tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg June 29, 2016 10:00pm-11:01pm EDT
♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." tonight, we begin with the continuation of the coverage from britain's exit from the european union. eu leaders converged in brussels today to respond to the referendum decision. prime minister david cameron told the press that britain would not be turning its back on europe. prime minister cameron: i want to process to be as constructive as possible. i hope the outcome can be as constructive as possible, because while we are leaving the european union, we mustn't be turning our backs on europe. these countries are our neighbors, our friends, our i
lies, our partners -- allies, our partners, and we will seek the closest relationship and trade and to operation and security, and because it is good for us and them. charlie: eu leaders said britain could no longer expect full access to the eu's common market without accepting the other conditions like the free flow of workers. in a statement to german parliament, angela merkel said there must be and there will be a noticeable difference between whether a country want to be a part of the european member family or not. this would end excerpt of tea -- uncertainty, but she wants to give them ample time how to exit . internal turmoil persists in britain. jeremy corbyn the leader of the , labour party, lost a vote of no-confidence but has refused to step down. in the financial market, a slight comeback may be under way.
the pound edged up 1% and the ftse 100 rose 3%. ,oining us from london, annie the editor of the economist here in new york. gerard baker. and the former editor of the new ofker and the president keynote brown life media. i am pleased to have all of them on this program. annie, i go to you for what is happening in london and on brussels. >> you gave a pretty good summary. here in london, the big news was with the labor party, they -- jeremy corbyn dramatically lost a vote of no-confidence. he said he is not going anywhere, so we lost the prime minister. he was resigning on friday, and now the opposition is incredibly weekend. -- weakened. brussels is probably the most serious place in europe. we have theater in london and at
the european mark parliament where nigel farage showed up, too great uproar, but in belgium, it was pretty serious. david cameron went to his last eu council meeting. there, there were probably serious words spoken. charlie: are they going to have another meeting in which he is not invited? >> they are, tomorrow is a powerful signal of what is going on right now. the eu 27, the remaining 27 are going to have a meeting without him. david cameron was there today. he will not be there tomorrow. charlie: troy baker is here and tina brown is here. tina, you sent a lot of time in this place. telling thefarage, european union they have not done a days work in their life was a wonderful type of elegance that he has. the guy is like, talk about an idiot. to say such a thing was set a rude. -- was so rude. i think it is --
charlie: usually the kind of opinion you reserve for boris. tina: to me, what i really resent about boris johnson, he led britain over a cliff and i believe that he was completely unserious in the pursuit of it. i do not believe for one moment unlike others that boris was a serious brexiter. it was a gesture of politics. was exactly the same thing as some of these republican candidates saying they want to abolish the irs. you know that is not going to happen. in boris's case, it was not in his plan to win. that is why ever since the vote happened, he has looked rueful and chagrined, because he has no plan. he didn't really expect to do it or he thought it would give him a nice sort of friend with the right. and when the election came around, the tory party had all this credit in the bank. tribute, he has
wrecked the car and he has to drive it. charlie: so he will be prime minister in your judgment? tina: i think it is highly likely. theresa may, who is also in the race, is impressive, but at the same time she does not have his , communication skills. as we know boris is the great , campaigner. >> is certainly true, speaking on behalf of of all of my countrymen, this is not a moment when we have lived up to the reputation of having a stiff upper lip. charlie: steady as we go. >> it is not exactly the churchillian spirit over there, a nation of bedwetters. [speaking simultaneously] a couple of things need to be said, and i don't fundamentally disagree with anything tina is saying, but it is important to remember that the british have long been deeply skeptical of the european union. they joined the communities in 1973. they ratified it with the
