Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appocarplay and then Rounoro with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Back in Washington, the fastest show in politics, back on Bloomberg TV and Radio. I'm glad you joined us here for the Monday edition as we still count votes, certainly in California, with several seats in the House not yet called, so we technically don't know who controls the House of Representatives. It's a pretty deliberate win for Republicans on the Senate side, though, we are again waiting for a call in the Arizona
Senate race. That'll be the last block. As we learned over the weekend, the Nevada Senate race called and Donald Trump wins the state of Arizona, so we could have some tickets splitting when it comes to Arizona. Of the House is the wild West literally in this case, We've got millions of votes to be counted, nearly five millions still in California, so it could be days it could be weeks before we really have a sense of it.
If Republicans do keep their majority in the House, it looks like it'll be about as thin as what they have right now. Republicans need five, Democrats need fifteen, and the nineteen outstanding races. You can do the math. It's looking pretty good for Republicans and the idea of a trifecta, which is where we start our conversation with someone you've been hearing a lot about over the balance of this campaign.
Kevin Roberts is president of the Heritage Foundation, and he's out with a new book called Dawn's Early Light, Taking Back Washington to Save America, and he's with us at the table today in Washington. Kevin, it's great to see you, a nice to meet you. Thank you for joining us here, Joe,
thanks for having me TV and radio. I've got a lot of questions for you, because as one of the forces behind Project twenty twenty five, you've been waking up reading about yourself every morning for the last six months or so. That's what I'm told, Like, Yeah, maybe you've been avoiding them, and if that's the case, I salute you. We're in a world where some Republicans have demonized you. Some Democrats have done the same, and quite an experience
for the Heritage Foundation here. Now that the election is done, though, Donald Trump is headed back to the White House and the GOP. As I just mentioned to our viewers and listeners, bay Well looks appears to be on track to controlling both chambers. So do you feel like they won or do you feel like you one?
Oh, they won and most importantly, the forgotten ordinary American has won because what really one was an emphasis on common sense solutions to problems, and really not that at Heritage we feel either entitled or defensive about Project twenty twenty five. We just are resolute because it's now policymaking season. This is something that we've done for forty four years, since nineteen eighty with Ronald Reagan. We understand that, of course President elect Trump and Vice President elect Vance.
Will make all the decisions.
Have said that Project twenty twenty five is the single greatest, biggest scope of personnel and policy work that's ever happened, and we're very proud of it. It represents several dozen million Americans. If you think about the one hundred and ten organizations who are part of it.
Once again, totally.
Up to the President elect and Vice president elect. We operate in service to them and to the American people. But ultimately, to get to the heart of your question, Joe, the American people have won here and we look forward to playing whatever role formally or informally that we can.
To support that.
Well, did you anticipate the backlash you mentioned Ronald Reagan? The Mandate for Leadership was something that was actually pretty well received as a policy paper. It helped to put heritage on the map. Was this supposed to be another version of that or sort of a quiet policy paper that you would provide whatever the incoming administration would be.
We wanted to insert substantive policy conversations into the political season. We did not anticipate that the radical left, which couldn't run on its record because it's terrible, actually use that as the boogeyman that'd succeed in doing that. And look, we made a tactical error in not responding in the first six weeks to their total mischaracterizations. That's on us,
But ultimately the mischaracterizations are on the radical left. That's a tactical lesson that we've learned and will never repeat that. But that doesn't mean that the substantive part of the work, the policies, the personnel database, which has twenty thousand Americans who want to serve not only in presidential administrations but also in gubernatorial administrations, is somehow something to be ashamed of.
In fact, quite the opposite. We're very proud of it.
Having said that, it is very much designed as all of our previous projects have been designed, which is to be of service.
And if I had to predict, the next.
Administration is going to be filled with excellent men and women, not just because of the work we did, but most importantly because of the great acumen of the President elect and vice president elect and the team that they're already assembly.
We learned one name just over the weekend. It's Tom Homan, who's going to be the border as Donald Trump is referring to it. That was from a post on truth. I don't think that's a position that requires Senate confirmation when it comes to being a czar, whatever that is. But he was one of the authors of twenty twenty five. So is the winter over.
It may be the Tom Holman is also a visiting fellow at Heritage he's a good friend. I was texting him earlier congratulating him on that. And look, the most important thing. Forget Tom's professional affiliation, forget that he was a Project twenty twenty five author. The most important thing is that he is aligned not just with President Trump, but also with the American people who want to bring an end to the ridiculous disorder on the southern border.
Tom's going to do a great job there.
In other words, Joe, neither today nor a year from today, am I going to be sitting in my office at Heritage sort of keeping score about who's in the administration and not.
That's not why we do what we do.
We exist every day to be of service to the American people and to the administration for that matter. If the Democrats had won, and although it would have been very surpri for them to have called us and say you got a name for so and so agency, we would have done that too. This is the whole point about the work that he understood, does understood.
Although we had heard from the transition team that no one from Project twenty twenty five was invited, you know, we've got home and that apparently was not the case. Have you talked to Donald Trump since he won.
We've not spoken yet, but I anticipate that we will.
