Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apocarplay and then Broud Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
And it is the day after the day in which we now know Donald Trump is the president elect. Will be the forty seventh president of the United States after winning at least two hundred and seventy seven electoral college votes. The vote is not all the way in yet, Joe, but it is not just an electoral college victory where you're looking at, but in all likelihood a popular vote
victory as well, as we wait the final tally. However, we don't have the final tally for the ultimate majority in the Senate, as there is still a number of races to be called or the majority in the House of Representative.
That's true.
We do expect to hear from Vice President Kamala Harris a little bit later on today. She chose not to speak last night, which was an interesting element the optics on our election night. She will be speaking at four pm Eastern time. Will of course, bring her remarks to you. It's unclear to us if she has conceded on a personal level to Donald Trump. We haven't heard news of a phone call, for instance. But I was struck following
our coverage at about four o'clock in the morning Eastern time. Here, kayleie to see law enforcements around Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue. It was clear, even if you were just walking the streets of New York that something had changed. The transition is underway now, even as we wait for many other races to be called, including some key Senate races. We want to get into this with Bloomberg's Michael Sheppard, who joins us now from our Washington, d C.
Bureau.
Shep was up all night with us, and it's great to see you.
Mike.
Your thoughts as we wait to hear from the Vice president? Why are we waiting so long?
Well, I think one of the reasons for the delay, Joe, is just how difficult this is for the Vice president and her campaign. This is not the speech they had been anticipating in giving. Even yesterday afternoon. Over the weekend, the campaign had seen some polls that suggested the race might be breaking a little bit more in her direction, and of course now we know, based on the results
that was not the case. It's also going to be a challenge for her because you remember that for weeks on the campaign trail and on the stump, she was warning voters that her opponent, Donald Trump was unfit for office. So how she frames this speech conceding to somebody she didn't think deserve the presidency will be difficult to do and to do graciously as well.
Well.
This also may be a speech, Mike, that she wasn't prepared to have to give so soon, whether it is a concession speech or a victory speech. We thought the final result would take a lot longer than it did to figure out. Within twenty four hours we knew that Donald Trump would be president elect. Can you just talk about briefly, how much more efficiently it seems the votes
were counted, how this election was won. By all accounts, it does seem like this was secure, This was safe, the democratic system worked.
Yeah, Kayley, I'm glad you brought that up, because you know that for weeks we've been talking in the newsroom, and everybody out there observing this election ahead of time was anticipating that it would be delayed the way it was in twenty twenty. But what we've seen since then is state officials and state operations really tightened up their game and they tried to prepare to ensure a faster, cleaner count that would be much more difficult to challenge,
and we saw that. Another factor also was that it actually ended up being a much wider margin of victory, including in some of those battle ground states that ultimately handed the presidency.
Did Donald Trump, well, Michael, I don't know exactly as we said what we're going to hear from Vice President Kamala Harris a bit later, but we have heard from Donald Trump. How did the optics strike you on the stage last evening in West Palm Beach, when the likes of Dana White joined the former president on the stage along with the Speaker of the House. When you consider the contrast culturally of what we saw, how does it inform your expectations of a Trump two point zero.
Well, it highlighted the way that the former president has built this coalition and he really has tried to cement the so called Maga brand in the Republican Party and now for good, this victory in the presidential election seals it for many years to come, and certainly the House Speaker Mike Johnson is someone who is very much part of the Trump camp. And the other thing you mentioned, of course, was Dana White of the wrestling fame and ripping open his shirt on the convention stage in July.
That points to how he had the former president had targeted mail voters very directly. We called it, in a way, the bro campaign, and it worked. It helped push his numbers with mail voters and including with black men and Latino man as they headed to the polls yesterday.