referendum in what they joined 1975. was a loose association of states trying to improve economic cooperation. among themselves, abolishing trade barriers, creating a single market. britain like to that. we thought that was good. we didn't want to give up, the british people did not want to give up their sovereignty. steadily, over the last 45 years, like a kind of ratchet aving along, there have been series of movements, a series ratified by treaties, always controversial. charlie: in erosion of their sovereignty. gerard: britain has opted out of absolutely. britain has opted out of some of these things. the euro. the so-called schengen agreement, which most countries adopted. these have eroded sovereignty, and the british people, who again, were pretty skeptical at the start they never want to be , part of a european superstate. the european union has as its animating objective, ever closer to a union, which means ultimate -- and we have seen with the
problems of the eurozone a among the core countries is essential if this product will survive. britain has never wanted to be a part of this. so it is easy to portray this as boris johnson behaving in an opportunistic way or a spasm of the british have been reluctant members of the eu. by the way, it is why, i think this break in whatever emerges from it, it will be messy and chaotic for a year or so, maybe the best thing, because we will instead establish a relationship between britain and the rest of the european union -- and the european union that will be more sustainable. charlie: and the rest of the world. gerard: and the rest of the world. britain, let's be clear, this is one of the other myths put apart -- put about by the the anti-brexit people. middle england is in, people wanting for a better yesterday, going back to the 1950's when
britain was cut off, that is not true. britain wants a better treat you tradenited states, -- deal with the united states former commonwealth countries. , and they want the relationship with the european union. most of those people, boris johnson himself, as he points out, he comes from a turkish family, there are obviously elements in british life and any country where there is a nasty racist xenophobic element. that was not the animating principle behind this vote. tina: i think it was tremendous anxiety. i think the brexit is a metaphor for the anger from globalization and digital disruption. mostly i think because people just feel left behind, left out. it is the same kind of anger we feel with the trump voter. charlie: the similarity the , quality and the sources of the anger. tina: life is too fast, leaving
everyone behind, nothing to replace it. those who say manufacturing is going to come back or anything will change is all another lie. it is not going to come back because the world is genuinely a very, very different place. where he do think that both labor and the tory party have been at fault is the real anguish about immigration has really been a subject no one is allowed to talk about. there i do think the sort of the pc nature of media, or anyone -- where everyone who even tries to discuss the issue is immediately branded as a racist. you can't have the conversation. gerard: there is a desire -- look again, eagle must understand in the united states as a member of the european union, you sign up to essentially an open border system. anyone within the european union can live and settle and work and draw benefits and housing in any other country. anybodyiple, it means
in greece or spain or portugal could leave diplomatic kingdom, if they want. -- could come to the united kingdom, if they want. there is no control within the european union over borders. there is still enough national sentiment and they believe that national resources should be primarily devoted to the people who live there, in britain and cannot allowt they the system where anyone can come along. charlie: two questions. the economic fall out. first,have we seen the worst of it, or is the worst of it yet to come? first question. second question, the idea this may set off a whole series of people wanting to leave the european union and a stronger sense of nationalism and all the things that tina and jerry have been talking about. >> can i get to both of those, but i will point out while i agree with a lot of what jerry and tina have said, they make incomplete arguments.
the idea of people being skeptical as angry about it is not true. this is years within a small element of the conservative party. jerry very well characterized the view of an element within the tory party. the reason we had this referendum is because david cameron thought that by having the referendum would quiet the argument within his party. most people didn't give two hoots. they really did not think about it too much. but becausese -- the tory politicians were blaming everything on the eu it , became a scapegoat to as tina said, there are many people who feel left behind. they were voting out of frustration and the state of the vote. i think this is just a much a vote against austerity as it is against globalization. a lot of people in britain have suffered from the shrinking state, and they are concerned about not having control of the immigrants. for some, it is a xenophobia.