I mean, he's got to be pretty keyed up on what Heritage is offering here. He was on the record when the team was trying to distance itself from you. I have no idea who is behind it, he put on X. I disagree with some of the things are saying, and some of the things are saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Do you have a sense of what he likes or doesn't like here?
I think the key thing is that President Trump saw
the branding as a liability in the political season. But I also would anticipate moving forward that the president elect and vice president elect, with whom we maintain great relationships, will also understand that it's the policy making see and that Heritage and all of the other groups are part of our project, are built for and if they're looking, for example, as President Trump said this morning, to dismantle the US Department of Education, we know exactly where you
can go for that plan. Totally up to him about whether he uses the plan. But that's what I'm talking about, Joe. When I mentioned that great ideas and great people rise to the top. All of the political calculations of the last few months, which were very understandable and about which we have no hard feelings, are in the past.
We're now in the policy making season.
We think that this is the beginning of a golden era of conservative reform. I will say that because the work of Project twenty twenty five represents the conservative movement. It would be very difficult for anybody to implement policies on education, on the border, on taxation without at least consulting those ideas in people.
That's not some arrogant or hubristic comment on our part. That's just the nature of how policy making works.
Well, so you're back, and you're back with a new book on Early Light. It was originally supposed to release in September. Was it your decision to postpone the release? What went into that?
One hundred percent my decision, and that was because as president of the Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action for America, I'm.
A busy guy, like a lot of people are.
You can relate to that yourself, and at Heritage Action for America, which is our five oh one c four more political arm we were busy registering almost one hundred thousand voters in Arizona and Georgia doing the appropriate ballot chasing to get them to the polls and succeeded in
doing that. And we just thought it would be better in terms of using my time, for me to be zealously focused on getting conservative policy makers in a position to have a good conversation and delay the release of the book until this month.
So you didn't think it would jeopardize Donald Trump's chances of being elected or other Republicans based on what you were hearing about twenty hive.
No, and I understand the question was very fair, but not at all. In fact, if you get around reading the book, you will see the book.
Is a reflection of trump Ism.
I mean, this is really where the conservative movement in America are going. And I think because the book is far more oriented around ideas and where we take the movement, the time for that conversation is after the election.
Well, I'll tell you it's really interesting because I wish I had more time with the book, but I did spend the weekend with it. And you write for America to flourish again. The institutions you talk about don't need to be reformed. They need to be burned, and you have a list of them. Burn them to the ground.
Every Ivy League college, the FBI, the New York Times, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Department of Education, which you mentioned, eighty percent of Catholic higher education, Black Rock, the Louden County Public School System, the Boy Scouts of America, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Economic Forum, the Chinese Communist Party, and the National Endowment for Democracy. Do you see all of these as being
on the same side of something? Is this the uniparty? You talk about?
Why burn it?
And what's important context for the list you there that you have there is the metaphor that I use of a controlled burn. So obviously we're talking about metaphorically regenerating these institutions. But what all of those institutions have in common is that they have forgotten the importance of the everyday American and how so much of the work that they do is oriented around concentrating power in either Washington or New York. There are good people in some of
those institutions and in Washington and New York. But what the American people told us last week is that it's time for power to be devolved from those elite institutions, back to the states and back to the American people. My book places an emphasis on revitalizing federalism because that gives the people closest to power the opportunity to actually have a say in their government. By the way, I think that's what we're going to see in the next few years.
Black Rock, Larry Fink sports Trump.
Right.
Blackrock and Larry Fink may have supported President Trump, but before that decision, which I would just speculate is largely political, underwrote a dramatic reorientation of capital from being focused on making profit, which I know you and me and your audience care about, to a socialized idea of ESG. And I'm really glad that one of the great things that
has happened in terms of policy. In fact, one of the things we talk about in Project twenty twenty five and at Heritage is undermining the ridiculous work of Larry Fink and Black Rock.
So it's ESG not China investment that turned you. It's both when it comes.
To there, and they're very much related.
Is yeah, no doubt, no, well, no, I don't actually.
Well In fact, if you let's just take the E and ESG in the environmental emphasis that actually favors the Chinese.
Coser, you're going understood. So here's the thing that strikes me after spending some time with your book. You and I are from really different places. You grew up in Lafayette, Louisiana, which is a great town, by the way, and I've been there more than once. I want you to know. I'm from a place called Putnam, Connecticut, may as well
be from two different planets. I think was smaller than yours, though, And while you grew up and saw the big oil bust and what happened to families and to households in Lafayette, for me, it was the textile mills, right. We had all those in these milltowns in Connecticut. They all closed when I was a kid. When the nineteen eighties got there. Then the shopping malls opened and all the main street stores closed. Unemployment went through, the roof morale went down.
Very similar cultural impact, even though we're talking about massively different industries, different geography, different values. I supposed between a New England family in Louisiana, but actually maybe more similar than you think. You have French Canadian ancestors. I do too, So we have the same scenario here, and there are different potential solutions, right Joe, Biden's been talking about reshoring and friend shoring and trying to bring jobs back that way.
