tv Fareed Zakaria GPS CNN August 7, 2016 10:00am-11:01am PDT
this is "gps," the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. we begin today's show with donald trump's tough week. >> she was standing there, she had nothing to say. >> to babies. >> actually, i was only kidding. you can get the baby out of here. >> and there has been more talk of gop defections. can republicans do anything? will they? i asked two prominent ones. then, who can boost it, trump or clinton?
"the new york times" debate. also, malcolm gladwell offers his take on what hillary clinton has to do with an obscure painter and his plans to remake the olympic games. but first here is my take. i was asked to make sense about one more things that donald trump said demonstratively false. i replied that there was a pattern here and a term for a person who did this kind of thing. a bullshit artist. i wasn't using that casually. trump has many things. some of them dark and dangerous. but at his core, he is a b.s. artist. harry frankfurt, a moral philosopher, wrote a brilliant
essay in 1996 called "on bullshit." frankfurt distinguishes crucially between lies and b.s. telling a lie is an act with a sharp focus. it is designed to insert a particular falsehood at a specific point. in order to invent a lie at all, the teller of a lie must think he knows what is true. but someone in engaging in b.s., frankfurt explains, is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. his eye is not on the facts at all. he writes that the focus is panoramic rather than particular and more spacious opportunities for improvisation, color and
play. donald trump boasts and boasts about his business, his buildings, business books, his wives. much of is a concoction of hyperbole a falsehood. when he is found out, he's like one of those guys when confronted with the truth k quickly responds, i knew that. take for example, his nonrelationship with vladimir putin. in may 2014, addressing the national press club, here's what trump said. >> i was in russia, i was in moscow recently. and i spoke indirectly and directly with president putin who could not have been nicer. >> in november 2015, at a fox debate, he said this of putin. >> i got to know him very well because we were both on "60 minutes". >> did trump really believe that you can say something like that on live tv and no one would check? >> did he think that no one would notice that the 60 minutes show consisted of two separate
prerecorded interviews with trump in new york and vladimir putin in russia? in fact, it was just b.s. look at the issues that fueled his rise. birtherism. trump claimed in 2011 that he sent investigators to hawaii and, quote, they cannot believe what they are finding. for weeks, trump continued to comply that there were huge findings to be released soon. he hinted to george stephanopoulos. we're going to see what happens. that was five years ago. nothing happened. it's highly unlikely trump sent investigators to hawaii in the first place. in 2011, michael cohen was asked for any details about the investigators. cohen explained that it was all a very secret, naturally. trump has said the same about
his plans to defeat isis, which he can't reveal. he has said he has a strategy to win states this fall but won't reveal which ones. even by trump standards, that's a head scratcher. will it be so secret that even the voters won't be told? of course it's really all just b.s. harry frankfurt concludes that lies and truth tellers are acute of the truth. by virtue of this, frankfurt writes, bullshit is a greater standard rules of fact, truth and reality that have disappeared in this campaign. donald trump has piled such vast quantities of his trademark product into the political
arena. that the stench is now overwhelming and unbearable. for more, go to cnn.com/fareed and read my washington post column this week. and let's get started. ♪ so that's my take on trump but let's discuss where trump and the gop go from here. joining me is brett stephens and emily. brett, looking at all of the stuff that's been happening, what is interesting is the conservative movement, intellectuals like yourself, the editors of the national review, the editors of the weekly standard have all denounced and distanced themselves from donald trump fairly consistently.
the republican establishment, on the other hand, has not. presumably because they felt sth might be a road to victory. as donald trump's numbers drop, do you think the republican establishment will find its principles the way the conservative establishment did? >> that's what i'm hoping for and why i wrote my column. both as a matter of political practice as well as the long-term interests of the party, i think they have to begin distancing themselves immediately. it's very clue that trump is going to lose by historic margins and he's going to be a millstone around their necks in this election. the idea that they have to support trump in order to protect the down ballot side of the ticket i don't think holds water anymore. more importantly, trump is not just politically toxic, i think he's become morally toxic.
