tv Charlie Rose PBS February 26, 2016 12:00pm-1:01pm PST
>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with a question. should britain remain in the european union. british voters will decide. we talk to john michel that wait, editor and chief bloomberg. >> what is happening now which is really interesting and the reason why everybody pretty much, america as well, this is about the west. as well as britan. i think that is an incredibly important thing to look at. if britain leaves it is probably bad for britain but it is also very bad for the european union am will you have france, germany, pretty much left there alone. you don't have this balancing fact. you also have the fact that the most dynamic economy in europe is britain. if it goes out, you can see all these other problems coming back to haunt it. >> rose: we continue with neel kashkari. >> i don't want the american people to be left with the impression that we may not be back in the same place again.
and my view is we need to take transformational reform to solve the too big to fail issue so we never have to ask taxpayers to do that again. >> rose: and they became vulnerable and could have failed in not rescued because they made such bad bets on subprime. >> correct. we had a nationwide housing downturn that none of us predicted. and the banks disn see it either. the regulators didn't see it. and then they ran into trouble. >> rose: we continue with al hunt on the story with governor terry mcauliffe of virginia. >> you look at how many the democrats start out with and how many the republicans. we have a huge lead in the electoral college. how do you grow that ledge torral college? you've got to go to states of new mexico and colorado an nevada with large hispanic populations. they have watched this republican debate in the attacks on the hispanic community, on the immigrant community, whatever it may be. this is such a turnoff. and we generally get, you know n this mid 60s percent of the hispanic vote. with what has been said, i think what donald trump has said and
others have said, i think you look at that hispanic vote, it could be a historic high for the democratic nominee. >> rose: we conclude with the legendary -9d 5 year old new yorker magazine writer roger angell. >> we find that the unbearable things happen to us. losses, weight of losses seem unbearable. you go on and we-- show we are better. an we're happier and we are looking, we are the same as we were before. >> rose: john michel that wait, terry mccallive, and the great writer roger angell when we continue. >> funding for charlie rose is provided by the following: >> rose: additional funding provided by:
>> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications >> from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: on june 23rd, voters in the united kng dom will decide whether to leave the european union. as of last year the chances of seemed remote however a recent poll suggests that more and more britains do not want to stay. in what was seen as a major he beuk to prime minister david cameron london mayor bore is johnson recently declared his support. johnson said remaining in the eu would lead to an erosion of democracy. joining me now is john micklethwait, the editor an chief of bloomberg from 2006 to 2014. he was editor in chief of the economist magazine which is where i first got to know him. i'm pleased to have him back at this table. welcome. >> i'm delighted to be associated with any erosion of
democracy. >> rose: so explain this to us. >> the british have long been in a state of angst about europe. >> right. >> rose. >> cameron decided to offer a referendum, huge debate about whether he should have done that, that is the starting point. >> rose: margaret thacher. >> the british have not voted on this since the 1970s. and i think there was a lot of pressure on cameron to give them a chance, to have another say on this. it's been building and building and particularly within the conservative party. david cameron both prime minister and head of the conservative party. within the conservative party, the easiest way to think about europe is it's roughly akin to being prolife in the republican party. if you want to get selected, being very sceptical about europe, is part of the committee. >> anyway, cameron, his deal has always been he would go to europe and we come back, he said, with the kind of improvements in the relationship. i brought those back. >> rose: he associated with-- negotiated. >> he nshted with angela merkel,
with fran choy hollande. he brought that back to parliament and said we will now have a referendum on whether to stay or go. i will offer everyone a free vote but i want to stay. >> rose: stop right there. tell us what the european union is and what is the advantage to being a member of the european union. >> the main advantage to being a member of the european union is that you are part of the world's biggest free trade, the world world's biggest economy. that is the main reason why people would generally think it's a bad idea to ef loo. there is also a kind of bigger reason for the people who set it up which didn't include the british. people like the french and the german really, the european union, was about trying to bring peace and long-term prosperity to europe. and it has always been slightly a project of the elite. it was set up at a time when people were worried about pop lism. >> they did for a long time, to be fair. for a long time europe was very popular. and there was a time even within the conservative party where you get back to the 1970s, back to the era of ken clark grew up in,
back then to be a kind of proeuropean was a big thing in britain. margaret thacher was less that way inclined and ever since then the conservative party has been more sceptical. and there is this sort of division in britain. the british are stuck. on the one hand with possibly the most cosmopolitan nation in the world. we've always welcomed foreigners. on the other hand, we have quite an insurance lar thing, not surprisingly because we are an island. >> we are stuck, we are stuck. >> rose: so what did he nsht? >> the negotiation he essentially did is one where he has gained a little bit. and he's gained the idea that the european union isn't always about ever-closer union, particularly for britain. he's got a few opt outs to do with welfare reforms. at the moment one of the biggest issues in europe is as you know well is to do with my grant, people going backwards and forward, in this case internal pieg rants for the european union and what is happening people are getting angry about the number of poll, the number of czechs coming too britain,
staying there and claiming benefits. he's now got a rule which says you've got seven years before are you allowed to get benefits. it's worth something. but it's not really the sort of thing you can go out and sell this on the streets of britain, that a great passionate declaration. the main argument for staying which he will make repeatedly is that the prospects of going out are much, much worse. and in some ways everything has been reversed. the idea logical dreamers, are largely those that want to take britain out. they think britain can become this free trading paradise outside the orbit. >> rose: britain is a member of the european union but not the eurozone. >> exactly. >> rose: that is the point i was making. there is the economic unity, there were two points i wanted to make and you corrected me, and i'm not sure that i'm not right. >> we're back on familiar territory. >> rose: we are. it is the idea that the idea of europe has had some economic dimensions which have been successful. the political dimension has not