We had the Chips Act. What does Project twenty twenty five do? What will Donald Trump do to restore the local economies in communities like the ones you and I are from.
I can't tell you how much, Joe, I appreciate your question. In fact, there's no doubt we have a lot more similarities than differences.
Right.
Well, actually, and that's I'm talking about all that's and that's the point of the book too.
But thank you for that framing. But to the heart of your question, which I love.
Actually, President Biden has talked about that I think he probably could have done more in his three and.
A half years.
I don't say that to be a jerk. I say that that I think he could have done more, But I give him credit for saying the right things. I think the Chips Act is well intentioned, but there are some details we've got to get right going down the road. But the ultimately where the policy emphasis needs to be is a looking at the trade offs when you have a globalized economy. It isn't that globalization is bad, obviously, it's that there are effects that are deleterious.
On local town on local communities.
But the second is whether it's friends shoring, onshoing, or providing incentives for American companies to be producing here at home for American jobs. That's the comment we need to have. And thirdly, because of how evil the Chinese Communist Party regime is at Heritage, we are fully supportive of tariffs
on China. We are not supportive of tariffs across the board, but we do understand that that is a valid conversation for us to be having, as opposed to what the political right in this country ten or twenty years ago would have said, which is you can't even talk about it.
We believe we need to look at the data, we need to look at the tax regime as a whole, and we always need to understand that a good, healthy economy flows first from a good, healthy civil society, whether it's Putnam, Connecticut or Lafayette, Louisiana.
And that's something. Lastly, I want to ask you about personal liberties. I don't want to do the abortion debate here on the air. We've been doing that for months and I know where you stand on this. You talk about it at length. You highlighted trans as an issue in this campaign the Republican Party did got a lot
of result from some advertising in that area. Are you focused on minors, on parents, on schools, or you focused on an adult who says, Hey, I have a different view of the world in myself than you do when it comes to things like gender dysmorphia. Shouldn't adult be allowed to do what they want to do with their own body.
From a policy making standpoint, especially over the next few years, we're focused on minors. But the reason that we at Heritage are so concerned about transgender ideology is because it harms any human person it touches.
We love every human person.
We believe in the dignity of every human person, and it's on those grounds that we think even for adults, this is problematic.
Problematic because they're talking to kids about it or they're going to somehow infect other adults.
What's your worry both if? I mean, hopefully there's real agreement in this country. Actually, I know there's real agreement in this country. Evidence by how effective a political issue. This was last week that we have a real issue with how much the transgender ideology has been imposed on children through our schools, through our institutions.
Going back to your earlier question.
As opposed to just someone going about their businesses, you know, a thirty year old, this is a choice I had.
That's a big difference.
That's a big difference. I'm glad that we could spend some time together, and I hope this is the start of a conversation that we'd like to continue here on Bloomberg.
I'll come back anytime.
I would love that. By the way, Don's Early Light is the book. Kevin Roberts, happy to meet you. Good luck with your travels. He almost missed a train for us. We'll have a lot more ahead on the fastest show in politics right here on Bloomberg.
Your listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Roynoo with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
I think we need to set the baseline only on the markets, but on the vote. We spent all last week, of course with you from New York, counting the votes well post Tuesday, and we're still counting. In the House. The House has not been called. We've got nineteen outstanding races. Republicans only need to win five of them to maintain control of the chamber. We had a couple more calls over the weekend, and the Senate firmly Republican now that
they've added Nevada to the list. We're waiting on Arizona, where the Democrat is in the lead. Reuben Diego, knowing, of course, now that Donald Trump won the state, making a complete sweep, the full sweep of all seven battleground states that we spent the weekend talking about Jackie Rose and the Democrat, if I didn't make that clear, projected to win Nevada's Senate race. Here fascinating conversation with Kevin Roberts, and that is one that you are only going to
hear on this program. Where else on TV or radio will you hear a deep dive like that with someone so important to the process and the conversation in this campaign. Of course, the head of the Heritage Foundation and the force behind Project twenty twenty five. It's the end of crypto winter, which it surely is a Bitcoin at a new all time high.
Here.
Apparently it's the end of Project twenty twenty five winter because one of the authors of this nine hundred page plus document that had tongues wagging all summer has been hired by the Transition team. Tom Homan will be the border Czar for Trump two point zero, coming back into the fold. He was already part of the Trump administration
last time around. In his coming back here senior immigration official in one point zero, Donald Trump is actually using the term border zar, emulating what Joe Biden was doing with Kamala Harris. Let's reassemble our panel. Genie Schanzano was with this Democratic analyst and Bloomberg Politics contributor, political science professor at Ioni University, joined today by Lester Munson, Republican strategist bg R Group. Great to see both of you
here and welcome Lester. I don't know your thoughts. I know you listen to our conversation, but I haven't had a chance to talk to you. In the break here, Kevin Roberts is now out of the cold will be helping to influence the transition. How do you see it, Well, I.
