tv With All Due Respect Bloomberg October 20, 2016 8:00pm-9:01pm EDT
john: our own special low earth orbit tonight. the clinton campaign attempts to reach hyperspeed and we are in an alternate universe. first donald trump's supernova of "suspense." the republican nominee walked off the debate stage last night having created one mega-galactic problem for himself when he refused to say he would accept the results of the presidential election. today in a rally in delaware, ohio, here is how he tried to clean up. mr. trump: i would like to promise and pledge to all of my voters and supporters and to all of the people of the united states, that i will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election if i win. of course, i would accept a clear election result. but i would also reserve my
right to contest or file a legal challenge in the case of a questionable result. john: so, mark, with his efforts today, do you believe that donald trump has put this matter behind him effectively or not? mark: he compounded one unforced error with another. this story will live on now, in absence of no more debates are big news to recur, unless there is some major wikileaks, he has created a secondary problem by saying something that is almost as offensive to people. underneath like seven layers of rhetoric, he has a point but it is underneath seven layers of rhetoric. the way he has talked about this has offended people across the country. he only compounded his problem today. john: the reality is, a, we do not have a widespread problem it of voter fraud in this country. it does not exist. the other thing is that we have in many states, we have mandatory recount laws. if the vote is really close,
there is a mandatory recount. you do not need to have to avail yourself of those rights. right? problem in the we second thing, it is handled if it is really close. we have recounts, we have examinations. that is what happened in 2000 in florida. i do not understand why if you wanted to make the second point, which is to say of course i will make sure everything is legit, why say the first thing? the first thing which is, the soundbite that is going to play forever, i will accept the result if i win. which is as you said, is worse than what he said the night before. mark: he took a solid debate performance and hillary clinton solid debate performance and he undermined it solid debate performance and he undermined it , by this. i watched a lot of coverage. it is all anyone is talking about. could the storyline change tomorrow? maybe. but this will linger in history and will linger in the new s cycle. john: to be clear, there is a reason why it is lingering. republicans, oh elected
republicans said it was , former republicans, the former chair of the republican party said it was disqualifying on television. it is something no major party nominee has said or done before which is to suggest they would , not abide by the peaceful transfer of power. it is a huge abrogation of the basic democratic norm in this country and we are not just being media freaks. it is a big deal. mark: i said elites care about this more than regular people. i think that is true. elites control the coverage and the political dialogue. unfortunately, that is the case. a lot of americans do not care about this, the people who care about it, the people who will drive the coverage and chatter for days on end. john: there is no doubt about that. i know what you are saying that there are a lot of normal americans upset about this last night when he said it. mark: democrats have no intention of letting this issue go. mark: last night after the debate hillary clinton paid her , press corps a visit on the airplane and deemed donald trump's remarks "horrifying." today clinton's surrogates , twisted the knife on the tv airways and on the campaign trail. vice president biden: if you
question, if you assert that a democratic election is fixed you are attacking the very essence of the notion we have a democratic system. tim kaine: after a campaign where he has insulted everybody else and now he is going to insult a very central premise of our democracy was a shocker. president obama: when you try to sew the seeds of doubt in people's minds about the legitimacy of our election, that undermines our democracy. then you're doing the work of our adversaries for them. because our democracy depends on people knowing their vote matters. mark: there are plenty of republicans who also are critical of what trump said last night, including senator john mccain who once faced the decision about whether to challenge the results. he was on the losing side. john, before the debate we agree that trump's chances were between slim and none.
does the prospect of a hail mary comeback now after what he said last night become more remote? john: let's put it this way. last night's chances of a comeback were between slim and none and now slim is packing its bags. again, there are many days, there are still 2.5 weeks before election day and i do not rule out the possibility of some cataclysmic thing happening. in the absence of that, i think this thing is cooked. again, this was his last best chance last night and he has spent one full day and he's going to spend more days, again, justifiably answering criticism for this. mark: he's answering criticism. it's keeping him from having anything positive going on in at least two news cycles and keeping them from arguing he won the debate because he lost the debate on one single remark. i think he would have been at risk of having lost it narrowly somewhat. the reality is that the polling data has gotten worse. i think it will get worse in the wake of this debate.