been successful. >> at times not, not at all and the british have never really bought into the political edge. >> rose: my point. >> but now there are many other people who are feeling the same way. france you've got marine la pen, other people throughout europe who are asking questions. >> exactly. >> so the really dangerous thing about the thing at this precise moment, and i should confess, i'm one of those people who think that britain should stay in the european union. i was somebody who was against it. i was against britain joining the euro because i thought all the crazy dreamers were in inside europe, this time i think the crazy dreamers are inside britain trying to take it a what. the main reason for britain to stay tsh tsh wz who with be a crazy dreamer. >> i think bore is johnson is being-- . >> rose: before the last time, in terms of joining, not joining the eurozone. >> i think back in terms of yoin joining the eurozone, pretty much a quite a lot of the big british banks, the cbi, various people came out saying it would be better to join the euro and they were wrong because britan
had a different economy heading in a different direction. what is happening now though which is really interesting, and the reason why everybody pretty much, you know, america as well, this is about the west. as well as bilt an. i think that is an incredibly important thing to look at. if britain leaves it is probably bad for brilt an but also very bad for the european union. will you have france, germany, pretty much left there alone. you don't have this balancing fact. you've also got the fact that the most dynamic economy in europe is britain. if it goes out, you can see all these other problems coming back to haunt it. and there are other things to do with security and all these other things. gathered together. there is a reason for americans to worry. >> if europe acted as a unit, it would be the largest economy in the world. >> yes, but it's always going to have-- it is the largest economy in the world but it's not in terms of kind of the clout that comes with that. the divisions within it. >> and cultural differences and everything else. >> yes, i think, it is interesting what you were saying about the political thing. ed bowls, one of the advisors,
famously, he had a scrimtion. he once told me about a meeting way back in the old days when they sat around the table, the british, the french, the germans, everyone around the table, jack will lore, the great man at the center of europe, the man who pushed it forward, something went through then he turned to the belgians and dutch and said no, no, you have to do this for europe. and now the ability to persuade anybody, anybody at all to do anything for europe is much less. it's like the united states with each state fighting desperately. >> rose: is bore is johnson in opposition for political reasons or for a deep and passionate belief about economics and the european union? >> i think there is a certain amount or strong amount of personal ambition. there's always been tension between him and cameron on many many different levels. and he is dying i think to become the successor of david cameron. there is principle as well. bore is has always been on the side, he's always been a euro scept particular but so have
many other people including cameron and osborn but they have made the decision that in this particular case, the cost of leaving is just so guy begannic, it's not worth doing. >> does george osborn get all the credit and does he deserve most of the credit for what's happened to the british me? >> i think he deserves a lot of credit. some people would say he took a bit of a gamble in the same way as david cameron is taking a gamble now on this vote. i think what osborn did, has managed to do is convey the message that some degree of austerity was necessary, that britain needed to tighten its belt. >> rose: was it the right economic-- answer. >> the answer is in terms of the numbers, he has been proven right, there are many people, larry summers has to some extent had to-- i don't think that is going to happen. >> rose: who never thought. >> people said this wouldn't work. but actually strangely that balance between having tight fiscal thing never is quite as tight as osborn talked.
and lose monetary policy has worked. the british economy is growing much quicker and better than the rest of europe. and that is another reason why if the british left it would have a dramatic effect on the rest of the european union. >> rose: tell me what you think, and i'm really talking beyond-- i'm not sure what else there is to say. the vote will be when. >> the vote is june 23rd. and it is one where at the moment things are very close. not that lodgeogue i wrote a piece called the 20% world. where i said there is a 20% world where maybe you end up where a president trump, a whole variety of different things and a lot of those 20%s keep on going up. >> rose: where do you think shall-- is there any common trend you can see. i mean if you look at the labor party, it's more left. >> yeah. >> rose: if you look in france, lapene suggests that right wing parties have a certain, because of the my grants issue and other issues, a certain gaining of strength. >> in terms of what is happening at the moment, you look across
the whole west am and you see a repeated thing. you see people who are angry and cross because they feel left behind by globalization, left behind by an economy which seems to be rewarding some people more than them, certainly particularly them. and they feel angry, they want change. they seem to be turning to leaders whether it is donald trump, whether it is mareven la pen, nie gel, some ways bore is johnson in this respect. and the people who say look, i'm the person who tells it like it is. i'm the person who will tell you what is wrong with the world and will try and fix it and there is a deep kind of enu i as the french might say. the reason why the european union is particularly prone to this is because it is very much an elitist project. it's one which is set up by the elite which is worried about pop lism. whenever they have had referendums before and they have gone against the project, the eur poans have sent it back and said you go and vote again until you get it right. >> is scotland, what is going to happen? >> i think one of the many
consequences, one of the many reasons why this certainly makes a whole series of things happen, one set of things to do with britan's relationship with europe and what happens in the european union, what happens with scottland is also really interesting, because what is likely if the british vote to go out, is that the scottish will probably have voted to remain in. what will immediately happen after a referendum, the referendum is an exit, i think you can first expect to see david cameron go. very soon after that you could expect to see the scots say we didn't play any role in this. we want independence. among the many many things that could follow from a break-- is probably the division of the united kingdom. and that is a big thing. >> rose: what is your best geses. >> my guess at the moment is that britain will probably stay in. but to leave an example, we're sitting high above lexing tong avenue at the moment. if i said walk across the road there is a 60% chance you will reach the other side, i think you might think twice before going across it.