Think that's not totally unexpected at all. The purpose of Heritage and these other think tanks in town is to offer policy suggestions to policy makers, whether they're in the executive branch or the legislative branch. Very natural that after the campaign is over, that these ideas they surfaced in their twenty twenty five report would be considered by the
incoming Trump administration. And certainly some of the personnel recommendations I think are already starting to work out in that report's favor, and there will be some other victories for them as well, at least some other things that aren't victories. The thing that struck me Joe, First of all, excellent interview, and I did learn a lot, and I loved your comparison of the hometowns. The interesting thing for me is that this is a think tank that makes policy suggestions
but also has some rather inflammatory language about burning down institutions. That's, for me is kind of the strange value add here from Heritage Foundation. I'm not sure how helpful that is. At the end of the day, we're certainly getting plenty of fiery metaphors and adjectives from the candidates. I don't know that we need them from think tanks.
Also, I get you there, and he did. I was actually going to ask him that, but he did make clear that he was using figurative language and referring to burning down institutions. But fighting fire with fire is a big theme in his book, Genie. He talks about rekindling the fire of the American tradition, burning away the rot, a long, controlled burn of targets like the FBI, which again he said was not literal. The book's original subtitle,
in fact, was burning down Washington to save America. But as the Democrat on our panel, Genie, after listening to him talk for the better part of twenty minutes about all a lot of different issues and what was not a confrontational conversation, I wonder if it makes you feel more comfortable about any of the contents here.
Yeah, I agree with Lester. It was an excellent conversation, and it was collegial and I learned a lot. I have not read his new book, but I have read and written about Project twenty twenty five And what struck me as you asked that last question is the fact that one of the pillars of Project twenty twenty five, which Kevin Roberts talks about, is that we are going to secure our individual liberty. And that was in the
context you asked that question about transgender issues. And I think it is quite the example to think about, since I played such a role in the election. And of course what he came back and said was anything but about the protection of liberty. What he said when you asked him to differentiate between children and adults was he's talking about everybody. That he is concerned indeed that adults who choose to live their life in this way may
infect children, infect other adults. This is why, as we look back, you have places like Politico and others refer to this as a Christian nationalist authoritarian movement, because while it wraps itself in a conservative dogma, the reality is when they talk about liberty, they talk about God given liberty, that is, the liberty to live as he believes God wants us to, not as we in the United States do. And that's why they talk about ending separation of church
and state. And of course I agree with Lester, you know, take away the fiery language they are talking about eliminating the FBI, eliminating the Department of Commerce, eliminating the Department of Education. No question, all of these can be curbed. And there's a lot of blow in DC that can be cut, no question. But this is a dramatic document, and there is a reason Donald Trump moved away from it in the campaign because he knew it would be unpopular with the American public. And lo and behold a
few days later, what did he do? He nominates to run our immigration in the Border, one of the contributors. So it is worth everybody reading Project twenty twenty five, even if twenty five percent of it gets into policy. It is a dramatic shift in what has been US history and US policy.
Yeah, take it from me. It's a long read, lester. I'm struck by the similarity in the language that we're hearing between some conservatives and progressives following the election. The aforementioned Kevin Roberts, in his forward for Project twenty twenty five, talks about under our constitution the elites here and under
our constitution the equality that has provided. He writes nearly every top tier US university president or Wall Street hedge fund manager has more in common with a social a European head of state than with the parents at a high school football game in Waco, Texas. Get these lines. Many elites, he says, entire identity, it seems, is wrapped up in their sense of superiority over those people. But under our constitution, he writes, they are the mere equals
of the workers who shower after work instead of before. Right, that's Kevin Roberts Heritage Foundation, Primila Giapaul, who is the head of the Progressive Caucus in the House. We have become a party of elites, she writes, choosing the same word, whether we abandon working class people, whether they abandon us, whether it's some combination of all of the above. Do we need to get Kevin Roberts and Primila Giapaul into a room to solve this?
Yeah, Joe, you know, it's fascinating that the civil wars inside each party seem more compelling to the fighters than the actual conflict between the parties themselves.
And I think, yes, part of.
This is because of the the changing nature of the way we vote. Right, It's not about persuading the middle anymore, or the undecided or the independence. It's about getting the low propensity voters on your side to actually show up and vote. That's the mechanism that matters. That's the revolution that Trump actually brought to the Republican Party was less about the yelling and screaming and more about he just got people to show up who would otherwise not vote.
The Democrats lost ten million votes from twenty twenty to twenty twenty four. For whatever reason, Joe Biden was able to get those ten million people to show up and Kamala Harris wasn't. And I have a feeling what Democrats are going to spend a lot of time trying to figure out is how do we get those ten million people back to the voting booth showing up to vote
for our candidate. That way we can win. So this like civil war inside the two parties, is about trading off a few elite votes for a lot of votes maybe more at the bottom of the economic spectrum. That might be a little bit healthy, but it is. It is kind of fascinating that both parties are doing pretty much the exact same thing, Isn't that right?