for most people, it is their doctors offices, they cannot get appointments, schools will be too big, prices are going down. as a confluence of these arguments. to say britain has been anti-eu for decades isn't right. [speaking simultaneously] gerard: not the whole. charlie: ok -- gerard: 40% of labour voters voted to leave the eu. tina: that was against david cameron. tina: i think austerity saying remain is the last thing they want. they haven't liked the last six years. charlie: that is taking constructionism too far. gerard: it is clear what people have been seeing. it is true, britain has been skeptical. that is why we did not join the euro. tina: people were voting against the eu because the eu was the equivalent of the status quo. now we are seeing the fact
people were not voting for anything concrete, because they were promised extra things they could not have. some people were voting to stop immigration, others were voting for a little singapore on the thames. a free trading liberal nation. some people were voting to go back to the 1950's. they were completely inconsistent views, that is why we are in the predicament we are in now. ♪
people what was the most important issue, and 53% said sovereignty. the i think it has become a buzzword. >> you have such a patronizing view of the public. why bother to vote? >> the most searched term the next day is, what is the eu? [please stand by] tina: the mayhem, the lines the , craziness of the media, nobody knew what to believe. gerard: the entire political establishment was in favor of
remain. the city of london, the most powerful, financial economic establishment there is, was in favor of remain. president obama came to the united kingdom. he urged them to say. -- stay. charlie: they made a negative -- gerard: there is no public enthusiasm. i expect, you could not have gone to the british people and said, really you want to be part , of this great european project, this great european ideal? [speaking simultaneously] voted,very demographic it was overwhelmingly the old voted for brexit, not the young. gerard: the cutoff age is probably 45 if you look at the different age groups. zanny: to get onto your question about the economic effects -- charlie: have we settled this at all in terms of why they voted? zanny: it is all of the above. you find people that voted for
the reasons jerry did, the raisin tina did, because they were labor supported mother thought it was an argument and borisvid cameron johnson and they hated all tories. i agree with jerry on that, we had enough experts, as michael says. the establishment, the two fingers to the establishment of the british people. gerard: it was that, but you cannot separate that. the idea, and there have been pulls showing this for 25 years in britain. it is not confined to a wing of the conservative party. and is one of the labour party's problems, we don't want to get too much into domestic policy. the leadership is out of touch with voters. labour voters are skeptical about europe as well. not hostile but skeptical. the britain has long been skeptical about the whole european project, deeply opposed -- tina: lots of people, their
aspects, that is why we did not join the euro. why britain -- britain has a different relationship with the european union. then many of the core members, and that is rightly so. it does not mean that what people were voting for now was not powered by different arguments about why they did not like the status quo. i don't think a large number, a large share of the british public has been festering as the main thing they are concerned about is anti-europe. it is like leaving the tory party. [speaking simultaneously] charlie: one, the economic followed, two, the strong surge of nationalism and sort of right wing, for lack of a better word politics. ,zanny: let me to the second one first, because it links what we are talking about. we are already seeing a surge of populism of different flavors. we are seeing it on your side of the atlantic with donald trump.
we have seen it in austria, we have seen in poland, we have seen in marine le pen. it is a big victory for the angry brigade, and it should be a wake-up call for everybody else. i hope they take the import of this event. what happens in terms of the economic events? in the short term, there's clear uncertainty, because we just don't know what will happen with the final arrangement of the european will look like. that uncertainty by itself hurts the economy. no one will invest or expand. in the long-term, how much the damage is depends on the kind of relationship we end up with. or is basically a very simple trade-off. as was laid out very clearly today by angela merkel. we want to have a single market, so we have to pay in money to the eu budget and to allow the principle of the free movement of labor. if we want to put up barriers and have a different migration system, we are not going to have
full access to the single market , and if we don't have that the , economy is going to be worse off for that. there is a simple trade-off. in the end, the eu has compromises. i'm not attaching a high probability to this, but it seems there will be some prospect we end up with an arrangement that is economically close what we have now, and possibly not even exit. otherwise he have an arrangement that is very close. charlie: what do you say? tina: i think she is right. i don't see the motivation europe has to give us everything we want, give the u.k. everything it wants. charlie: the people in the eu are saying they give a lot to -- they gave a lot to david cameron before this took place. gerard: that is not true. tina: no motivation to give it to them, what they are asking for. the best of all worlds,. gerry: i don't dispute the question that it is a trade-off between sovereignty and economic integration.