All right, Bloomberg's Michael Sheppard reporting from Washington, DC for us. Thank you very much. We appreciate it, and of course we have been touching base not only with Mike Shephard and the rest of our Bloomberg team throughout this cycle, but our next guest as well, Frank Luntz, famed polster and founder of fil Inc, is joining us now. Frank, thanks for being back with us on Bloomberg TV and radio. We have been talking about this entire cycle how tight
margins were likely to be. Turns out they're not quite as tight in most of these battleground states as they were in twenty twenty. And I just wonder your takeaway here when it comes to whether or not the Poles were adequately reflecting the reality in America once again, doesn't it seem like Poles underestimated Donald Trump?
Degree, Yes, and that is about turnout that every Trump supporter became a Trump voter. But that is not the case with Kamala Harris, and that's one of the reasons why she fell short. Certainly, the idea that Trump would get a majority of the popular vote.
Is a surprise to a lot of people right now.
And is the Iowa poll which I want to draw attention to, because that changed the actual narrative of the campaign for the last forty eight hours. Trump ended up winning Iowa by about a dozen points or so that the poll had Harris.
Up by three.
It was not only beyond the margin of err it actually changed how the race was being covered, which is really one of the rare times when survey research actually becomes part of the narrative. I think that there's a lesson for Americans in the future, which has spent a lot less time talking about who's winning and losing and a lot more time talking about what the candidates say they're going to do, and why either we should believe them or distrust them.
Sounds like people were wrong about a lot, Frank. They were wrong about the protesters showing up at the DNC, they were wrong about violence around polls, wrong about pole watchers, wrong about in some cases even though our polls were tied, the idea that there was momentum behind Kamala Harris as well. I'm wondering if there's a reckoning here for polsters. Was there an overcorrection in the sample? And what's going through your mind today?
What's going through my mind, because I've been asked this in almost every show, is this is the media. The posters did get it wrong, but the media went all over this IOWA survey when all over trying to see some trends, some movement in one direction or another, and that they're the ones who drove this. I tend not to talk about polling when I do shows this. I talk about policy, YEP. I talk about language, what the public wants to see and hear, and whether the politicians
are doing it or not. And so much of this is actually driven by those who ask the questions rather than people like me who answer them, because we won't answer them if we weren't asked them. I don't want to make a blanket statement because I take this so seriously and I so approve of the way your show handles politics.
It's one of the.
Best shows in all of television for politics. But I do think that there needs to be a reckoning for what we choose to focus on and how we cover it, because in the end it becomes misleading or even detrimental to the political process.
As that IOWA survey clearly.
Was well Frank, we appreciate the kind words, and of course there always is room for critique when we consider how the narrative is shaped in America, and media plays a role in that as well. I think we can all agree. Earlier on in this cycle, there was a few conversations that happened in quick succession, one being whether or not the media was putting too much focus on the age issue for Joe Biden. Then became whether or not the media was complicit in covering up how deep
those issues may have run for the current president. And I just wonder as we consider the role of Joe Biden in all of this. His late withdrawal from his reelection campaign. If ultimately you think that made a difference, if the timing mattered, or if it was never going to be possible for an incumbent administration given the kind of inflation experienced during it, to keep hold of the White House.
Don't I don't believe that.
I challenged the narrative which has been put forward now for weeks. Vice President Harris had one of the sharpest fastest rises of any candidate modern history.
She went from five points down when she.
Got into the race to three and a half points up in a matter of a few weeks. Because she was joyful. She talked about the things she wanted to do. Instead of the negativity which he decried again and again. She was hopeful and optimate and talked about all the things that she wanted to get done. But then after the convention, she turned dark, she turned negative. It sounded as much like a Trump campaign as it did a Harris campaign.
And that was when she hit her ceiling. And then she and by changing.
This by being joyful and then being harshly negative, calling a trumpet fascist, voters started to wonder who is she? Is she authentic? Is she genuine? How do you go from being joyful to damning your opponents. And then Biden, of course made the comment about Trump's voters, and it just it didn't ring true. That's number one, and number two is she never articulated exactly what she wanted to do in the first hour, in the first day, first week,
first month, first one hundred days, and so on. If she had done that in the CNN town hall where it's done live, if she'd done that in the sixty minutes interview or a Fox interview, any of the if she had done that and told voters exactly what she wanted to do, she would have done much better because then she would have been about policy, and that's where she was weakest. But instead she got driven around. She never answered the questions that voters had, and so she
never crossed that threshold. Whereas Donald Trump, we knew him, There's nothing more we can learn about him. We knew his weaknesses, we knew his strengths, we knew his record because we saw it for four years. So her criticizing him didn't add anything to her, did not detract from him, And I think that that's one of the reasons why she lost.