What a great conversation with our panel. Can't do this anywhere else, Jennie Shanzano. Thank you, of course, Bloomberg Politics contributor Lester Munths and bg our group. There's a lot to think about. We have a lot of questions to answer as we make our way to the next administration.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appocarplay and then Rouno with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
We're back on Bloomberg TV and Radio from the nation's capital, back from world headquarters in New York, following many days of counting votes, and we're not done yet. The House has still not been called. This week after we've got nearly twenty outstanding House races, a lot of them in California where the balance of power will be decided, and it's looking like it will be decided in favor of Republicans. Of the nineteen races still not called. Republicans only need
to win five, Democrats need to win fifteen. That's where we are in sports. Brad Howard, an expert on all things House, joins us right now from his perch at Corkoran Street Brad was a chief of staff in the House, Stephanie Murphy, as a matter of fact, who you see quite often on this program, the Democrat from Florida, a blue dog Democrat, had floor privileges and knows exactly what this moment is when we're trying to find out who's in charge, who's going to run the committees, will there
be a power sharing agreement. All of this stuff is still possible, by the way, because if you were listening closely to what I said, Democrats actually could still win the House. We could still have divided government. It's just a less likely scenario with the paths that we're seeing right now. But following our conversation with Kevin Roberts, I wonder what Brad Howard has to think about our conversation about the working class, about why things went the way
they did last week. And glad to see right now, Brad, it's my first chance to compare notes since the election, and I hope that you're doing well. Before I get into the big picture stuff, just give me your read on the House. Are you giving this to Republicans or you're waiting for every vote to be counted?
Well, you know, well we should wait till we at least have a call on the remaining races, at least enough to determine there's two eighteen. But it does remind me of that scene in domin Demmer where he's like, you've got a one million chants. He's saying, so there's still a chance say it. So you know, look, I do think the Republicans had a great night. I think the Democrats have got to figure out, you know, what
the problem with our brand is. And I've heard too many of my own party try to say, well, America is racist, or it's you know, misogynistic, or you know, they didn't know how they were voting, or they're tricked by the conservative media. And if your premise of this is entering the conversation with assuming voters were somehow tricked or duped, then you're never going to learn the lesson. The Democratic brand was resoundingly rejected in all nearly all demographics,
and we have to figure out why. And the conversation has got to start with not with blaming voters, but with understanding voters. And you know, as a party, it's our responsibility to go to the voters, not to sit here and expect voters to come to us. Until we figure that out, we're going to continue to lose. And so I hope that we looked at the blue dogs
for a lot of the answers. If you look back some of the closest races in the country, Jared Golden Domain and Marie Glusen camp Perez of Washington State where blue Dog co chairs, and they won. They outperformed the Democratic ticket wildly. We're still waiting on Mary Peltola and Alaska and a few of the blue Dog endorse candidates in California, but so far the blue doog in comments have held up very well.
Well interesting. So with your blue dog hat on, I want to spin back to the conversation we had earlier this hour with Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation. He's
out with a new book, Brad you might have heard about. He's, of course, the force, the driving force behind Project twenty twenty five, and he writes in his forward for the project that many elites' is the term elites entire identity, it seems, is wrapped up in their sense of superiority over the working class and what he refers to here as parents at a high school football game in Waco, Texas under our constitution, though he says they are mere
equals of the workers who shower after work instead of before. It's actually pretty good writing, and it sounds a heck of a lot like Primila Jayapaul who says we've become a party of elites and talks about the working class abandoning the Democratic Party or is it the other way around? What does it tell us when the two ends of the political spectrum come around and meet in this way in the.
Narrative, Well, there's no doubt that there's a populism streak running through the people at the moment, you know, and I think dimocrats are a couple structural problems that they're plaguing or party at the moment. I think we've got to stop letting kind of young, college educated wide urban liberals dictate to the rest of the party, particularly in the social issues. You know, there's rapid change right now in the American society, from automation, UH to technolo technological
to you know, social civil rights movement. There's a lot coming at people and to we've got we've got to understand why some of them can't move as fast as we would like and we have to have patience, and we have to, you know, come with them. I think the second thing is you have a big disconnect in the organized labor movement. You have the national chapters which are adamantly Democratic and and and you know and work
with Democratic Party. And you have the rank and file, which, as we've seen in this election, and the working class warm whilely to Trump. So if Democratic Party leaders are listening to the national labor chapters, there's a big disconnect there. And if we're listening to them but getting none of
their votes, then something's off kilter. And so we've got to ask the questions about why that disconnect is there and start listening to the rank and file union members that are out there in the country, and they're telling us what they want, right. They're telling us they resent the fact that if you have a college degree, it means you can't be successful. They resent the fact that the rich are getting richer and the hard working Americans
aren't keeping getting ahead. I think Democrats ignored the alarm bells around inflation too late, and when we finally did, the American people said, well, if you can't even acknowledge that there's a problem why would I like you to fix it? And keep in mind, Donald Trump one with one very simple premise. It's been the same premise he's had since twenty sixteen. Things are broke, and I'm going to fix it. And the Democrats didn't have much to
come back with. We didn't have a consistent message, and the closing visuals of the campaign were Trump wearing an orange workers vest, driving a garbage truck in McDonald's commas was with Beyonce, and in the lips in Washington, DC.
You know.
So, I think we need to look at our messaging.