the association with trump is going to taint otherwise honorable republican leaders trying to find their way, find a path in this election season so that the republican brand itself is going to be damaged, if it can ever recover. separate themselves from the man himself, the healthier the party will be after november. >> also tell me what are you hearing are there republicans beginning to worry about their survival? >> no, not at all. in fact, i just got off the phone with a high-ranking official of the rnc. they called it a family feud. they are having -- no one is -- the party is firmly behind donald trump for president and i think you'll see going forward -- first of all, it's
too premature to say donald trump is over. everyone said donald trump was over months ago and the poll numbers went up. it's too soon to say. when we start seeing numbers in september when the debates start, mid-september through october, those numbers count. a lot of people are undecided. >> but states in new hampshire, crucial states like illinois, republican senators who are up for election, their poll numbers are sinking. >> but there's no -- we haven't seen a correlation between trump at the top of the ticket and their problems. >> i really feel like what i'm interested in is where the party goes. you work for colin powell. do you think colin powell will come out and say something against donald trump? >> i do not speak for colin powell and i'm sure he will see this and be very grateful that i
say that. as you know, he endorsed president obama twice and i know that he and donald trump are not friends. whether he endorses anyone or stays silent, i honestly don't know the answer to that. he hasn't told me that. but this election is unlike any other election because he split from the party in the last election. donald trump's numbers with independents are so much higher, people that are not even independents, who have no party affiliation. this has split up everything. the standard party lines are all up in the air. hillary clinton is pulling some of the moderates to her. donald trump is pulling in some democrats, more democrats than she's pulling in republicans, he's pulling in the middle. it's just not fitting in to the
standard party lines. and so i don't think we can put any past patterns into this race. >> you know, just very quickly, this is the standard line of the trump side of the party. all of us who oppose it are a bunch of elites who live in this bubble of unimaginable wealth. i wish i had been born into an extremely wealthy new york family to get my starting life. i started at the bottom like so many of us did and to the extent i've achieved anything, i think it's on merit. a lot of the americans feel the same way. it's not a convincing argument and it's not convincing when trump are telling so many people who are at the bottom, first generation americans trying to rise, that he has a different vision. it's not a vision of opportunity of mobility. it's basically increasingly a vision of the privileges of a
white ethnic bloc. for reasons of principle, the party of lincoln is a party of opportunity for everyone. it's a party about the right to rise and mr. trump, unfortunately, doesn't represent that view. >> i think you're missing the point. i'm not talking about donald trump as -- i'm talking about when i say the elites of new york and the mainstream media, donald trump, as you see him go through today, going out to these town halls and rallies and getting thousands of thousands of people showing up, he's matched hillary clinton in fundraising. these are not big donors. big donors have walked away from him. he has a popularity. no one is talking about him being elite. obviously he's rich and lives in the trump towers but he speaks
in a way and represents which people economy is still weak and wages low. they don't feel like people in new york and d.c. and this media is expressing what their problems are which are these stories, the bigger problem of the economy, their home and personality safety. >> the american people deserve a president who can speak grammatical english. >> it's so snobby. >> no, it's true. >> on that note, we have to go. next on "gps," we'll discuss some of the substance of this campaign. who has the better ideas to get america growing again? a debate. paul krugman versus stephen moore. i've been taking fish oil from nature's bounty to support my heart.
eating better, keeping healthy. so that no matter what happens in the future, my "future self" will thank me. thank you! 45 years of experience has taught us: no matter what the future holds, you're always better off healthy. nature's bounty you can help prevent blindness in undernourished children across the globe by getting your vitamins at walgreens. walgreens. at the corner of happy and healthy. right now with card, select nature's bounty vitamins are buy one, get one free.
(ee-e-e-oh-mum-oh-weh) (hush my darling...) (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) (hush my darling...) man snoring (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) woman snoring take the roar out of snore. yet another innovation only at a sleep number store. did you know people can save over $500 when they switch to progressive? did you brush your hair today? yes, mom. why? hmm. no reason.