it is the risk, the downside of this i think is a very big one. and that should frighten people. even if the odds at the moment are on staying in. >> rose: in part that is the unknown. >> it is the unknown. and it's the unknown because nobody has really had the clans to ask the british people about this. for 40 years. and it's a state that people are angry with their leaders just as they are here. people are cross about the many things that have come from europe, quite rightly such as too much regulation, not enough opening up markets. and people fundamentally also, they want to have a say about this. and the real question much as it is with scotland, is will they be scared. because i think the scared bit is in a strange way, everyone says you aren't allowed to do negative campaigning. in this case as in scotland, the negative side will be don't do this. the risks are too high. >> rose: thank you for coming. >> thank you, charmie. >> rose: back in a moment, stay with us. neel kashkari is here, the president of the federal reserve bank of minneapolis. his career began as an aerospace
engineer, after working at goldman sachs he joined the treasury department. there he oversaw the $700 billion bank bailout initiative. it was known the t.a.r.p. he made headlines last week after suggesting that regulatory efforts had failed to cur the risks posed by large banks. he proposed that they could be broken up and regulated like public utilities or have increased capital requirements. i'm pleased to have neel kashkari back at this table. welcome. >> thank you, charmie, it's great to be here. >> let me just talk a little bit about your career. were you an engineer as i sugd. i think you went as an analyst in silicon valley. >> after business school i went to silicon valley when i was a banker at gol man. >> yup. >> and then hank, who was a c.e.o. of goldman sachs goes to treasury. and did you simply write him a letter or call him up. >> i called him up. i met him once for ten minutes. >> rose: he said come to washington let's talk. >> so i met with imhad, he was not yet confirmed sew wasn't a
treasury yet. and i went in there with a pitch like i want you to hire me. and he just said stop with your pitch. i need somebody on my team who will just do whatever needs to get done. how does that sound. and i said. >> sign me up. >> rose: this is a year before the financial crisis, none of us saw it coming. >> then you had deep involvement as was suggested in the introduction. and then that's over. >> yes. >> hank leaves as secretary of the treasury. and then you go back to california. and we're wondering what you are going to doment and you run for public office having never served in public office. and running for governor. >> well, you know, i looked around the country and i saw a lot of people running for office and i thought if they could do it, why can't i do it. i looked at the state of california and i thought california still has, unfortunately, the highest poverty rate in america. i have lived the american em droo. my parents came here, immigrants from india, i grew up a normal middle class kid. i get to go work for the president of of the united states. what a great country.
so i said i want to give every kid in california 9 same shot as i had. and that starts with a good education and getting a good job. that is what i ran on. >> you won the primary first time out as a politician. >> yeah. >> you learned a lot. you may go back and do that later. and then you end up in minneapolis as the head of the federal reserve in that city. >> correct. >> rose: how did that happen? >> well there are 12 regional federal reserve banks around the country. they each have boards of directors. their board of director was looking for a new c.e.o. and they conducted a nationwide search. and their search firm contacted me, said would i have an interest in a plooing, i applied, went through the process and was selected. >> rose: so what is your role there. >> so i lead an organization with about a thousand people, believe it or not, a thousand people at the minute wrap liss fed, there is an management element to, that obviously. i sit on the federal open market committee so i help to discuss interest rate pls he for the country. an then i get involved in broader policy issues around the 9th district. so it's not just minnesota, it's also north and south dakota. also montana, part of michigan,
part of wisconsin. >> rose: and then you make a speech that is enormously controversial. especially in this city. but also in washington. first the question really is what did you think of the regulation that were passed after the crash in 2007 and 8. >> i strongly supported the need for financial reform. when dod trang was passed i supported it but i was worried maybe it didn't go far enough to address the two big to fail issue of the largest banks. i gave a speech in 2011 at the federal reserve bank of chicago where i articulated my concerns. but i wanted to reserve judgement. >> rose: that even after dodd-frank, too big to fail was still a problem. >> yes. none of us, no, no matter what your polit wall party is, none of us wants to be in the position where we once again have to use taxpayer am unto stabilize large banks. and the question i asked is, did dodd-frank go far enough. so now here we are. i joined the federal reserve, i'm talking to the experts. the minneapolis fed, they literally wrote the book on too big to fail, before the crisis,
literally, the original book. not andrew ross sorkin's version. the o, there are experts in minneapolisment i started talking to them about their ideas on too big to fail. i realized my concerns are still slal i had, they are not addressed. so we have these giant banks at the center of our financial system. and the problem is if one of them collapses, there are all these linkages to the whole economy. it's like the heart and our arteries an veins, if you have a heart attack, it can kill the whole body, not just the heart that gets damaged. that is what we saw in 2008. whenned biggest banks ran into trouble, they brought the whole economy down with them, in contrast, think about silicon valley. we had the tech boom in the '90s. it crashed in 2 thousand, devastating for silicon valley. but it didn't cause devastation for the whole american economy. and that's the unique thing about having these giant banks at the center of our financial system. they can do a lot of good. but when they run into trouble, they can cause real harm. and that's why policy makers like me an like my former boss,