we will see. i mean, i think, look, the one thing we have seen unfortunately in the last few days is that the people that campaigned for brexit really did not have a plan, and that is, that is deeply reprehensible. there will be a negotiation. be,uess is that there will despite the rhetoric you have seen, there will be a desire to find an accommodation with the u.k. says, theyzanny cannot give too much to britain, because there are these separatist tendencies in lots of eu countries. is theythey can do can't seem to be reporting -- rewarding britain for leaving the eu. said, there are duties and privileges, and if you don't want the duties you , don't get the privileges. it is in nobody's interest to have the u.k. leave the european union, work with the european union have a relationship
, that is determined by wto rules, which would be terrorists, 10% tear -- tariffs, 10% tariffs. there will be a desire to find some accommodation which will be some version of access to the single market in exchange for cost of or obligations. short of the burdens of membership. tina: we are in this complete chaos. is idea of an orderly path very, very complex matter now, is so discharged. -- is so besmirched. charlie: he will go through october or november. gerry: there will be a new conservative leader by september 9. tina: that is a long time in business life. gerard: these things take life. zanny: maybe one time we are not going slowly is not so bad. uncertainty is too fast, you
want clarity. on the other hand, the european cannot do anything until britain triggers article 50. that shows we are beginning to leave. until we do that, nothing can happen. if we take our time thinking about it, frankly, once we have a new leader of the parties, almost certainly, we will have some laying out of what the two parties see as the future of europe. then there will have to be another general election. this will have some kind of mandate for the british people, i think. you can't have a referendum which was won without any clarity about what comes next. it would be the only thing that drives this relationship. charlie: when might that take place? -- your guessass is as good as mine now. i think we will have a new tory leader by the beginning of september. i suspect we will have a new labor leader sometime soon. i would expect a general election sooner rather than later. it will beewise,
difficult. a new prime minister by early september. that new prime minister could call a general election, by the end of the october. that is very, very tight, and what would he really be campaigning on? remember, they will only have taken office, david cameron stepped aside. we don't know if it is he or she, what kind of deal little one from europe. is relatively early before the five-year process is up is quite high. until we know what they want from the eu, and the negotiation, it will be hard. charlie: they won't know that. gerard: they won't know that until september. charlie: sandy, who will be the new leader of the labour party? zanny: i don't know. the names kicking around are a net tuber, many others. -- annette cooper, many others. we could talk about a new later, i would not have thought we would be this far, so i don't know. to remain wasedy
that jeremy corbyn was such a lukewarm, tepid campaigner. gerard: to be honest with you -- i don't think they would survive that. charlie: chair, you say -- gerard: you say who you will replace jeremy corbyn as leader, you have a massive vote of no-confidence from his own numbers. he was elected to the members of the party who love him, and they are furious for acting as himself. you have an incredible, even more divided party than the conservatives. tina: not all the members are, not necessarily all the members are. jeremy corbyn is in an extraordinary position. he is despised by his parliamentary mps. he is beloved by members of the activist party. he is viewed skeptically by many of the labor voters in the country. gerry: he is loved by the conservative party. tina: ultimately, they go to ukip. charlie: another question britain has had a real influence , within the european union. fair to say? tina: at one point, waiting
recently. charlie: will be the future role in the european union for angela merkel? zanny: one of the reasons is she would not, she would like the brits to stay, very hopeful that the referendum would go the other way. if they are not there, she loses an important broadly free-market ally. becomesr big our france, and it is distantly more protectionist and statist. tina: she also feels her own of right-wing element. gerry: she has an election in a year in germany. as were the folks in -- focus will be. she went from approval rating of 55% down to 25%. charlie: does this show something on her part? butrd: you could say that,
was it wise to say you allow one million people to come in the country, and there by the way, also signaling, come on in, everybody else. come in, theyt are trying to backtrack. so she has got her own problems. i agree with zanny. britain has been a pretty good ally with germany, and the germans, the last thing they want is to go to this franco-german running the european union. but unfortunately, without the british, that is what they have. tina: it is ugly across the board is the result, the ramped up emotions, the rash statements, the chaos that has ensued. nothing good is going to come out of this. it is all well in a year or two we would get everything we want, but right now europe is in absolute turmoil. if you are a terrorist, if you are anybody -- if you are are putin, you are happy as a clam right now at the state of the turmoil. charlie: how does putin take advantage of this? gerard: well the germans, again,
we have this ambivalent relationship with russia. we saw last week, the german foreign minister saying -- we need to be careful we don't sort of assume the admitted turmoil in europe is somehow helping putin, which the dallas is, because there are strong elements within europe that are not prepared to take a firm line against russia. we have seen that repeatedly, germany is the main. tina: something that is being planned. charlie: like syria, like ukraine. go ahead. deep: we went into a festive gloom. there are some hopes. charlie: there is a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel? have onust you know, we the last few years, talked about indeed on your program, had the europeans have a fantastic
recipe to kick the can down the road, to participate -- procrastinate. angela merkel is the master of this. there is even a verb in german. merkel, to put off decisions until you have to take them. we face something that nobody in the eu wants. most british m.p.'s don't really want. no one has a clue about how to get out of this. no one wants to deal with the consequences. it seems to me we have a classically european situation. i don't quite see how it happens, in large part because the domestic politics. i wonder if we end up with something less cataclysmic? we had the vote to leave and the collapse in british politics over the chaos in british politics. in the end, they kick the can and come up with compromise. gerry: that has worked out well with them.