i have made billions of dollars in business-making deals. now i'm going to make our country rich again. >> well, here's what i want you to know. i do have a jobs program and as president i'm going to make sure that you hear you're hired. >> so who has a better plan for the american economy. steven wuir is an economic consultant and paul krugman is a columnist for "the new york times." steven, your argument is that the slow growth we are now watching is a consequence of obama's economic policies and
therefore we are condemned to slow economic growth. >> fareed, you summarized my position. i think donald trump's position is exactly right. that isn't just my opinion. i've asked trump to take with him everywhere you goes, the speech he gives, the front page of the "wall street journal" last saturday which said worst economic recovery since the great depression and that's exactly what this has been. we've downgraded our growth rate and now we're down to 1% which is near recession levels. i think the business sector is in a recession. so these are bismol numbers and i think the barack obama has failed. we're going to focus on three things and trump will give a major economic speech on monday focusing on, number one, reforming our tax system and bring jocks back to the united states. number two, to produce our oil
and gas, we can be the energy-dominant country in the world. >> stephen, we are the energy dominant producer in the world. >> well, we're still importing oil. finally, donald trump talks a lot about the regulatory burden and how we can unshackle businesses so they can grow. there's an old saying, if you don't have healthy businesses, you don't have healthy jobs. >> paul, i'm sure this is a critique you're familiar with. but briefly, what's wrong with it? >> well, first of all, it's worth just thinking for a moment about skbrobs. if we looked at job creation, particularly private sector job creation, look, the obama era has been better than the bush era. you do the comparison on the charts and it's not even funny. it's ridiculous how much better. if these are anti-growth policies, how come we have all
of this job creation. >> bush began with a big tax cut. obama had a tax increase at the beginning of 2013, followed by the best job growth since the 1990s. he had the implementation of obamacare which everybody on the right side would be a huge job killer and job growth kept plugging along. productivity growth has been disappointing. >> the fed's forecast and administration's forecast started with 3, 3 1/2 growth. >> nobody ever forecast -- >> that was a known error. i mean, that was people like me saying, this is a post-moderate recession, the aftermath of a financial crisis. it's not going to be a recovery that's going to be all that fast. where we are now, we are pretty close to full employment by most measures. >> paul, the problem isn't that we haven't created enough jobs. you're right. it's decent. the problem is that their
walmart stores are minimum wage jobs. the question is, how do you create not just more jobs but middle-class jobs that pay you 50, 60, 70, $80,000 a year. you need more business investment. that's what worries me the most about this economy, fareed. if you look over the last year, business spending and investment and factories and plant and equipment and computers, that's fallen off a cliff because businesses feel like they are under assault from washington. just lifting that veil of fear of businesses like putting somebody like donald trump in the white house who is a businessman and wants to cut their taxes and regulations and i disagree with paul krugman on this. when you look at the reagan era, those were the biggest booms we've ever had in this country, not just for the middle class as well. >> the clinton boom following
the increase is bigger than the reagan era boom. clinton greater than reagan, which doesn't fit that story. obama better than bush. bush cut taxes, obama raised them. it's kind of sad. it's kind of pathetic, steve. if you're going back to the reagan tax cut 35 years ago. >> and the kennedy tax cut. >> totally different environment. we have 25 years of evidence. we have clinton, bush, obama. in terms of ranking in success and economic growth is clinton, obama, bush. and you're saying, yes, but we should believe in your recommendations because of something that happened 35 years ago. i could argue that story with you. >> i think a lot of trump voters -- the reason trump won this nomination, i think, is because voters don't like at all
what barack obama has done to the economy. you're right, paul krugman, they didn't like too much what happened under george w. bush. we have record levels of spending. and we're going to turn that around. but look, you can't -- when you look at bill clinton, i think if hillary clinton were to govern the way bill clinton did, i would vote for her. but she wants more spending and more debt. you know this, paul krugman. gdp fell more under bill clinton than any other president in 30 or 40 years. >> and the cold war hadding? to do with that, you know. >> government spending went down and the growth of the economy went up. >> thank you, gentlemen, for a feisty debate. next on gps, fewer than 40% voted in the election. low turnout is the norm in america but it's very low compared to other countries. we have a fix when we come back. if you miss a show, go to cnn.com/fareed for a link to my
itunes podcast. the bud light party believes in change. that's why bud light has a new look... ...and we want to share it with everyone... jackpot! still the same refreshing bud light. with a new look. when this busy family... ...got a cracked windshield... ...their dad went to the new safelite-dot-com... ...and scheduled a replacement... ...in just a few clicks. with safelite you don't have to miss a thing. y'all did wonderful! thank you. (girls sing) safelite repair, safelite replace.