The diagnosis from Frank LUNs on Bloomberg TV and Radio. All of that said, Frank, what did we learn about our nation last night, particularly if this in fact was about men versus women?
I love that question, and that's a question that we need to be talking about over the coming weeks and months, because there are some things that are more important than an election. It's the next generation. And what are they learning. They're learning that it's okay to tear your opponent apart. They're learning that there is no bounds to negativity, that there are right and wrong ways. But they need to learn that they're right and wrong ways to approach politics, to approach economics.
To approach day to day life.
And I'm just afraid that what we now learned is the wrong thing, which is anything goes at any time for any reason, and that frightens me for the future.
Well, okay, so if we keep looking at demographics here and what the future may hold, Frank, I look at Donald Trump's victory in Miami Dade last night. We haven't seen a Republican win that county for decades. It obviously is majority Hispanic. We did see a sizable break among Latinos for Donald Trump. In a way we haven't seen in the past. Obviously, movement for black voters as well.
And I wonder if you think those demographic shifts are unique to this candidate who is now president elect, or if that may be something more permanent.
It's unique to this candidate, but also to this time that it doesn't matter whether your white, black, brown.
It doesn't matter if you have trouble.
Affording food to put food on your table, to put gas in your car, or the healthcare you need and the housing that you want, then it doesn't matter what your ethnicity is. What matters is you're struggling your living paycheck to paycheck, and that's what's happening right now. And Donald Trump articulated an empathy to that much more explicitly than Harris did. She tried to run away from it.
Now.
Trump's greatest weakness is he didn't focus enough on prices, on costs, on affordability that instead he got sidetracked by issues that did not matter. And in fact, I want to acknowledge something, I'm going to go back to that presidential debate that clearly she did relatively well and he did relatively poorly.
In the end, it did not matter.
I thought the debate performance would cost him his candidacy, and instead it actually did not matter. And that's another learning that America pass to face and even when you put two candidates side by side, the outcome does not necessarily matter and who wins for president.
Really great to have you back, Frank Frank Luntz, founder CEO FI L and just the voice we were looking to hear today. Thanks for being with us throughout this entire campaign. Here on Bloomberg TV and radio.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple CarPlay and then Rounoo 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.
Donald Trump had any number of economic policy proposals that we've talked about over the past couple of months that brought us to this point. Here's a taste.
What I'm going to do is something that nobody has ever even thought about doing.
No tax on tips.
As part of our additional tax cuts, we will end all taxes on overtime. I want to cut taxes on Americans while putting tariffs on China and foreign countries.
To bring our jobs back home.
My plan is to make the Trump tax cuts permanent. They are massive tax cuts, biggest ever permanent.
And to cut taxes even more. A reduction in the corporate tax rate.
From twenty one percent to fifteen percent. No tax on social security benefits.
Restoring the salt deduction, saving.
Thousands of dollars for residents of New York, Pennsylvania, New.
Jersey, and other high cost states.
As part of our tax cuts, we will make interest on car loans fully deductible.
And joining us now. Joe Lavornia, chief economist with SMBC Nico Securities America, the former chief economist the White House National Economic Council in the first Trump administration. Nice to see you at the table. I bet you've been up all night.
I can only imagine a lot of you. Thank you for having me. I was on earlier in the week sitting over there absolutely well.
Nice.
Do you know this table very well? And you've been generous with your time over the course of this cycle. We've got a lot of questions for you here, beginning with this market reaction. This is a monster move. To see a day in which the dows up over one thousand points. The S and P five hundred is up some supercent, but the bond market is moving in the other direction. We're looking at a four or five here
as of this moment on the ten year. What do you make specifically of the reaction in the bond market. This is clearly an anticipation of some sort of inflationary event.