he will have two days of that coverage. he has less time now. he has got no other big events. and the other thing is the perception is now among a lot of republicans more than ever it is done. john: to win the election he needed to gain new votes. the thing he said last night did not gain a single votes and lost him lost him suppose because our people that said, i do not want that as my president. now the split and republican party is even wider because you have down ballot republicans are going to say you are calling into question if i win, my electoral system is rigged. i do not want any part in that. mark: when donald trump and his center circle are doing -- are angry at the press, he does not perform up. they are angry. this is 90 minutes of event, why are you focusing on one thing question mark because you said one thing that was completely out of bounds. john: point to those three democrats. we often talk about why hillary clinton has the advantage because she has these big super surrogates. they now today, they think they have the boot on donald trump's throat. they are pressing down.
mark: they think the election was over before the debate but they are trying to end it de facto right now. john: so, how is the conservative media reacting to all this? mixed. rush limbaugh and gerard baker defended trump saying the mainstream press is reacting to his comment. others like byron york wrote that trump was " headed toward his best debate until those few seconds." laura ingram, a steadfast supporter of donald trump "he tweeted should've said he , would've accepted the results of the election. there is no other option unless we are in a recount again." all day today there were , conservative voices on foxnews calling the whole thing a distraction. here is how karl rove summed it up. karl: he could've easily said, of course, i believe in the peaceful transition of power and i will accept the results of the election as they are certified. >> he thinks the whole system is rigged.
karl: that is right. this white song all of the good things he said about trade and the clinton foundation because this is the headline. john: on the other side of the ideological chasm, progressive pundits hailed clinton's performance as nearly flawless. he wrote the performance last night put the finishing touch on "the most effective series of debate performances in modern history." mark, for the sake of argument, let's pretend we live in a parallel universe where donald trump did not call into question the peaceful transfer of power what would the verdict be in , that circumstance on last night's debate? mark: i think people would have three takeaways. one is that hillary clinton is a masterful debater, and has found her voice last night with some emotion and poignancy as much a she ever has. two, that trump, what might've been for trump if trump perform ed that will an improved from the baseline, things might have been different. the last thing is, he just is
not prepared. even by the third debate, he clearly was nowhere near as prepared as she was. chris wallace asked substance. he was dancing. john: i will say in the first 30 minutes of the debate, when trump seemed like he was on tranquilizers, he was better than he had been. mark: the question. john: but in the back hour, the same thing happened, she effectively, not only prepared on policy, but she psychologically prepared a strategy of getting out of his -- under his skin. every time she would say something, like last night when she said he choked when he went to mexico. his demeanor changed, he started to get personal. the thing at the end of the beaver he called her a nasty woman, the thing where he said, you're a puppet. you are a puppet. she brought out all of the things she wanted to do, wannts -- which is to call into question his temperament. i think he lost the debate last night, even without the worst agree jim. mark: what about axis will imitate, no access -- accusations of women, i think
the big story last night would've been hillary clinton's evasions, skillful. chris wallace tried to pin her down to it she did not answer. john: when we are living in a parallel universe, i want to take away wikileaks as well. a parallel parallel universe. mark: up next, we will break down some of the interesting moments from last nights's debate after these words from our sponsors. ♪
♪ >> do you make the same commitment that you will absolutely, sir, absolutely accept the results of this election? mr. trump: i will look at it at the time. i'm not looking at anything now. i will look at it at the time. chris: one of the prides of this country is the peaceful transition of power and no matter how hard fought a campaign is, at the end of the campaign, the loser concedes to the winner. are you saying you're not prepared to commit to that principle?
mr. trump, what i'm saying is i will tell you of the time. i will keep you in suspense. mark: that was the big moment that everyone was talking about and will for years. there were other overshadowed noteworthy exchanges that should get their dues. there were times when donald a rare composure and policy presence is john suggested earlier that offered a stark contrast to his more off message remarks throughout the evening. mr. trump: we need a supreme court that in my opinion is going to uphold the second amendment and all amendments but the second amendment. the justices i will appoint will be pro-life, they will have a conservative bent, and they will be protecting the second amendment. they are great scholars in all cases and they are people of tremendous respect. they will interpret the constitution the way the founders wanted it interpreted. it's all about the constitution.