now for our "what in the world segment". >> and then there's donald trump. don't boo. vote. >> president obama urged audience members of the democratic national convention last week to express themselves at the voting booth. ♪ only 60 million americans voted in the republican or democratic primaries and half of those citizens voted for a candidate other than trump or clinton, according to "the new york times." only 9% cast ballots for either hillary clinton or donald trump, as "the times" pointed out. the united states has voting rates among the lowest in the
developed world. only 53.6 eligible citizens voted and 84.3% of turkish adult citizens and 87.2% of voters in belgium exercised the right to vote in their most recent national elections. why? well, maybe because voting is mandatory in belgium and turkey. you get fined if you don't go to the polls. they are just two of 26 countries. should the united states follow suit to boost turnout? president obama has pointed out mandatory voting could be transformative. >> the people who tend not to vote are young, they are lower income, they are skewed more heavily towards other groups and
minority groups. there's a reason why some folks stay away from the polls. >> the president touted australia as a success story. mandatory voting was put in place in 1924. a fine of 20 australian dollars has been enough of a disincentive to mobilize voters. over 90% of aussies voted in the last general election. not only are they more represented, they might be more politically aware. countries that strongly enforce couple po couple pull sorry a political scientist from australian university surmises in countries with strong enforcement,
"cumpulsory voting increases citizens' political knowledge, either because voters choose to become informed given the requirement to vote." so why not voting? at the very least, the government should make it easier for americans to cast a ballot. like in sweden where citizens are automatically registered to vote and turnout is the highest in the oacd. how about oregon, the only state that automatically registers people to vote when they get a driver's license or state i.d., a step in the right direction. or take estonia, the small baltic nation which allows online voting. australia, brazil and greece, according to think progress, do a very simple thing. they hold elections on weekends so people can partake without having to skip work. after all, american elections are only on tuesdays because of
truly arcane logic. in 1845, congress deduced that sunday was sabbath. and wednesday was market in the farming communities. so tuesday was the most convenient day for voting. clearly, our society has evolved. the rules governing or elections should do as well. next on "gps," the great malcolm gladwell gives us his good ideas on his podcast. [stork-man] special delivery.
according to current polls and pundits, there's a strong possibility that hillary clinton will be elected president on november 8th. and she will make history as the first female president of the united states. right on the heels of the first black president of the united states. but the first of this kind inspire seconds and thirds? will future presidential election contests feature more
women and african-americans? that's something my next guest has been thinking about a lot for his new podcast. malcolm gladwell hosts a terrific new podcast called "revisionist history." malcolm, pleasure to have you on. >> it's good to be back. >> your podcast deals with all kinds of fascinating subjects but they have contemporary significance. so one of them, you know, one thinks of hillary clinton because it's really about what happens to a woman when she enters a man's world and you go back in history to an unusual history. >> yeah. the idea behind the podcast is revisionist history. so in each episode i try to re-examine something that's either been forgotten or misunderstood. i have long been fascinated by this english painter called
elizabeth thompson who is briefly the most famous painter in england at a time when there were no women in the world of painting, which was a huge deal. it's an incredibly prestigious profession. she breaks in and has a position in roll call and everyone is convinced that she's the one that breaks down the door for all women to the world of art. so she's thought of being a pioneer and everyone paths their heads on their back and the instant she has a breakthrough, boom, they slam the door. >> and there are no more paintings? >> there are no more. so the next time it was thought that she might become a member of the royal academy of art and as it turns out, this is in
1973, everyone thought women would be joining willy-nilly. it doesn't happen for another 50, 60 years. this is a phenomenon. it's a token phenomenon. there's a term that is used called moral licensing which says that when a favored group, a majority group does an act of generosity towards an outsider, it doesn't necessarily signal that more acts of generosity are something. sometimes it gives them license to then go back to their old ways. so this thing that incites prejudice is acts of openness. if you look at anti-semitism in germany, the germans didn't hate all jews. they liked some jews.
there were german jews who they adored and held close to their heart and it was that love of a very small number of jews that gave them permission to hate the rest. >> some of this -- you talk about it with regard to obama. >> yeah. >> is some of this that when you allow in some, there is also a backlash? >> yes. this is a way of describing the psychological mechanisms of backlash. so you can -- efron and other psychologists have tested this out in an enormous number of settings. dieting is this. if i go to the gym, i give myself permission to have an enormous unhealthy meal. by doing good work, it's okay to slide into bad work. but it's really most interesting with respect to discrimination and it explains why discrimination persists
generation after generation even when there are these hopeful signs. now that you have one black president, is a second black president more or less likely? that's what this kind of work would -- >> and what you're suggesting, actually, less likely. >> maybe less likely. maybe donald trump is what you get when you've had two terms of obama. in other words, that people having said, okay, we have been to this country that is open to opening the white house to a very, very different kind of president. maybe we can go back to our kind of baser -- i'm telegraphing my feelings about the presidency but make you can return to your baser instincts. once you've been so generous and open for eight years. >> what do you think it says for hillary? >> in that first podcast, part
of it is an interview with the first female prime minister of australia. it's all about what happens after she takes office. she is subjected to the most extraordinary, devastating, unbelievable level of vitreal, and she gave a famous speech where she finally has had enough. >> i will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by these men. i will not. >> and that was a classic example of moral ecstasy, having opening the door to the first female in the history of australia, unspeakable truths about her. the stuff that was said about her it's astonishing to think that people in a modern democracy would say those kinds of things and it makes me think, if hillary clinton wins, what happens? does the fact of her victory and
the achievement of our first ever female president open the door to people venting a level of misogonistic behavior of those before her? i think i would say this even if i was not a hillary clinton supporter. the level of scrutiny she is given for real or imagined misdeeds is far greater than an equivalent male would be given. i don't think that's an outrageous statement. people take over things she does in kind an extraordinary way. i would imagine if she were to get elected, that undue scrutiny would ramp up. why? because that's what happens to every woman who enters a previous male world. up next, gladwell will tell us what he thinks of the olympics. he has a plan to fix them.