Well, here's the thing.
I when I was talking with investors and clients as I do that's most of my day job, this simple question is what happens if Harris wins?
What happens if Trump wins?
And my initial read very simplistic terms, was Harris bad for equities, good for bonds. Trump good for equities, bad for bonds. And that related to the fact on where I see growth and also how the market initially would react to things. So, for ext with Trump, equities are up because the market's more excited about growth, lower tax rates, less regulation, et cetera. But the bond market gets worried
about more spending, tax cuts, et cetera. And like the CBO for example, they're going to initially probably score a Trump budget as being you know, more deficit related spending, the Tax Foundation found that the problem with it is that we don't know the specifics yet. And I'd argue, if you look back at the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of twenty seventeen, and you see what CBO scored the revenue numbers in sixteen, we actually got the money in eighteen. In other words, the tax cut paid for itself.
So I think these are, you know, knee jerk reactions, and then we'll see what happens once we get some meat to the bone.
Well, so as you consider the timeline you just said, they're knowing that there was eight trillion dollars in deficit added during the first Trump administration. The Committee for Responsible Budget says it could be another fifteen trillion dollars if not all of it pays for itself. But it is a question of time, especially knowing these markets are discounting mechanisms,
they are looking well ahead. So when we consider sequencing here things like tariffs that could potentially hit the economy first before the actual beneficiary impacts of lower taxes is fully felt and recognized, and corporate profits and the like, Right, how should we think about the way in which this plays out?
Right?
So the europeolutely right, marcuts are forward looking, and they may fear or they could think that, okay, tariffs are inflationary, it's a one off price adjustment. But again it would be how are the tariffs implemented and what would the US be getting in return. I think there's this misperception that day one of Trump, We're going to have tariffs across the board x percent, and this is my guess, and in China's gonna be at least sixty percent, maybe higher.
To me, it's going to be more nuanced. It's going to be very transactional. In other words, terifts are going to be used in large part as a tool to essentially have more fair trade. So, for example, the US has certain environmental regulations and certain rules against child labor. Some of our trading partners don't have those same rules, and we're at a disadvantage. So to extend tariffs can level the playing field and make trade fair. I think
that makes sense. Also, it would depend too, what happens with energy policy. If we have a significant amount of drilling and energy production, that will offset the tariffs, even if the tariffs, for argument's sake, we're implemented across the board. The energy share of the economy is bigger than the import share of the economy, So it really depends how
it's going to be put into place. And I always tell people look at things the broad policy set, like, don't focus just on the tariffs, don't focus just on the tax cuts, look at the holistic approach in terms of trying to increase productive capacity.
I guess a.
Simpler way though of asking my question would be are we likely to feel the inflation before we feel the growth?
No? I don't believe so.
I don't believe so because if energy prices stay low, that will immediately hit people's pocketbooks in a positive way. Prices will come down. The general rule of thumb is every one penny change in gasoline is worth about a billion in terms of an energy tax cut.
So if you get prices down, fifty.
Cents may not seem like a lot, but in a twenty five trillion dollar economy, that's basically like a fifty billion dollar tax cut immediately.
What do you make of the moves of these the banks today? This is wild Golden sacks up thirteen percent right now. I could go down a long list of them. Is basil three dead if it wasn't already.
I think Basil three is dead or like in The Princess Bride, it's mostly dead.
Yeah, but look, the financials are is it a great movie?
The financials are essentially a high data on the economy. So if you believe, and again I'm trying to be objective here, if you're looking at the equity market, the equity market's up on the expectation of stronger growth, and the financials are a high data to GDP. So if we sustain three percent GDP or higher and inflation does moderate as I think it will, then you know the banks are dealing what you're supposed to do well.
So as we consider potential policy here and regulation, We've talked with you before, Joe about some of the other policy ideas that have been put forward, like on immigration, for example, the ideas that around mass deportation and the economic impact it ultimately could have if millions of people who are contributing to the labor force right now, who are paying into things like social security, were to leave the country, how should we be gaming that out, and
the realism of trying to get that many people out of the country in an expeditious manner.