We need to look who we're listening to and who we're talking to, and we've got to have some tough conversations. I think everybody's right and everybody's wrong. So there's a lot to look at.
Great analysis. You use the word resent, Brad Bernie Sanders used the word angry in his interview on Meet the Press yesterday.
Let's listen, the working people of this country are extremely angry.
They have a right to be angry.
In the richest country in the history of the world today, the people on top are doing phenomenally well, while sixty percent of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. Where is the Democratic Party? Are they prepared to stand up to these powerful corporate interests, raise the minimum wage, fight for healthcare for all people, make sure that all of our kids get the quality education that they need, expand social security.
Of course, he's an independent, not a Democrat. But Brad, how come it's so easy for everyone to have this conversation today instead of last Monday morning?
Well, I think number one, I want to point out that Kamala Harris got a higher percent of the vote in her race in Vermont than Bernie Singers did in his. So first number two is that all Bernie's already trying to prescribe solutions, And this is part of the problem with the Democratic Party. The solutions we're prescribing, Like Americans generally support, but they don't like us. You saw in states where they voted to codify abortion rights but yet
voted for Donald Trump. They voted to codify paid family leave but voted for Donald Trump. So what's it tell you when they generally like our solutions and our policy positions but they don't like us. That is a branding and connection problem, Like you cannot show up in the black and Hispanic communities two months before an election and expect them to listen. It looks the way it is. It looks like you're pandering. And so we've got to
build inroads in these communities. We've got to get off these college campuses and into We've got to get out of the boardrooms and into the break rooms. We've got
to really have conversations these workers. And I think number two is the resentment is so when you look at, for instance, the Biden college student loan debt relief, the people that had worked hard their whole life, who passed on the fancy vacations, who passed on the fancy cars and fancy houses and script and saved to put their kids to college, and then yet they see their neighbors, who you know, lived irresponsibly, all of a sudden, get
a check from the government and unforgiven, that builds resentment. I'm not saying it's bad policy. I'm just saying it builds resentment. And so we've got to understand that there's a popular streak in the government in the electric right now that's looking at an unfair system. And when you think the system is unfair and it's broken, you're going to go to the guy that'f telling you he's going
to fix it. You're not going to go to the party that's acknowledged that, that's refusing to acknowledge anything's broken. And when we said defending democracy, I think a lot of voters took that as defending the status quo of defending the broken system, and I think that backfired of us.
Wow. I hope everyone understands here that people are going to be hiring Brad Howard for the next two years to explain this to them in a room. And you're getting it right now on this Monday here on Bloomberg. Brad, you're a creature of the house. Bring us inside what's about to happen here because Hakem Jeffreys is going to either have a razor thin majority where he's going to leave the Party of the Insurgent and see which one is actually more impactful, which one's easier.
Well, I mean, obviously being the minority is always easier. You know, the responsive governing is hard and Republicans have figured that out this last two years. What I will say with this, does you know we know somely close
margin regardless of who wins, right, that's for sure? What that does is that actually empowers groups like the Blue Dogs on the Hill and the modern Republicans, the Republican governance groups, so to speak, because we've seen that the far far right, the kind of what we call the
right wing Maga crowd, doesn't want to govern. And so you know, Speaker Johnson has struggled over the last year and a half to put together a group of Republicans that can pass a rule to put things on the floor as simple as funding the government, and he's had to rely on Leader Jeffries to deliver democratic votes so
they can govern. I suspect that's going to continue. And so really the key makers here regardless if the Democrats have the majority or if the Republicans have the majority, it's going to be groups like the Blue Dog Democrats, of which I know well, and the New Dems, of which I know well, and the problem Solfer's Caucus, like these moderate coalitions. There is a you talk about a power sharing agreement, there won't really be a formal one.
There's a there's always an informal powersharing agreement that determines committee sizes and stuff, but there may actually be forced into an informal power sharing agreement because if the far Far Ride is never going to vote to allow Speaker Johnson to bring responsible legislation to the floor, he's going to have to rely on Leader Jeffries. And Leader Jefferies has shown that he will put the governing and the American people over parties in politics.
And so, and I'll add two.
Leader Jeffries, you got to remember didn't force all the Democrats to vote a certain way in the last two years. He's allowed them to vote as they need to vote. So when they come together, he's in a strong position to help this Democratic Party heal and and and because he's you know, he allowed people to vote the way he need to vote. So he's going to be a great leader in resource to turn to as this party emerges and figures out where to go forward.
Well that's why I ask what might have sounded like a weird question, because Speaker Johnson, if this is in fact going to be a sin Republican majority, will need Hakim Jeffries. He will need Democrats to get things done, which makes him enormously influential in the minority, doesn't it.
Yeah, And keep in mind, like when I was Chief of Staff to Congress from Stephanie Murphy. She was leader of the Blue Dogs. When we came in, the Republicans had full control of government, They had the House to sit in the White House. This was in twenty seventeen, So you know, I have a lot of experience personally navigating to being a Democrat, you know, in a year.
