside of government, angry at the big banks, and angry at corporations, angry with what they see as economic unfairness. but they have not lost faith in their elected leaders. she is saying to them, look, i have experience and can make change within the system. that is totally different than what we see on the republican side, which is a full out revolt. a lot of voters are losing faith not only with the system, but the leadership, and that is why you are seeing support for donald trump and ted cruz, both of whom are totally outside figures who want to blow the whole thing up. mark: two minutes, would you like to sing anything at this point? guest: i'll pass.
mark: you wrote a nice expectation on why ted cruz settled with carly fiorina. explain what the match was in his mind. guest: i think they have an intellectual connection. she is really smart. but the thing that sealed the deal is that she is an incredibly effective attack dog. cruz is not connected with somebody who could really go out and defend him strongly, and that's what carly has done for him and brought to the ticket. mark: nice to have your own personal attack dog if you are trying to get elected president. thank you both. both have great pieces on their respective websites at this hour. and neither wanted to sing. seeing us to break, go ahead. thank you both. up next, who is winning the indiana war? we will be right back. ♪
♪ john: john kasich is not spending money on the airwaves in indiana, but his rivals, donald trump and ted cruz, and a whole gaggle of super pacs are not taking chances. the same goes for the democratic [side for bernie sanders, who is currently outspending hillary clinton in the hoosier state. in this week's "by the numbers" section, we get an update on this particular state in the midwest. >> a lot of people think of my
father as a tough guy. reporter: it is the latest trump bad. so far playing over 200 times in indiana. the billionaires spent $46,000 on the buy as part of a last-minute rst in hoosier ads, totaling over $8 million so far. but once again, the front runners are not the ones buying big. reporter: the sanders campus spending $2 million in indiana. the anti-trump forces are showing out $500 million in indiana. zooming out nationally, it is right in line with this cycle's upside down trend, front runners spending much less than their opponents, up to $442 million shelled out on radio and tv ads this race. first-place trump has only shelled out $21 million. hillary clinton has sent $15 million less than bernie sanders.
john: so it cannot be said enough times that this race has cofounded expectations. a lot of money has been raised and spent, but given the expectations for how money would play and who it would help and hurt, they have kind of been obliterated. mark: look, ken does a great job at tracking this stuff. but that adequate simon and garfunkel was great, but at the time it was dovetailing the momentum he felt, and the contrast with hillary clinton's smaller offense and his larger events, and it started to make him seem like an optimistic candidate rather than the negative rhetoric he sometimes has. i think trump is going to be able to win without a serious change in media. but winning in the general will matter. john: all that money on the republican side, all those
candidates, although super pacs, there is not a single memorable republican added that i can cite that i thought was a memorable piece of creative and actually moved the needle, not one. mark: the kasich campaign says they do not have a lot of money. our thanks again to the great ken goldstein. he is great. we will be right back. ♪
♪ mark: check out our campaign tracker on bloombergpolitics.com on 2016 information, including a great story on james nash on san francisco republicans being courted ahead of the upcoming primary. coming up on bloomberg tv, emily chang sits down with the twitter cofounder. john: i love that guy! mark: see you tomorrow. sayonara. ♪