secretary paulson and the federal reserve had to step in to use taxpayer money to stabilize. >> rose: you disn do a good job of explaining why it was about rescuing big banks and not taking care of main street. >> i agree. we did. the communication was something we always struggled with. you know, we were trying to project confidence to the markets. and we were trying to let congress and the american people know how scared we were. those are two very different metionages but we only had one microphone. so we ended up with a very mud eled message that didn't satisfy anybody. >> rose: when you say too big to fail today, i mean you look at how many banks you think are too big to fail. >> i mean, ball park 20 that have been designated as financially significant, mean. >> rose: meaning they cannot be allowed to fail. >> basically that's what it means, yeah. >> rose: because if they fail, they will take down the system in part. >> in part. now conditions matter a lot. so we've made progress. i don't want to suggest we have not made progress. the banks have more capitol today which is their buffer against bad things going wrong. that is a good thing. >> rose: the capital
requirements were changed by dodd-frank and others. >> correct. so that is a good thing. they are stronger than they were before we went into the crisis. but i don't want the american people to be left with the impression that we may not be bank in the same place again. and my view is we need to take transformational reform to solve the too big to fail issue so we never have to ask taxpayers to do that again. >> rose: what do you say about the idea that the people that have been penalized are banks, but not people that made the decisions. >> i'm very sim pathetic with that view, that concern. it frustrates me-- . >> rose: people don't pay. >> the managers don't pay, it is the shareholders who end up paying. that isn't fair. i don't think we have figured out-- i'm not a lawyer. and this is really an issue for the department of justice, it's hard for me to know what the real solution is but i think as a country we need to take a fresh look at that. >> a fresh look. >> i think we should. >> rose: meaning we should go back and look and maybe hold the people accountable even though we just held their institutions accountable. >> or at least on a go forward basis. see if there is a legal
framework that we can come in place that people are on the hook for their fraudulent decisions. >> rose: now banks like jpmorgan to take one and others, wells fargo, i would assume they are too big to fail but they would say we're never going to fail. and they will say we didn't fail in 2008. >> they didn't fail in 2008 because the mern people stepped in. >> rose: but jamie diamon would say we didn't need the money you gave us. we didn't want it and need it you made us take it. you know it's true. hank paulson made them take it because he didn't want somebody not being part of it because he thought the crisis was so deep, that everybody had to be part. >> right of the solution. >> rose: am i right. >> that is true. however and i like jaim nee diamon personally and i'm not here to demonize everybody. but if all of jpmorgan's major counterparties, their trading partners were in bankruptcy, they would be in bankruptcy too. so the notion that they were strong at that moment was only true because the american people stepped in to save all of their friends around the table. >> rose: and you saw a little bit of that when aig failed.
>> absolutely. you know, the federal reserve had to step in to rescue aig. not because of aig itself, but because of everybody else who would have been dragged down. and we never want to be in this situation again. >> rose: all right so let me just say with this too. there are two options, number one is you can break up the banks. and number two, you can set higher standards of capitalization. >> correct. so the second one, you know, i made a comparison a new clear power plant. new clear power plant, if it melts down, it's devastating for society. so governments will do whatever they have to do to stabilize that new clear power plant before it melts down. now new clear power san important element of our country but we have incredible regulations around it to try to control it and protect it. so maybe if we conclude that we need huge banks, okay. then let's capitalize them like a new clear power plant so that they are truly safe and secure. we can never eliminate all risk. but i think we can go a lot further than we've gone today as you know, this has been a very
controversial speech and i know you knew that going in. john leary acting chief executive at the financial services forum said breaking up the u.s.-based global financial institutions would ensure that one of the united states' most competitive global industries serving companies small and large is turned over to banks based outside the u.s >> you know, if other countries want to take extreme risks with their financial systems, we can't stop them. i think we should do what is right for our economy and taxpayers, then maybe we can set the example and get other countries to follow our lead. >> rose: if they don't can they take advantage of what we is done or suggest be done. >> it's possible. but i think, we have thousands of banks in america. i would expect to see small and mid-sized barngs grow to fill some of the voids that may be created in the short-term if our large banks ultimately were restructured. >> rose: how would you break them snup. >> there are a number of ways you can do it. if you, one way to do it. >> rose: a glass steagall thing. >> one exam example is a glass
spheegal. they figured out how to do it. you know, you could simply set very, very high capital requirements as a function of size. which would in effect force the banks to more aggressively break themselves up. there are a lot of ways of doing this. the industry will also argue that well, big companies like boeing need global banks. i believe there is truth to that. there is economies of scale to banks but cost benefit analysis means you have to consider the cost too. >> and the cost is you may risk failing. >> we may risk another financial crisis. >> because are you so big and therefore. >> who is going to be running jpmorgan in 30 years. it's not going to be jamie, i don't know who it is going to be. maybe it's not somebody who is as good a steward as mr. diamon. we need to think about these eventualities that are not the base case scenario because the downside, the cost to the american people are so devastating. >> rose: there is the question of interest rates. has the fed acted wisely. >> i think so. i'm soim pressed-- is she has
put down the marker of data dependency which is let's not be doing mattic about this. let's look at the data. let's-- congress has given us a dual mandate. stable prices which means low inflation and maximum employment. the good news is the job market continues to be strong. we continue to put more americans back to work. that will lead to higher wages for americans. that will bring the inflation back up to our target. and so i feel good about where she is taking us. >> rose: should we raise the minimum wage? >> you know, there are pros and cons. and it really de pends on the overall unemployment situation. if you are starting from a place of high unemployment and raise the minimum wage, you make it harder for people without don't have a job to get a job. if we bring the unemployment rate down and put a lot of people back to work and then were you to raise the minimum wage, the cost, the consequences are not so grave. and so personally i think it may, a regional approach may be better than a national approach but that is outside the window. >> rose: when this crisis was happening, there was a lot of working together between