by the way, the other person ho is notorious or billion -- brilliant at kicking the can down the road was david cameron. >> he was very different. >> muddling through is the motto of boris johnson. >> despite zanny's desired to cling to the wreckage of the european union, i think it will be hard. 17.5 million british people voted to leave the e.u. that is the largest number of votes cast in british history or any position. the idea that you can just turn around and they, that wasn't right. can we do it again? zanny: that is not what i'm suggesting. pointing out that if you look at the history of the european
union, we have had referendums from countries that have changed their minds. this is different in scale and import. i'm saying the story of the european union is one way you walk to the edge of the precipice and you then kick the can. i'm mixing metaphors. you end up with compromise solutions. the european union's bat at reforming but is good at keeping the show on the oad. >> the map of those that voted for the brexit matches those areas that had mad cow disease. gerry: most of the regions, every region was 60-40. it is not quite such a yellow and blue map. charlie: is the idea of europe dead? gerry: i'm not quite sure with the idea actually means.
the idea that you can create what they claim to be, and ever closer union. a single entity to which people feel a strong sense of belonging, i think that was always -- it was never going to ork. we are exposing the flaws in that. this is the tragedy of europe. what you are doing to force people, by trying to force people into this single unit, you are creating more and more attention. it will end badly. >> i want to say we keep on saying everyone felt this dislike for europe. there are many people, many younger people, who have that or multicultural pbringing. who have been raised in that system and they were at school with 30 different nationalities. they love it. they love the freedom of movement. they like being part of an international world. they feel it is a bigger world.
it is also a digital world. you can can indicate with veryone. -- communicate with anyone. you can play chess with someone in russia. gerry: that was never the argument made to remain. it was, don't do this because you are going to be falling off a cliff. charlie: thank you for joining us. good to see you again. >> you're very welcome. good to see you. charli: back in a moment. stay with us. ♪
the house select committee on benghazi offered its final report. it offered the details about september 11, 2012 when four americans were killed in benghazi, libya. it rebuked the conduct of the department of defense and state department. it found no new evidence of wrongdoing by hillary clinton. democrats criticized the committee which persisted for more than two years and cost an estimated $7 million. also today, donald trump gave a speech on global trade. he praised the british referendum decision to leave the eu and decried globalization, saying it has iped out the middle class. mr. trump: factory workers have seen the jobs they love shift thousands and thousands of
miles away. many pennsylvania towns once thriving and humming are now in a state of total disrepair. this wave of globalization has wiped out totally, totally, our middle-class. it doesn't have to be this way. we can turn it around and turn it around fast. charlie: yesterday, trump hired jason miller, a veteran political strategist and former advisor to senator ted cruz. indicating a move towards a more traditional campaign structure. joining me is an opinion columnist at the washington ost. and from washington, bob costa. national political reporter for he post. tell me about the speech today. bob: just a few days after
secretary clinton went to cincinnati, you see trump going to the rust belt. going to western pennsylvania. talking to a steel town. the blue-collar workers. trying to rouse those workers who this campaign believes are at the heart of his campaign. he is trying to right his message after a distracting summer so far. a trip to scotland. he is coming back to what he ran on a year ago. trade. economic populism. trying to set the table before the convention. charlie: and immigration? bob: not so much at the center. he is more comfortable talking about trade. immigration is part of it. when you see trump trying to navigate a general election audience, he still wants to build his wall but when it comes to barring all muslims, from entering thehe has used different language country, to talk about maybe blocking people just from terrorist countries. not just focusing on the muslim
aspect. you see the broader theme of the economy and trade. charlie: trump talking about the trade, less about the uslim ban? more about appeals to reagan democrats? rust belt workers from the middle class. >> pretty extraordinary speech by any measure, and shows the race we are in and how things have changed with him as a candidate. we have a republican candidate who publicly called today for scrapping nafta, withdrawing from tpp. labeling china as a currency manipulator. the message was nti-globalization, something president obama and business leaders and the chamber of commerce has been actively pushing. charlie: those interest groups you just poke to, the chamber
of commerce -- >> they are traditionally aligned behind the republican candidate. it shows how difficult these waters are for republican donors, business leaders, to unify behind someone whose core message is actually an anathema to the republican party. >> it is up ending a republican orthodoxy. if you are a republican voter, i don't know what you are thinking. it is a complete reversal of what the republican party and donors have stood for for decades. charlie: this idea of appearing more presidential, has not gained a stronger foothold? bob: we see the campaign becoming for rofessionalized. the addition of jason miller is an important one. a twentysomething spokeswoman
has been the main way of communicative. now they are building a messaging operation. miller is important because he is a link to the movement right. that is a group ahead of the convention that remains in many quarters resistant to trump. trump himself, if you look at his comments, this is a man who as populist. who is extemporaneous, who is not on a script. even when he is on a script, he adds commentary. charlie: what do you make of he two ladies in blue?