But to your point about why now people are having these conversations and we haven't really had before, You've got to keep in mind when Trump won in twenty sixteen, it shocked everyone, and a lot of people chalk that up to, well, he'll really won the popular vote. Well, Russia intervened, Well, it was the James Comey letter, right, And so we never had the discussion the hard lessons because we thought we won. And then you go to twenty twenty and they did win, and I think we
took the wrong lessons from both of those. And so this is the first time in two presidential cycles that we've had a tough conversation internally as a party. And I think what caught a lot of people off guard. I think all the polls show that Trump was a
slight favorite to win, and he did. But I don't think everyone suspected the incredible growth and support he had across nearly every single demographic and a clean sweep of the battleground states, and even you look at areas at Cook County, Illinois where Chicago is, he has a twelve to fifteen point swing, double digit swing in his favor, which is just you know, you've got to really think, if we're losing the heartland and we're losing votes in urban areas, what is left.
Absolutely incredible in such great analysis by Brad Howard, I can't thank you enough Brad for the deep dive today. He's at Corkoran Street Group where he is the founder and president, as mentioned former Chief of Staff Congress Swim and Stephanie Murphy. Great to see you, Brad.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and then Rodoto with the Bloomberg Business Ad. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Here on Balance of Power, on Bloomberg Radio on the satellite and on YouTube, where you can find us right now search Bloomberg Business News Live. We've got the cameras set up for you here and a lot to talk about as we wait for California. Throw another log on the fire. They still have almost five million ballots five million votes to count in California, which means it could
be another week, another two, I don't know. We'll find out here, nine hundred and fifty thousand in Los Angeles County alone, and they get thirty days to count in California as we wait to see who's going to control the House. This is why things are taking so long. In a world in which we can all vote on American Idol and solve this with millions of people weighing in in a matter of seconds, we'll wait weeks for the state of California to choose its representatives. Here in Washington, DC,
a little different. In the Senate, we've just got one left that's Arizona, which Donald Trump won over the weekend. It looks like we've got some tickets splitting there with Diego the Democrat leading Carrie Lake. Big questions as well about the transition, and when we talk about what's happening on Capitol Hill versus what's happening at the White House versus what's happening on the campaign trail. There are very few people you can call to hit all three. Ron
Bonjean is one of them. As political rights he is one of the most popular communicators in Washington, and that is quite an achievement in a town with this much hot air. Chief spokesman for the Speaker of the House, for the Senate Majority leader. He also helped in the transition last time around, and he knows a thing or two about what we're discussing. Having also worked in the executive branch. Ron Bonjean is also a founder partner at a firm you hear a lot about on this broadcast,
Rock Solutions, one of the pillars of K Street. Ron, we finally got you in. It's great to see you. Welcome to Bloomberg's Balance of Power. What a treat.
Thanks you much, Thank you so much. It's an honor to be here, and thank you for that.
Well, my god, I hope I came close, because I've got some questions for you, and I'm really wondering how you're feeling about a lot of things. I'm going to start with something rather esoteric, and that is the leadership battle that's taking place here and about to unfold in the Senate. It looks like now that Donald Trump has won, the deck may be shuffled.
Here.
We were talking about John Thune versus John Cornyn. There was Rick Scott over on the side, but nobody saw that as a real possibility. Now MAGA is endorsing him, not Trump, but Tucker Carlson and many others. As we heard from Rick Scott, Senator from Florida on Sunday Morning television.
Let's listen, we have got to change the way the Senate is run to get Trump's agenda done. What is going to take is somebody's going to take the time to sit down and bring people together. We've got to get, for a lot of things, sixty votes in the Senate, so we've got to have somebody's going to sit down with Democrats and say, how do we balance a budget? How do we do these things? Okay, that's all I've done. I'm a deal guy.
It's the secret ballot though, Ron Bonjin, could MAGA change the order here in the leadership in the Senate or is this just a diversion for you and I to talk about today.
Yeah, it's really tough when it's a secret ballot. You know, if it was a transparent ballot and senators had to put their names on it, there Republican mega constituents will be lighting them up. I find it highly unlikely that Rick Scott, actually Senator Rick Scott, actually affects this vote tremendously with this outside campaign to persuade the inside. This is an insider's game. While Donald Trumps president is president elect, you know, in ways has a tremendous amount of power
going in and is already making big moves. You know, senators like this is a very club like atmosphere. It's very difficult to make the changes that Rick Scott would like to see. And imagine if Rick Scott forced his way in the way he's doing it right now, how would he be able to manage that conference? You know, going forward he's going to need them. So, you know,
the pressure on the outside can backfire on him. And if it were to work, there would be a lot of I would say, you know, a sour taste in Republicans' mouths.
Does Trump care himself or does he figure whoever wins here he can affect, whether it's Thune corner Scott.
Listen, if Trump knew who the winner was going to be out of this, he would probably back that person because you don't going in being the most you know, president elect, you're not going to want to back a loser. That's a bad message. You're sending it right away that you made a strategic mistake. So he's being very careful. And I don't think that anybody telling him to stay out. I thought what Senator Thune said about him staying out
of the race. I thought, okay, well, you ask him to stay out of the race means that he's likely going to weigh in at some point. Then if you're asking him to stay out, but we'll see what happens.