congress, the executive office, which you were part of, and the president pretty much handed it over to hank paulson. >> correct. >> rose: talk about central banks today. federal reserve and the united states, and the role they're playing. >> well, all the central banks around the world, especially here in the u.s. but they're taking the leadership and trying to get their economies growing again. and many central banks are struggling from some of the same challenges. in many developed economies, inflation is coming in below where stram central banker was want it to be. we all want it at around 2% and yet we're struggling to get back to that 2% level. some economists will say it's just cuz the central banks haven't shown enough conviction. i don't believe that it's hard for me to see that they are all undershooting conviction. so we're struggling a little bit am but i think that in the u.s. we have some advantages. we are creating jobs a lot faster than europe is. as an example. and that is a good thing. if we can keep putting americans back to work, that will lead to economic growth. >> rose: is it fair to say the jury is still out as to whether
raising interest rates as the fed did was the right thing to do? >> i think so. our current most recent estimate is for moderate economic growth and inflation returning the target over the medium term. if that happens, then we would expect to continue to raise interest rates as the data allows. so i don't buy the argument that the volatility we're seeing in the markets now is because the fed raised rates in december. there are a lot of other things going on. >> rose: dispreat to have you here. >> thank you, great to be here. >> rose: back in a moment, stay with us. terry mcauliffe is the 72nd governor of the great commonwealth of virginia. a former national democratic party chair and a prodij us fundraiser before that. no one is closer in politics to bill and hillary clinton that terry mccall-- mcauliffe and we're pleased to have him here. >> great to be with you. >> we'll talking about some virginia sent rick issues but let's start with national politic, handi cap the hillry bernie race, why so tight. >> i think in fairness, he's been saying a lot of things that
just can't happen. he's promising everybody free college education. his governor of virginia i would love to give everybody in virginia a free college education, there is zero chance that could ever be passed and put into law. we can't afford it. he's promising everybody, even where the hardworking president obama did on health care, he's promising everybody free health care. so i think for a lot of folks they hear that, it sounds great. but the reality is, you and i have been-- you and i are older than dirt. we have been around longer than ever. at the end of the day that can never become law. >> but let's talk about young people, for example. we do polls, young people like barack obama. they liked bill clinton. and they love bernie sanders and they don't like hillary clinton. they vote overwhelmingly for bernie sanders in the first counsel elf contests. you have five kids, one goes to a great institutional of higher learning my alma mater. >> that's right. >> rose: why are young people so turned off by hillary. >> i don't know if it is turned off by hillary versus senator sanders bernie is out there promising history college education, that is exciting. we have seen this in other
campaigns before. you go back to 2004 when we had governor dean, remember howard dean had all the young folks in iowa, everybody had the orange hats. an he had a lot of young folks. but listen, we are just in the beginning of the process. we have only had two contests. so. >> so you basically thing she could wrap this up by march 15th. >> i think march 15th there is a real likelihood that we will be table to announce that senator sanders statisticically cannot win. remember, this is exactly what president obama did back in. >> exactly. how is this campaign different than the 08ee campaign. >> i think this campaign, the campaign manager, i'm very biased. he was my campaign manager. robie had won in arizona, in ohio, in indiana. i think it is a very talented team. they know the mechanics. so last time there wasn't even a delegate operation, believe it or not. robie has put together an operation to go win delegates. in order to become the democratic nominee, you have to win delegates. and that is exactly the plan
that he has put forth with his team. this say long haul. listen, we're running for president. but we've had two contests. we won one, we lost one. >> there are some people who want to replace robie. some of the second guessers. you think that would be a mistake. >> sure, this is shall-- i've been in clinton world a long time. this is not the easiest place to survive. >> it's a constellation. >> it is a big constellation and everybody has an opinion which is great. when you are up, you are you. when are you down everybody has a great idea how we should change it. here we are, we won won. we lost one. >> robie mook should stay. >> absolutely. he's got the mechanics in place. >> you talked about the sanders program agenda message being unreal statistics. what is the-- what is the hillry message? remember carville, 1992 had that great if is about the economy, don't forget health care. could you put it on a bumper sticker. what can hillary put on a bumper sticker. >> like we like to say she is a progressive that gets results. you know she las been to battle on children's heal care and
other health-care issue, education. her whole life she has fought on these issues. she got out of yale. she could gone to work wherever she wanted. she went to work for the children's legal defense fund. first lady of arkansas, the work she did on health care, first lady of the united states. she went to china talked about women's issues. the first one to really go over there and hammer that issue. so her voice has always been out there. >> do you think that is getting across. >> i wish it would get across more, but as i say it is early in the process am once we continue to move on, on the republican side, there has been interesting year, fascinating year. but listen, she gets results done. the things that she works on. president obama ran against hillary. he made her his secretary of state. that tells you something. she has said to democrats, i'm going to continue the policies of president obama. as you know senator sanders has been critical. it's called the president, she wants to build on it but in addition, she needs to protect