the d.c. v. heller decision, she was extremely angry about it. iwatch. she was very angry what upheld. -- when upheld. and justice scalia was so involved in it was a well-crafted decision. mark: i'm not saying if he had done that for 270 minutes over the three debates he would have won, but it would've been a much different set of context. john: it would have been. if you try to do that, i was surprised that he cited a case. he cited heller. he has no depth if you asked him to explain what heller says. i'm not sure he would know. tonally, that would've been a very different world. mark: the exact tone many of us said going into the first debate, surely he will adopt. john: the clinton campaign expected him to try to adopt and they spent a fair amount of time to induce him to not adopt. let's look at one of those examples.
hillary clinton was a little out of character last night as she tried some almost trumpian maneuvers, interrupting, mocking and needling her opponent. mrs. clinton: he had a meeting with the mexican president. he did not even raise it, he choked. mr. trump: from everything or see, has no respect for this person. mrs. clinton: that is goes he would rather have a puppet for president. this is a person has been cavalier about the use of nuclear weapons. 10 people who had that awesome responsibility and have come out and in an unprecedented way said, they would not trust donald trump with the nuclear codes. there's only one of us on this day to is actually shipped jobs to mexico because that is donald. he goes around with crocodile tears about how terrible it is but he has given jobs to chinese steelworkers. he was borrowing $14 million to start his businesses.
i'd be happy to compare what we do with the trump foundation which took money and bought a six foot portrait from donald. who does that? mr. trump: in my apartment today on a very beautiful hotel down the street -- mrs. clinton: paid with chinese steel. he did not get an emmy and he started tweeting the emmys were rigged. you are whining before the game is even finish. it just shows you are not up to doing the job. , just like we went after bin laden. while you were doing " celebrity apprentice." he was criticizing president reagan. social security, payroll contribution will go up as will donald's assuming you cannot figure out how to get out of it. mr. trump: such a nasty woman. john: there it was. right there. the barb fest. there were a lot of those. the last when he saw in a crystallized moment, that is the kind of thing she did for three debates but that is it.
mark: i praised hillary clinton's prep team. many of the people that worked with barack obama, they learn to work with her two future things that she went in her gut, in her heart feel, criticism of donald trump with prewritten lines that she was comfortable delivering in her own voice with her own attitude, very smart. john: it was a sense of almost a sense of joy. she was enjoying herself. mark: she prepared and they gave her a lot of good options. john: clinton overtly sidestepped some tough questions from the moderator, chris wallace. she did it in a way that many people have noticed. chris: we've learned from wikileaks that you said is, "my dream is a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders." mrs. clinton: i was talking about energy. an electric grid, an energy system that crosses borders. i actually think the most important question of this
evening, chris, is finally, will donald trump admit and condemn that the russians are doing this? chris: why isn't what went on between you and the clinton foundation, why isn't it pay to play? mrs. clinton: everything i did a s secretary of state was in furtherance of our country's interest and our values. the state department has said that. i think that has been proven. i am happy, i am thrilled to talk about the clinton foundation because it is a world-renowned charity. the clinton foundation made it possible for 11 million people around the world with hiv-aids to afford treatment and that is about half of all the people in the world who are getting treatment. in partnership with the american -- chris: secretary clinton. mrs. clinton: we have made environments and schools healthier. chris: this was an open discussion. the specific question went to pay for play. [talking over each other]
this is clinton: there is no evidence about the very good work and the high rank. mr. trump: it is a criminal enterprise. john: that was not her at her most evasive. if she did not enter this debate on a roll, people would focus on -- she handled it much better than some of the other challenges she has had. john: think about the contrast with her and trump. i agree she's evasive. here's only talk about we talk about doing well in debate. visiting is what you're supposed to do. quick answer, get out, do not go on the defensive, go on the attack again. mark: you can see why republicans are frustrated. john: up next, the schlapp attack. we will talk to the american conservative union. ♪