when you cook with incredible ingredients... you make incredible meals. fresh ingredients. step-by-step-recipes. delivered to your door, for less than $9 a meal. get $30 off your first delivery blueapron.com/cook. (ee-e-e-oh-mum-oh-weh) (hush my darling...) (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) (hush my darling...) man snoring (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) woman snoring take the roar out of snore. yet another innovation only at a sleep number store.
history." i know that you think that the olympics are fundamentally flawed but you have a solution to them which most people don't. people have gone on about the corruption. you actually have a fix? >> well, one fix won't do it. but -- i mean, i have many theories about the olympics, mostly motivated by the facts that a disaster on the level of kind of multiinternational disaster that we haven't seen in a long time. so many things can go wrong. but i think a core of the problem has now become, that the olympics, every year we make it bigger and more complicated. every four years, the cost of it grows. every four years the security concerns grow even more terrifying. every year the job gets harder and more expensive. >> and the amount of money
becomes so large that the corruption becomes in a sense inevitab inevitable. >> the corruption becomes bigger because you're talking about billion of dollars at stake. so i think it's so time to break up the olympics. >> which means what? >> there's zero reason to have everything in the same place. this notion that everything has to take place in rio, or london before it, is so nuts. where is it written that the wroter has got to row in the same geographical proximity as the runner has got to run. no. break it into four or five logical parts and have a country take each part. i'm a big running fan. can i say how absolutely insane it is to have people run long distances in ecuadoral -- you
don't put the runners in hot places. >> you put them in iceland and norway. >> sweden would be a fantastic place to have the track every four years. you could have the gymnastics in rio, because they're inside with air conditioning. but now i cannot believe that brazil will look back on the rio games with anything less than regr regret. at a time of crisis, they have devoted, not just money, but the attention of their leadership has been toward a set of gains for the rest of the world that will leave them impoverished ant the physical plant of which will
be essentially unusable for the rest of its life. this makes no sense. >> i don't think you're going to get on the international olympic committee any time soon. malcolm, glad to have you on. next on gps, the human olympics pit man against man, woman against woman, but russia is putting on war games of a kind. 9 out of 10 u.s. olympians grew up drinking milk. moms know kids grow strong when they milk life.
after five hours of spinning and one unfortunate ride on the gravitron, your grandkids spot a 6 foot banana that you need to win. in that moment, you'll be happy you partnered with a humana care manager and got your health back on track. because that banana isn't coming home with you until that bell sings. great things are ahead of you when your health is ready for them. at humana, we can help you with a personalized plan for your health for years to come. i just want to find a used car start at the new carfax.com show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search at the all-new carfax.com.
year were the olympic games first hosted in a country outside europe or north america? stay tuned and we'll tell you the correct answer. this week's book is "isis, a history." this is the definitive book on the group to the most well informed guy on the region. everyone opining about isis should be required to read this book first. at the very least, they should read it's wise concluding chapter. now for the last look. the past few weeks have not been easy for russian sports fans. doping allegations are keeping scores of russian athletes on the sidelines at the olympics. but have no fear, perhaps giving rio a run for its money, russia is now hosting it's own international sporting event. last saturday just outside of moscow, the second annual
international army games opened, a two-week long, 19 country military competition. interested in watching sniper versus sniper? war medic versus war medic? you've come to the right place. and in the tank contest, operators navigate tanks through trenches, over water and then fire a target. players are scored on speed and accuracy. other than a sniper from greece, there are no representatives from nato countries participating in this year's games. with america threatening to leave european countries to defend themselves, perhaps they're all preparing for the possibility of the real thing. the second answer to our gps challenge question, the answer is c, 1956 was the first time the olympic games was hosted outside of america or europe.
australia hosted those games. the only countries that have not hosted an olympics is africa and china. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week, i will see you next week. hello, everyone. donald trump trying to get back on message after a bruising week of public scuffles, but the hits keep coming, this time in the form of new poll numbers. a new nbc news wall street journey poll shows clinton up 8% over trump in likely voters, clinton maintains that edge even when you factor in the libertarian and green party candidates. meanwhile trump is refocusing his attention on clinton, launching new