the president's left flank so that someone doesn't get in there left and right flank and tear down the things he has worked on his whole life. >> march 1, supertuesday, virginia is in play. will she win virginia easily? >> it's never easy. she will win virginia. but none of this is ever easy. i give senator sanders tremendous credit. >> it is proportional representation. how big she wins matters. >> sure it does, it de pends where you win, with a congressional district that is important as well. we got out of new hampshire. i think we both got 15 disel gats. >> how big a victory do you anticipate in virginia. >> i will take one vote. i was on tv the night of the iowa caucus and a win is a win. i don't care if it is a half a vote. a win is a win, al. >> before we get to virginia issues, let me ask you to put your political expert hat on and look at the republican party. how do you-- what do you make of the donald trump phenomenon? >> i think people, first of all it's been a circus to watch
these debates. name calling. if you do watch, you watch senator sanders. you watch secretary clinton, it is a different debate. you have seen it, and when you had governor martin o'malley in the race it was a good substantive debate. it has been embarrassing to watch some of these debates go on. i don't-- i never attack our country. i think we're the greatest nation on earth, al. now can we make it better, of course we can. but all of this china is killing us, and japan is taking us down, forget that. >> it seems to be working for donald trump. >> it seems to be working for a certain segment. he would have a very tough time winning the general election. >> who would be the toughest republican to run against him in the state of virginia. >> i think cruz would have a tough time. you know, listen, i see the attraction some people have with senator marco rubio. >> kasich. >> i know john kasich, governor kasich. i think he would be formidable in virnlg yavment i think jor rubio because young and millenial and you know, family
from cuba and from florida. let's look at electoral college states, kasich is from ohio. rubio is from florida. so you know, but they've got to worry about their left and right flank. >> they would be much stronger general election candidates in your view than cruz or trump. >> i think, listen, al, you know this, 270 electoral votes. you look at how many the democrats start out with and how many the republicans. we have a huge lead in the electoral college. how do you grow that electoral college? you have got to go to states of new mexico and colorado and nevada, with large hispanic populations. they have wamped this republican debate in the attacks on the hispanic community, on the immigrant community, whatever it may be. this is such a turnoff. and we generally get, you know, in mid 60s percent of the hispanic vote. with what has been said, i think what donald trump has said and others have said, i think you look at that hispanic vote, it could be a his moric high. >> higher than obama. >> it could be his
for-- historic with the rhetoric that has gone on, you know, i think there is a real possibility it could be a historic turnout. people are angry. closing our borders. the issue that has gone on with refugees, the idea that no muslims in our country any more. there are a billion muslims in the world, al. we are going to them today asking them to help support us fight isis in the middle east. >> we said we are going to talk about virginia issues. so let's do that now. one of which is political though. it's whether a redistricting controversy will go to the supreme court with the death of justice scalia. there is at least some people who say that makes it very unlikely that what you have done so far in virginia would be overturned. did you agree with that and how many seats could democrats pick up. >> we've just gone through the process in virginia and now we have one new democratic seat. the lines were very unfair. it was 8-3, republican to democrat. all five statewides in virginia today are democrats, both senators, governor, lt. governor, attorney general. so we've just gone through the process. they have redrawn some lines.
one new democratic seat has been created. i find it highly unlikely that the supreme court will do anything with that, leave it the way it is. >> can you pick up any other seats. >> now we have one which would be a 60% democratic performance, that say pickup for us. we have other eat seats that obviously are very exeltive. you look at northern virginia, always an opportunity. a very rich area that we can pick up democratic seats. we can pick up there in northern virginia, huge opportunity with the republican held seat up there. so i think we net one seat, i think florida has added two seats, i believe through the process. so you know, we've got three new seats that will go into the democratic colume. >> terry mcauliffe, i'm glad you didn't walk away from this table. thank you so much for being with us. thank you all for watching. >> rose: roger angell is here. he is a senior fiction editor and long time contributor with "the new yorker" magazine. he is also the only writer to be inducked into both the baseball
hall of fame and the american academy of arts and letters. how about that. his new book is this old man. it is the collection of his writings over the years. it's title essay offers a reflection on growing older and life in its tenth decade. it won the 2015 america society of magazine editors best essay award. he says that it has also brought him more kindness from readers than anything he has ever written. i am pleased to have roger angell back at this table. very pleased. >> how are you. >> i'm good. but better than that. >> i'm good. i'm betting there. as they say in mainek i'm supposed to be up rrs but talk about old in a minute. but your health is pretty good. >> i'm good, yeah. >> rose: your lovely wife died and later you. >> i happily remarried. >> rose: which is one of the things that i think about aging. you talk about this, loneliness. >> well, loneliness, life goes
on. and we can-- we find that unbearable things happen to us. losses and the weight of losses seems unbearable. and then you go on and we-- show we are better. and we're happier. we are the same as we were before. >> here is what you said. of the essays, genesis. i wrote this whole piece in pieces meaning this is a collection of other things you have written here. >> yeah. >> of which this is perhaps the one that is most recent, got the most importance. i wrote this whole piece in pieces. i didn't know what to do with it. there is a lot in there about loss. but it's not the central theme, i think. i lost my older daughter. i lost my wife of 48 years. in between there we lost a wonderful dog of ours who jumped out of the window during a thunderstorm. and there is wound in and out, and they are wound in and out. i don't think in a gloomy way, just as they seem to me in