Yeah, or give you a read on the House. Does it go Republican? The math is certainly pointing that way. And if that happens, does Mike Johnson remain speaker?
Yeah, it's likely going to remain in Republican hands. You know, all eyes you know are out west, and we're talking about you know, plus one, two, three, four votes, you know, something along those lines, A very handful of votes that would be you know, and it's better to be the majority than the minority, because you're setting the agenda. You're
setting the committee schedules everything hinges on that. However, this is going to be very typical for Johnson because what if what if a member of Congress gets sick, a Republican and gets sick. What if there's a car that's broken down the highway? He needs every vote on the big ones to make account. And you know, I think for the next decade we're going to have back and forth,
small margin Democrats, small margin Republican. So this is a this is an area that Johnson has operated decently well in. He's thrown into the mix during the midterm, like mid year, and he's doing well. And I think he knows how to how to handle it with Trump on his side, by the way, which might help affect how the Freedom Caucus operates and relates to him.
So then to the transition, we're touching all three bases with Ron Bonjie. We've got a couple of names here. I'm sure you're hearing a lot more than those are being published. At least Dephonic to the UN Tom Holman is going to be borders are and we understand that Stephen Miller is going to get a deputy a chief of staff role when it comes to policy. In this case, you've actually helped to orchestrate transitions like these ron Bonjin.
When will it be complete? And when you go downstairs out to dinner or for a drink on K Street, you go into the prime rib next door, what's the number one conversation? Is it tariffs or taxes or what?
Yeah?
No, Look, I worked on the first Trump transition. We were in charge of making sure those nominees got across the line, got confirmed. And you know, right now Trump is very clearly making moves early. He is not sitting still going forward. You know a lot of other president elects carefully plan and time out their announcements. That's not the way Trump does it. He rolls them out there.
I mean, the transition really hasn't officially begun. I mean they have not moved into I mean, they's still negotiating about moving into the large GSA building that's used by thousands of Trump team members to prepare, you know, prepare nominees for confirmation. But I'd say that the number one thing that CASTRT is looking at is who's going to be in power under the Trump in the Trump cabinet. So right now, I was just hearing at State. Could it be Senator haggardy Er, could it be Senator Rubio?
That was the latest I just heard before coming in here. You know who's making it, who's not making it. I mean there was look at center, Pompeo left by the wayside, not center. Second, former Secretary of State Pompel left by the wayside. So now underneath that, sure, there are a lot of policies that that organizations now have to get ready for. But you have to see the details of those policies, and you need to know who's in charge.
We're still, you know, a little ways away from January twentieth, but I'll tell you Donald Trump is making moves. I think he's going to make the most moves that any presidential elect president elect has ever done, affecting policy and affecting change before he's even entered office. I mean, look, he already talked to Putin with Musk on the phone, and he also told him don't mess with Ukraine. I have weapons and only use them. He's not even sure, he's not even sworn him yet.
Yeah, I don't know how appropriate a lot of people feel that is, but that's where we are. And apparently they did get on the phone together, Ron Bonjin. What's it going to be like? And there's some shades of nineteen eighty here. Do you think that the Middle East unfolds, Ukraine unfolds around the time of the inaugural whatever the next chapters are in those two theaters?
Well, in terms of foreign policy, I think that world leaders view Donald Trump as an unpredictable one, an unpredictable person. They're going to really tread with caution with him. I mean they did so during his first administration very carefully. They're going to do it again. And so Trump is going to lay out his red lines out there. Glad he just did with Putin. It's unimaginable to see what will be like going in at this point, because I
think every day feels like a giant news cycle. But you know clearly there's some there will be hesitation among China, Russia. I ran I'm making big moves on Donald Trump's watch.
Fascinating stuff here. As someone who helped to orchestrate the last transition, I'm just curious. Lastly, what you expect to hear. There's been a lot of attention paid to Project twenty twenty five and that second pillar that includes personnel. There's also been reporting that because there's no contract or agreement with the GSA, the transition team is doing its own vetting using a private security firm instead of the FBI. What does all that result in?
Yeah, Look, I would say that, you know, Donald Trump doesn't adhere to norms and the standards that are set out there.
It's very clear.
We've seen it in all over year, so it's likely going to you know, this transition. I think they need that infrastructure that will be helpful. I you know, being there on site. I mean we had a mock hearing room. We knew where every transition team was around the nominees in one building, so we could get to them quickly and have conversations that needed to take place. Can it occur outside of that, Yes, I would say the number one target, and I don't know Donald Trump's mind right now,
is the Pentagon. I think that there are generals that he doesn't like in there, who were you know that he wants to get out and install his own people in, get get rid of some of the bureaucracy that he finds would be challenging to his ideas. I don't know what those are, but I have heard from those connected to the Trump world that that's that's a big goal, is.
Ron bonjing. I hope this won't be so long before we get you back. It's great to see you, and thank you so much for the nites with his experience from the transition from the Capitol and from the White House. Co founder partner Rock Solutions, Ron Bonjine with us on the Fastest show in Politics. Thanks for listening to the
Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.