hillary clinton, seeming to have fun with the senator from massachusetts. >> if you had asked those people whether elizabeth warren would be the vp pick, whether she was a serious contender, people would have said not so much. that pairing is high risk. that she perhaps alienates middle of the road voters hillary clinton will need. but now, seeing them come of the body language, the language from the campaign has changed. that seems to be more closely. there is no question, there was an excitement and dynamism. charlie: it is now a possibility, more likely than before although they are not anywhere close to a ecision. catherine: i would add elizabeth warren has been an effective attack dog. which is important in this campaign.
to the extent that donald trump got where he was because his opponents were pulling their punches or not attacking him effectively. getting him to say things that were more vulnerable. it is hard to undervalue that in the vp pick. charlie: i was thinking this morning, can you imagine the vice presidential debate if the attack dog is governor christie and senator warren? that would be a debate. megan: that would be a fierce matchup. both of them are grappling with this issue. do i want an attack dog or someone who removes the stain of my unfavorables. omeone who is unimpeachable. someone who brings that ravetas and clean slate.
catherine: and the right demographics. with elizabeth warren, you get massachusetts which was not really in doubt for the sake of the general. with chris christie, it seems very unlikely he is going to pull over new jersey voters. there is a reason why historically, at least in recent elections, the presidential candidates have gone for people from swing states. you are pulling in more of those voters. charlie: barack obama and joe biden went for balance. catherine: there are other forms of balance. it was more about finding that balance rather than finding that more aggressive sort of attack dog. harlie: what do you think of a warren and clinton romance? bob: it is a powerful moment to witness. the question over secretary clinton's campaign, she has traits she wants to see in a running mate. someone from a region, a different generation. i spent nine days on the trail with senator sanders. there is something happening in
the american left and inside the democratic party. here are ideological winds blowing throughout this democratic process. you see sanders, reluctant to endorse. warren, she may be nodding towards those winds, but there's a lot of activism that wants to see something, they want to see a real progressive on the ticket. charlie: who would it be other than warren? sharod brown? someone lightning that? bob: sharod brown is a name i hear. tom perez. charlie: labor and latino. >> drawing that parallel with the u.k., jeremy corbyn who has been voted down. you see rallies in support of
him. ignoring that dynamism on the left in both the u.k. and u.s. charlie: he had the labor rank nd file and his favor. think about this. where is the trump selection process? and when somebody said there was a split between trump and family, there was the question as to when they would announce the vice presidential pick. should i read anything into that about they have narrowed to the choice down and selected heir running mate? bob: trump has not made a final decision but it is a short ist. before lou left the campaign,
now that he is gone, the campaign chairman and long time lobbyist and political operative is running the process. he is very preferential toward a senator. someone who can help trump navigate washington. names i hear are rob portman from ohio. senator richard burr of north carolina. senator corker of tennessee. as a potential pick, jeff sessions of alabama. he wouldn't necessarily expand trump's appeal but is a sitting senator from alabama. charlie: is portman up for reelection? bob: so is richard burr. it is tough to see how they leaf their re-election races. the campaign sees those rust belt industrial areas as key areas where trump needs to do well. charlie: is it automatic that he has the support and encouragement and relationships
and dialogue with republican establishment? that will get them on board? megan: can he keep him on script? we were discussing the speech today. while it does cut so many tenants, in his cadence and some of the lines he returned to about making america wealthy again, those are things he can stay on message and stay away from drifting on immigration and mess deportation and personal attacks, although that has been a core part of his campaign and successful. what people want to see with the establishment is the ability to turn people out on the days with the message. catherine: i think it is just not the content but the irtuousness.