recollection and often interrupting with change of tone. there are jokes, jokes about death even. i think it sounds like me, i love good jokes. tell us about aging and what you-- beyond what i have just said and what you have just said. >> well, i guess aside from the arrival of sex and early teens or before, is the secretary biggest surprise in your life or my life that suddenly are you old and you don't feel old. you feel you are the same, going on day to day. and suddenly you look and you see how old you are. but i think that almost all old people feel about the same. they are just a little farther down the line. it is a great misconception, misconception maybe that since we're bowed and look grave and move slowly that we've given up. and i don't think that's true of most people. most people my age. and life keeps happening. >> rose: and did this really resonate with people your age? >> enormously. enormously. >> rose: that life keeps happening. >> well, i say somewhere in there that one phenomenon that
old people get to notice is that if you are in a conversation, at a dinner party, something. and you are among friends. a moment comes and you think of something and you speak. and then everybody looks at you and nods and the conversation goes on as if you hadn't said anything. ang they say what didn't i just speak, didn't i just say something here. it's the invisibility of age. and behind that is the notion that, well, he's unconscious, i think, he's old and had his turn. now it's our turn. and i think that this book, this collection in some way has helped people my age feel a little bit less invisible because i'm saying things that i'm sure all of them. >> rose: that they recognize but haven't expressed. >> yes. >> rose: that is what good writers do. >> yeah. >> rose: they give expression to other people's thoughts. >> i don't come here as, since this book, this essay got a lot of responses, i'm trying to not become a spokesman for people my age. i'm just me, this is just what happens to me.
but it has been surprising. and the other thing that is really surprising is that a lot of younger people have been reading the book and saying now i see, now i see. >> rose: my parents or my grandparents. >> but they also think, it's not going to be so bad when i get there. i think this isn't as bad, in the back of their minds. >> rose: is that what you are i sag, it's not so bad. >> sometimes it's horrible. it is bad times. and losses are unbearable. >> rose: how do you bear them? >> well, i say in there, i have been going to the same therapist for years and years. it's not therapy any more. it's just scheduled conversations. and after my wife died at some point my wife carol died, we had been married 48 years. i said i don't know how i' going to be able to bear this, stand this. and she said neither do i. but you will. which imagine, it is the perfect thing to say. and i suddenly-- . >> rose: neither do i, but you will. you love baseball more than
anything. >> more than anything? >> rose: more than any sport. >> well, yeah, i guess. so sure i do. sure. but it's been great to me. it has been a great fit for some reason. >> rose: for the hall of fame say pretty good fit too. >> well, i don't look for deeper meanings in baseball. i have never tried to connect baseball with america. >> rose: not like. >> but investigation, my other job, my main job always has been as a fiction editor. and the thing that connects baseball and writing is that both of them look easy. and they are really hard to do. really hard to write, for everybody, almost everybody. it is hard to write well and its' really hard to play ball. much harder than it looks. and this is part of what-- why you keep going. and it's-- when you see baseball in the major leagues, are you looking at the best of the best of the best. >> it's hard for them too. but there is a difference between the top level players and the low level players.
>> rose: but it's still hard for them too, isn't it? >> well, i'm not so sure it's hard for hank ar on. i remember once saying somebody said to hank harron, how does it feel to come to the ball park and know will you get two hits tonight. and he said oh, i never think that. i never think that. but if i don't get two hits tonightk i will get two hits tomorrow night. and then jim fry, a wonderful man, of the royals once said to me, he said the hit tore think about is the .1240 hitter who is just barely going along. and what he wants is one extra base hit per week. and one extra base hit per week, one extra base hit will make him a .265 hitter, .270. >> rose: arch two base hits would make hunt a .300. >> well, yeah, yeah. two out of five, well, i don't know if in a week but the struggle is the struggle sendless. and the writing, the writing
struggle is-- what i really love is sitting down with the writer i've been working with for years. john yup dike, a william trevor, a bobby mason, ann beatie, and you have them up here or they each vay copy and you are deal with a sentence or there is something wrong in the tone or something wrong, something has gone a little bit off, not in the actual writing. and you are trying to think, what are we going to do about this? and john updike, for 50 years would do this over and over again. there would be a little pass age. and then on the last day we would be going to press later would phone me and read something. he had rewritten an entire passage and said how does that sound. and he would say it to himself. say it to himself because he wants to shall-- he wanted to think, how is the reader going to take this. and this is all about the reader. does this sound better, does this sound better. and this is what writers do to
themselves too. >> john updike was also competitive as you have told us. >> yeah. >> rose: you were excited about some young-- some young novelist and all of a sudden he went home and. >> i would sometimes say, we talked back and forth on the phone a lot or wrote back and forth. and i would say oh john has a wonderful new story in the magazine this week, coming out, a new writing, i think will you like it i would say really? and then about three weeks later, there would be a new story from him. >> i'm hesitant to do this. but i mean, was any of them that came forward and spoke to you, that made you say this is the talent of god any writer? >> well, i think, i think that the person, i'm sure i would have enjoyed it if i said it i think i thought that about donald. >> did you really. >> because he was like nobody
else. he was like nobody else when he arrived. and these amazing casuals and essays about inscribable combinations of things happening am full of artistic references and historic references and references of the day. and heartbreaking and funny and completely surprising. over and over again. and half the people on the magazine didn't understand them. and were angry, we were publishing them. and we were publishing them because the ed editor loved them as well and said i done know what this is but it is really something else. but other people thought he was the-- he said as long as he's writing for us, things are going to be okay. and its with a general sense. >> tina brown got you to write about yourself. >> yes, she did. she did. >> did you resist that or. >> i was surprised because i had a sense of privacy about writing about my family and my children and my own life. which i still have, i think. but she said you've had an interesting life.