♪ john: now it is time for us to have our weekly dose of fun with our favorite social media have schlapp chat. , with this now is matt schlapp, also a big donald trump support. -- support. we will ask him whether he still is after last night. matt, there is a big split in the republican party after what to look trump did last night, unprecedentedly saying he did not know if he would accept the reluctant -- the election results. where do you stand with those conservatives who are hitting him hard today or with those conservatives making excuses for him? matt: i dont' know. maybe somewhere in the middle. i would not have answered the question that way. i think i would like to see these two get to a point, one of them is going to get elected in 19 days. i would like to see these to be to do something simple like
shake hands on this stage. i think it was ridiculous that the clinton campaign negotiated that they did not have to shake each other's hand. if you do not have enough respective with each other and i and check each other's hand, we are in a pretty bad place and the country is as well. he should also on election day, if donald trump does not win, he will recognize the results. mark: matt, what was wrong with this answer? matt: i think the only thing that was wrong with the answer is that it overshadowed what i thought was a good debate performance. mark: what was wrong with that particular answer? you said you would not have done it that way. what were the negative implications of his answering that way? matt: i think the negative, i think, i just think it looks more magnanimous to say i want to be my opponent's brains in, but if she wins, i'm going to support that. that makes him look like the better man. i can understand with everything we have learned on wikileaks and
the way the clintons roll, he is frustrated. i thought the answer that made that the clearest is when he said, you should not be able to run because of all of the legal problems you are reading about. he brought up the example of the four star general. there is a certain degree of frustration for those of us were not clinton fans she has seemed , to find a way out of every one of these legal concerns when others have not. john: you agree that america is an example or of democracy for people around the world, right? matt: absolutely. john: you do not have any lack of faith in our ability to conduct a free and fair election? matt: i think we have the best elections on the globe. john: don't you think all the ways trump is talking about the thing he suggested last night says he is skeptical of that? he seems to have doubts about the integrity of american elections. is that a helpful thing for a major party nominee to be expressing explicitly or implicitly? matt: i think when it comes down
to it is this, if you look at the polls, does not look like this race is a one or two point race, but let's say it is tight at the end. as you all know subjectivity , comes in play. i spent a month in florida and there were a bunch of al gore democrats who did the same. we know oftentimes it comes down to a room or someone has to make a decision as to whether a hanging chad result of the vote for one of the other person. when they ran and leading all election night into the early morning and after several recounts and lawsuits, all of a sudden they did not win the race. mark: we have got less than a minute. you probably have seen the private republican polling data that shows donald trump standing in the battleground states as strong as it was a couple weeks ago. tell me the states that will put 270. matt: i think the states that will tighten he has to win. he has to think about the electoral vote in maine. he has to win new hampshire.
obviously, virginia does not look like it improves, you have to get pennsylvania or michigan or wisconsin. he has got to win nevada and he is got to win iowa. i think several of those states are states that will tighten up dramatically over the next two weeks. i think the demographics look good for him. i agree with the investor business daily poll with it two point race for hillary. that is the closest polish all -- that was the closest paul i saw. john: that was schlapptastic. we will be back with randi weingarten after this quick break. ♪
with you, even virtually. mark: how would you rate hillary clinton's chances of being elected president in november? randi: i am one of those people who it is not over until it is over, but i think she has a pretty good chance now. i'm not, you look at the different upshot and nate silver and you see all of the chances, changed, butrk has i think what is happening is hurt or directory is going higher and higher with a greater and greater percentage of showing she's going to win. and donald trump's trajectory is in the opposite direction. and so, normally at this point, things actually start showing which way the electric is going , and i think people are confident in her competence, so you are seeing not just the
people who would ordinarily some or to a democrat, but you are seeing more and more people say, when they look at these two candidates, there's only one of them that has the judgment, the temperament, even if you disagree with some of their positions. john: one of the things the clinton campaign has made clear is that the key to her winning this race would be to disqualify donald trump. and with his help, they have done a pretty good job of that or making him pretty toxic. as we turn this corner into the home stretch, what does hillary clinton need to do now as she prepares perhaps to get ready to govern? should she continue to trash trump or start doing something else? randi: i think we have a november 9 problem. i'm a big believer that you lean towards people's aspirations not people's fears. i think what she tried to do last night when she had the time to talk into really debate, was