Joel of Warren, Your private citizen doesn't expect mass deportation.
Okay.
My strong sense and gut instinct is that we're going to enforce the laws. We're going to make sure the administration will make sure that there is more legal immigration that comes through. However, there are a lot of potential bad actors, as we know, not to get into details that need to be removed, and I think law enforcement will do so, but I do not personally.
This is me Joel of.
Warren is speaking, do not expect mass deportation. The other factor I want to mention is that if you look at labor force participation, we're about three quarters of a point below where we were pre COVID. That's over a million workers. So if the economy can grow and we can get labor force participation to rise further, that would offset any modest effect that we may not be getting through immigration and will clearly be benefiting the US workers that are here.
This would be a very different FTC than we have right now. And I mentioned Goldman earlier. I'm thinking IPOs, I'm thinking.
Mergers and acquisitions.
Is that what we mean when we say animal spirits?
Yeah? Animal spirits a confidence in the outlook.
Yeah, what's the M and A situation going to look like in Trump's two point.
Zero Well, certainly there will be much more M and A activity.
Look, I don't think to me, it's going to be more entrepreneurial.
I mean I always would tell people when I highlighted this when I was in the administration, if you look at the small business sentiment, it was the highest under President Trump's in any administration. So there is I think a dynamism and an animal spirit that is reflective in an entrepreneurialism, a type of role, and that is going to be I think beneficial to activity that allows people to trade act and by the way.
Onlike tariffs and things like that.
This sounds pretty basic, is I don't think this is insightful. But President Trump's a business man, and I think you have to look at the transactional nature of how he approaches things. And there was a great quote from a reporter of the Pittsburgh Is that I believe eight years ago said don't take President Trump literally, but take them seriously.
And I find too often we get caught up in the rhetoric and get caught up in things that divide us I don't really believe that to be the case in the second term, at least I.
Hope as we consider entrepreneurialism being able to jumpstart things, we have to look at the cost of capital. And that brings me to something that's coming up tomorrow, as if we all haven't had enough this week, a Federal Reserve decision. They're expected to cut twenty five basis points. The market is now pricing in fewer cuts over the course of the next year, Joe, in part maybe due to the outcome of this election.
What do you think about that? No question, the market is expecting faster growth.
I think it's perhaps incorrectly expecting inflation is going to be higher, but it's expecting faster growth and then less inflation. And because the president's going to try to make per and I think he will the tax cuts some Jobs Act of twenty seventeen, there's no big tax hike coming in twenty six and therefore there's no fiscal cliff, which means there's less pressure on the Fed to cut. So
I think initially the Fed will probably cut less. They'll cut twenty five tomorrow, and to me, December is probably a pause, and then we'll reevaluate and we'll see you know where the personnel is in the Trump administration and what policies are are advocated.
Because right now this is still guesswork.
Pretty interesting to consider what will happen over the course of the next month. Your phone's going to be ringing. What job would you want in a Trump administration?
Again, I said this the other day.
I said, look, I'm very happy where I am and being honored to serve, and we'll just play it by year.
We'll see.
I really, I mean, I love the markets, I love coming on, like having a nice conversation with you guys, and certainly if the President called, I would be hard to say no. But right now I'm happy and we'll see what happens.
You know, I feel like, you know, I like to think I've got some options. But we'll say they.
See you on the North one points soon, hopefully not cut well.
I want to say it, thank you either way, always welcome you here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. We appreciate you joining us. On this day after the election, Joe Lavornie, of course, formerly of the Trump White House, now at SMBCNCO Securities. On this day after the election, a day in which markets are ripping the S and P five hundred at a fresh record high in the bond market seeing big news with a tenure yield up seventeen basis points.
We'll have more ahead on the markets and the politics with our political panel next on Bloomberg TV and radio.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on amocr Play and then Broun Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
They are still counting votes. We still have some important Senate races to be called here, Kaylee, but the transition on the presidential level has already begun. Donald Trump is now officially the president elects.