and i have heard some of your stories, and try to write more. and this is why i wrote this book. a lot of personal stuff in here. and i will always be grateful to her, absolutely. >> but was it hard for you? once you started. >> i can't remember. i don't think it was a breakthrough piece but there are pieces of people i wanted to write about. i wanted to write about my stepfather eb white who was not just a great writer but physically one of the most graceful people, just moving. just to watch him walking down. >> grateful. >> just walk down the road toward its pasture, there was something about him. and he was very shy. he was a world-class hypocon hypochondriac. i would hear him every week writing a comment page, for "the new yorker" and on monday or tuesday he would lock himself in his study and i would hear not a whole lot, long pauses, little bits of things and would come out for lunch and not say anything, was very serious. mailed it off in the 2:00
afternoon mail and say it isn't good enough. and then you would read it and then come back the next monday or something, would you see it again and he would say well, not bad. but the amazek thing about that is, and in is why i have tried to take him as a model is, that prose when you read it, it is just like its easiest thing in the world, like you are dashing off a letter or talking to somebody. >> rose: you knew he agonize over it. >> yeah. but and writing is, there are some people for whom it is a lot easier than others. >> rose: and it is hard for you. >> it's not hard-- not as hard as it used to be it used to be very hard for me to start a piece. i would have enormous-- in the world series and other things, all of that stuff, and i would freeze, and days i would say i can't do there. but this was something, this was something in my unconscious about performance. can i do this sort of thing. and after a while, i think i learned that i can do this sort of thing.
so it isn't as hard as it used to be. but i am surrounded with wonderful writers. and new york has the greatest venue for writers. >> do you go there every day. >> not any more. have i always had wonderful writers around me. and i see them thinking what is the matter with me. why isn't this working. if you are writing on a deadline, all that goes away. >> your mother was fiction editor. >> she was. the first fiction editor, yeah. >> and then you became fiction editor. >> not write after. >> no, no. >> i know. >> but i mean you held a position your mother held at the new yorker. >> i ended up in her office, same office. and the first day i moved in her office in the back of her closet i found, she hadn't been there for years and years an i found a round thing of koit face po der of my moarts and i told this to a therapist, he said the
greatest single act of sub limbation in my experience was living in my mother's office. >> rose: were you an athlete at all. >> i was a boy athlete but not quite-- not a great athlete. i had a good curve ball. i threw the curve ball and-- . >> rose: everybody lit it. >> yeah. >> rose: how about tennis or tbofl. >> i play pretty good tennis. i played a lot of tennis over the years and ended up playing a lot of doubles with people my age and playing with the same doubles people for year after year so you knew where the next shot was going. >> rose: you have kept a diary. >> no, no, never. >> rose: no or you're not sure. >> no, never kept a diary. >> rose: why not, are you a man of letter, a man of writers. >> never had daily thoughts. >> rose: never had daily thoughts. >> i wanted to write down. >> rose: is it necessary, to have to have a daily thought. >> i don't know, i never kept a diary. but what i have done. one thing i did that is unusual, and donald-- put me on to this,
he said if you want to change writing, if are you having some problems, turn the paper around, instead of having it this way, turn it this way and just start writing across, whatever is on your mind. cross writing. and you can started kroses writing and say-- i met that son of a-- or so and so, finally happened or great weather on tuesday, and start going across. and it is entirely different stvment not what you would write if you were writing this way. >> rose: yeah. >> i used to do that. and i would fill in my thoughts, sometimes-- have written 10 or 12 pages longhand about what is happening, sometimes just days going by, but not as a regular thing. >> rose: but it seems to me that first of all, whoever it was that said i done know what i think until i see what i wrote. whoever said that. >> well, i don't-- .
>> rose: i used to think it was odd. >> if i'm writing a sentence, i'm trying to go somewhere. >> rose: if you're writing a sentence you are trying to go somewhere. are you trying to tell a story. >> i'm trying to say something to the reader. i'm trying to talk to this invisible reader, that is the essential to me. >> rose: what brings you joy in life, where would you put work? >> work is very hard. writing is very hard. if i have written something i feel good. i really do. it just could be a little blog or something, if i have written something today, i'm okay. >> rose: you are a great man and i thank you for taking this time, i'm thrilled that you are as healthy and able as you are. and that you contribute things like this that help connect to off us. >> thank you so much, charlie. >> rose: great to see you. >> thank you. >> rose: roger angell, the book is called this old man, all in pieces. for more about this program and earlier episodes visit us online at pbs.org and charlie rose.com.
woman: it kind of was, like, the bang that set off the night. man: that is the funkiest restaurant. thomas: the honey walnut prawns will make your insides smile. [ laughter ] woman #2: more tortillas, please! man #2: what is comfort food if it isn't gluten and grease? man #3: i love crème brûlée. woman #3: the octopus should have been, like, quadrapus, because it was really small. sbrocco: and you know that when you split something, all the calories evaporate, and then there's none. whalen: that's right.