she actually lifted up aspirations. she talked about what her plans are going forward, not how to -- and she did more of that than spar with donald trump. now, donald trump on a debate stage is so reckless it's hard to ignore a lot of the things that he says. but i think that he himself disqualified himself so much yesterday, that her path right now is to connect to people's aspirations, like jfk did, like fdr, like reagan, and to show as she said in her closing that , regardless of whether you vote for her not, her responsibility is to be the president for everyone and to lift everyone and to make those words stronger together mean something to people. mark: you think about your
friends and your family, the people you are closest to who is , someone who supports donald trump and what is your understanding of why they support donald trump? randi: so, you know, there are a couple of people i know who support donald trump. and their view is that washington is broken. and you need somebody to shake this whole thing up. it is like the people who would say, i need to change that house. so i'm going to burn it all down. it is a level of frustration that, that suggests that no rational thinking would pierce it. it is a level of anger that is really connected to a frustration about what happened in washington. and i think it gets rooted into
the point where what is scary about this when you see donald trump basically not distinguishing between fact and fiction and living in his own reality of life or whatever it is, people basically, his supporters john: are you saying believe him. john: are you saying that the 40 million or more so people that will vote for donald trump are irrational? randi: no, i am not saying that. i am saying there is a sense of loss that is emotionally moving people to feeling like he is going to be the savior. and that is very scary. but it does come, underlying it is this sense of loss in their lives. and so, i'm very sympathetic to that. that is what the labor movement has fought for all our lives. it is the sense that people felt like that their lives should be
better going forward and they are not. john: there are a lot of people on the left and the democratic party, bernie sanders supporters who have been reading some of the things that came out of wikileaks e-mails that feel like all of their suspicions about hillary clinton have been borne out by those e-mails, that she is different in private than in public. she's phony. do you have any sympathy with that view? with the progressive wing of the party that is frustrated with the wikileaks e-mails in that way? randi: well, you know, i think there are two things about the wikileaks e-mails. i want to separate them. one is the watergate-type interference in elections this time done by a foreign government. let's put that aside. that is a problem in and of itself. i think that you are seeing here is people are embarrassed but this is what ends up happening in elections. it is what happens in
organizations. there was a really heated debate between bernie and hillary. you see a lot of heated language. there was even one from me where i called somebody sanctimonious. in retrospect, you wonder why you would do that, but you see that kind of, you see that in campaigns. the real issue i think is what we did at the platform which was, after all these leaks, which post date all of these leaks, and what we tried to do together, hillary's people and bernie's people to create the most progressive platform the dems have ever had. the accountability is what i think she said at the convention, which is when she looked at the bernie people and said, we did this platform together. we ran ultimately together in the last month or so, and it lets actually let's actually , implement this.
let's actually do this. i think all of us on the progressive side are going to have to try and make sure we get to rewrite the rules of the economy, which is what most of us are talking about and what the big difference was between where bernie initially was and where hillary initially was. mark: thank you very much. strategy bipartisan session right now. if you're watching us in washington, you can listen to this program on bloomberg 99.1 f.m. we will be right back. ♪
mrs. obama: let me say that since then my office has been flooded with thousands of letters and e-mails from folks all across the country. speaking out for the values of decency and respect that we all hold dear. men of all backgrounds and walks of life agreeing that decent men do not demean women. [cheering] mrs. obama: we should not tolerate this behavior from any man, let alone a man who wants to be the president. john: that was first lady michelle obama criticizing donald trump at a rally in phoenix, arizona, not that long ago. the first lady was one of several surrogates on the trail hammering donald trump. with us from the city of brotherly love is republican strategist and democratic strategist mike feldman.