somebody said, i think it is good if he sticks to the script. when he goes off message, that is more dangerous. that might get a nice cheer from the crowd but turns off oters. charlie: does it matter that george will is leaving the party, secretary kissinger is supporting secretary clinton and other republicans are eaning that way? bob: trump supporters would argue he is extending the party. he is bringing new people in. if you are not keeping those conservative rank and file, the movement players who thought they were with goldwater and reagan and helped build the modern republican party, if
trump ignores them. trump is ignoring the george wills of the world. he is not really caring may leave. if they don't show up, you have a potential outcome in november. charlie: there is thing does e. $7 million, all these earings. saying, the state department do certain kinds of things. there was not a sufficient eaction. what impablet pact does it have on this campaign? catherine: i am not sure that the latest in an unending series of investigations is going to make that big of a ifference. they see it has value to their base. potentially to voters who are on the fence, turned off by trump. but are skeptical of hillary. it doesn't seem like it is going to bring any new facts to
light. it is more about maintaining the whiff of scandal. charlie: she tried to address the issue of trust, she said she is going to figure out how to respond with it. catherine: trust is very intertwined with authenticity. she has had struggles with authenticity since the beginning. it is not really clear how one regains it at this point, given that there is such a wide and well-heeled apparatus intended o destroy the trust. charlie: what is his pathway to victory? bob: his pathway to victory is to be changed. he has so many problems on paper. voters are concerned about his vulgarity, his racial undertones. they are concerned about his policies. but he is not clinton and not
of lyrical insider. if he can rouse those working-class voters who are disgusted with political elites and aren't even happy with trump himself but one total change, then he can maybe have a narrow path to victory in some of these rust belt states. like pennsylvania and ohio or virginia. >> and north carolina? >> and north carolina. your state. > yes, indeed. charlie: what is her pathway? >> similar to president obama's. holding on the coalition he built. donald trump is going to find it very difficult when you are taking 20% or less of the latino vote and 10% or less of the black vote. there's just not a pathway forward unless he takes such a huge share of the white vote. they have been effective at targeting groups, not just minority groups but communities. lgbt.
communities that have been allies. reinforcing their message. women. doubling down on that. making sure they know exactly what donald trump has said about planned parenthood or waffling on abortion. she is going to expand that coalition. she has the demographics. his road is much, much more difficult. catherine: i would add her pathway is being not trump. her unfavorables happen to be quite high but his are even higher. so many voters find him unfavorable. so repugnant that they are looking for any alternative. to be fair, there are a lot of voters on the other side motivated iv not hillary aspect of trump. but for her, it is a motivating factor. i went to a rally in raleigh. it was billed as an economic policy speech.
this is where she talked about her tax plan, her college affordability land. all sorts of things relating to her worker protections. unions, minimum wage. when i asked people, what do you like best about her? the response was, she is not trump. it is not some aspect of her message. charlie: does that mean this is a campaign of personalities, not issues? bob: that is the wildcard. what makes him difficult as a george mcgovern or barry goldwater is trump doesn't really come from the right. he is per trade as someone like far right leaders. but he is a celebrity, nationalistic candidate. he is not running on a platform of conservative policies. he is a reaction to certain angsts in the country. he has a high profile.
mark: in ottawa, the leaders of canada, the u.s. and mexico unveiled a private climate plan, calling for the electricity to come from clean energy sources by 2025. >> this partnership will see our country's stand side by side as we work toward the common goal of the north america that is competitive, encourages clean growth, and protects our shared environment now and for generations to come. mark: the three leaders say north america has the capacity, resources and moral imperative to build on the agreement.