i want to start with you, mike, because one of the biggest things happening since donald trump made his comment about not necessarily accepting the results of the election is that people in his camp and other in the country has been saying, what is so bad about that? al gore contested the election in 2000, given your closeness to vice president gore and you are part of that story, explain to us whether they have a point or not? mike: they have a point, but it is the wrong point. this has been pretty well litigated today, but 2000 was a disputed election. as you both know, florida was under recount by law. i think nobody would doubt that it was good to go through every, every legal process they could to determine that the will of the voter was actually honored by the process. but, again, when the highest court in the land weighed in and stopped the recount, al gore,
and there were plenty of people encouraging vice president gore to pursue it further, he not only graciously conceded the election but he said, do not trash the court. there is a fine line between anarchy and a disputed print this supreme court decision. it was a good moment. what concerned me about last night where people going out in using that example. what mr. trump did last night was the very opposite of that. john: kim, remind everybody where you stand on your party's nominee. are you voting for him? kim: i will keep you in suspense. mark: very funny. let's say this program ends and the phone rings and it is stephen bannon and kellyanne conway and says, mr. trump decided that the debate answer is not good. he wants something new to put this behind us. what would you tell him to do? kim: stop trying to be so clever. i think he gets himself in
trouble where he has the meat of what people who are supporting him and people who are disgruntled with washington in the system want to hear and he takes it too far. i think that happen to him a couple of times last night. he has good gut instinct about what is going on in the hearts and minds of people who are tired of politics as usual. but then he tries to be too clever and put on a show instead of just laying that out there, and i think that is because that is who he is. john: when you're watching the debate last night, one of the things we discussed earlier in the show was a moment when hillary clinton made a comment about him not paying taxes and he under his - -he snapped at her and called her a nasty woman. i have heard from women who read into that not just a snappiness but a kind of misogyny that upset them. both as a woman and republican
woman, when you heard that, didn woman, when you heard that, did you groan? what was your reaction to that comment? kim: a suburban pennsylvania voter woman. look, i think that i don't like the guy. i really do not. i do not want to hang out with him, but i think that people are getting panties in a bunch over a lot of stuff. he says things in an incendiary way. he should not. he treated her like any other guy who might be on the stage with her. if you are woman in a business where there were no women, i would have taken that as a compliment, not that i would want anyone to talk to me that way. i would not have gotten so upset over that. i think that bulk of everything he has been talking about for the last several days, it does turn them into a big jerk. -- ham into a big jerk. but actions as well are important. if you look back over history there are some twos actions have -- whose actions have been pretty gross, too.
mark: hillary clinton calls you and says mike, can you come to headquarters, interview everyone on the staff, make sure we are doing everything we need to do. who would you talk to? what would you ask them? mike: i think they are doing a pretty good job. i think she did it last night but it was overshadowed by these comments mr. trump made. she has got to start, and randi alluded to it, she has to start laying claim to the outcome of this election. at this point, if the election were tomorrow, people would view as a total repudiation of her opponent and not necessarily a mandate for her. i think you saw her starting to do that last night. you saw her trying to talk to independents and moderate republicans and others to lay out a vision, nobody heard much of it because of the outcome of the debate. they need to start thinking about how they are going to govern in addition to how they are going to turn out the vote. one thing that kim said is important, and i agree about what you said on the substance, but the debates, and it has been
said often in the district, debates do matter in preparation for debates matter. i think what this debate has shown a lack of preparation and a lack of discipline that is troubling in a potential president of the united states. it is not like mr. trump did not know there was going to be a question about his comments. every single member of his team, including his running mate, was giving him a trail of breadcrumbs for that answer, and yet he still dominated the news after in the debate by making a comment that was clearly viewed out of bounds by even people in his own party. john: i'm going to ask about both the same question. michelle obama is in arizona. we just played that some. they are trying to win arizona. the polls in texas are close, georgia, missouri. there are a lot of places the clinton campaign is in play. right now, today, if you had to project, do you think hillary clinton will win by what? mike: i don't know. john: is it starting to look like a landslide? do you think it will be type? mike: it feels electorally like she is going to have a very good night.
it depends obviously on turnout. again, the campaign is methodically i and q indicating with the voters and have a pretty good idea who is going to show up. the trump campaign have less certainty about who is going to turn out. i think what you saw today is an example of what the clinton campaign is going to do for the next two weeks which is surrogates, everybody out there trying to energize and let people know what is at stake with the election. john: i'm going to ask you to be a dispassionate analyst in pennsylvania. are you starting to feel a landslide or does this feel at the core is a tight election? kim: i am loathe to predict anything in this election ever, because i was on her show six months ago and got everything wrong. first off, i will lead with that caveat. i think we cannot really predict a landslide, though to start election, the, it is kind of, sort of rig, not in the way that elections do not work, but the electoral college
liens democrat to begin with, but i do not think this is a left-right split. i think this is a top-bottom split. how that plays out on election day is going to be new and different for all of us to look at. john: all right. do you think there is any chance donald trump could win pennsylvania? kim: um, i will keep you in suspense. john: kim's taking a pass on all our questions today. we always love having her here. mike, you are adequate. thank you both. we'll talk ticket splitting and the clinton campaign's arizona ambitions a little bit more when we come back. ♪
♪ mark: as donald trump struggles in some of the key battleground states, republican senate candidates are on the hunt for one is now an endangered species, the voter called the ticket splitter. they are the focus of the latest piece in our eight-week series we call "battleground 2016." here to talk to us is our colleague. steve, the country is more polarized. people tend to vote along party lines more than they did a generation ago. why do these down ballot candidates think they can get a lot of ticket splitting ahead of donald trump and some of the contested races? steve: it is less common now, 11% in 2012. 11% of the electorate voted for one party for president and another party down ballot. this year is different because of donald trump's popularity. partially because you have less of a ground game operation the past candidates do and he is more reliant on party operations, party ground games.
the problem is, they have different goals than donald trump does, especially in an election like this where he is so unpopular. i talked to a party chairman in arizona who was for trump but said, we are working in the same direction, but we have different goals. my goal is to turn a all republicans are for donald trump. john: how are campaigns in terms of methodology, how are they trying to find ticket splitters? what are they doing about that? steve: we try to re-create this in the took two different sets of data, the data that shows the voters likelihood to be a republican or a democrat, the partisanship, and we also took data that show their likelihood to be a donald trump support. in cases where we had republicans, voters who look like they were going to be republican, that number was higher than voters that look like they were going to become supporters.
the difference between those numbers, those of the vulnerable targets the clinton campaign might want to target. we met them around the swing states and we found the top three states where after, not really a surprise, but also arizona and also ohio. in ohio, things are so close that any sort of movement could move the needle in that state. john: arizona a huge focus because you have a lot of republicans there. a lot of republicans who would be mccain voters but not necessarily be trump voters. so, how important is it -- does john mccain need to get a lot of clinton voters if he is going to be reelected? steve: no. it is actually the opposite. clinton needs john mccain voters if she wants to have a shot at winning that state. the clinton campaign has made it clear they are making a play there. republicans in arizona have gotten a very mixed message. the two senators have been anti-trump. the chairman of the party has been one of the most vocal trump
supporters in the last few days. and so, if you are a republican in that state, it is not clear what you are supposed to do on election day. john: maricopa county, a key county, what did you find? steve: what we found there is most of the voters in the state are from maricopa county, 60%. around phoenix. and so, it's key to any sort of turnout in the state, but we found a huge percentage of these ticket splitters were there. and a lot of them we found were mormon, which is one group. we also found a lot of them followed the same sort of trends that donald trump is a problems with, women, high education voters, young people, things like that. mark: thank you very much and we will be right back. ♪
♪ john: we will have a new culture caucus podcast. we talk a lot about politics but also the cubs and the dodgers now split 2-2. would you have? mark: cubs mu john: i'm from l.a. but i am rooting for the cubs. we have more from the bloombergpolitics poll bloombergpolitics.com. on the website coming up, emily chang has more from the vanity fair new establishment summit. until tomorrow for me and mark, , we say, glad we are out of vegas, and we say, sayonara. ♪
♪ in hong kong. i am haidi lun. rishaad: i am rishaad salamat in hong kong. this is "bloomberg markets: asia". there is only one story happening in hong kong, this typhoon. they don't foresee problems for aircraft until 11:00. indeed, markets pretty much shut. haidi: hong kong whipping up the storm.