YEP, having won two hundred and seventy seven Electoral College votes at this point, but it is expected he could win many more than that. For all of our months of discussion about how this race was incredibly tight going to be decided by very closed margins, the margins Donald Trump was able to put up over the last twenty four hours have been pretty remarkable, adding to what he
experienced in twenty sixteen and twenty twenty. And it's not just the electoral college we're watching here, but the popular vote, which he is currently winning by roughly five million votes. He did not get the popular vote in the first two cycles.
He ran in defying most predictions that we described here on the air, talking to various pollsters who do this for a living confounding us to the point where it's now being called a red wave, or, as Romaine Bostik called it from Detroit, a red wake up call. Things went late into the night. You probably didn't get much sleep yourself. The whole nation is bleary eyed this morning. J. D. Vance got up to the podium while Donald Trump was delivering his victory speech last night in West Palm Beach.
Let's listen.
Well, mister President, I appreciate you allowing me to join you on this incredible journey. I thank you for the trust that you have placed in me, and I think that we just winn us the greatest political comeback in the history of the United States of America.
Joining us now for more our political panel, democratic strategist and partner at Rock Solutions Kristin Hahn, alongside Republican strategist and West Front strategies principle. Ashley Davis, thank you both for being with us on this day. After Ashley, just to begin with you, jd. Vance calls it the greatest political comeback in the history of the United States. And he is not alone in characterizing this in that way.
After a loss in twenty twenty After January sixth, twenty twenty one, Donald Trump is going to be the forty seventh president of the United States. What does it say to you?
He's also going to be a very decisive president of the United States. I mean, the win, which I think is probably good or bad, is good for the country in regards to there's no question about who won. And that's really not a political statement. I would say the same thing if Kamala would have won. The fact that it's not hanging on Chad's or anything else is a good sign. But yeah, it is a huge political comeback. I mean, who would have thought how many times was
he indicted? How many times has he been convicted? On thirty four and indicted more? Yeah, And so I mean just the fact that he was able to do this and come back. I actually think it shows one how he does talk and resonate with parts of this country that a lot of us don't talk to every day,
and also just how upset the country was. And I think that's what shows and I think that we a collective we probably need to take a look at the people that have spoken about how unhappy they are and want them change in our country.
Kristin Harne, a lot of Democrats are feeling bruised this day after. It's not just the presidency, it's Congress. You spent quite a good amount of time on Capitol Hill as a blue dog Democrat. How do you see this today?
I think there you've already seen kind of the blame game, starting the finger pointing.
I think I think, you.
Know, as Democrats, we need to take a look like what Ashley said, why were the people not happy? What are we talking to them about? How are we talking to them? And really think about that. You know, this automatic some of the talking points I've seen out there from some Democrats saying, you know, we just had didn't lean into the progressive the liberal side enough, I think is the wrong lesson to take from this. There were
no more votes to be be got from there. We need to think about how we are are listening and talking to the American people all across the country. I think there was a lot of fear mongering, you know. I think that there was a lot of misinformation out there, and I think it'll take us months, if not yours, to figure out what, you know, what we need to do, particularly heading into the midterms.
Well, and I wonder how you're reacting to the demographic breakdown we've seen an exit polse Kristin. It's looking like Kamala Harris, who would have been the first female president in the United States if she had one, is going to win fewer female vote votes than Joe Biden did in twenty twenty. For all of the talk about momentum among women, what does that say to you?
Well, I mean I think there's also like she had, you know, one of the shortest runs for the presidency, and I think that probably hampered her ability to really define herself beyond you know, Joe Biden. I think also, you know, we were fresh off of four years with President Trump and people were sick of it and they voted that way. So I think it's not necessarily her. I think it was you know, you look at the you know, what's happening at the time, and when it's happening.
And I unfortunately think that we're going to get two years with the mid terms and four years down the road, and people are going to be reminded of how exhausted they are with having to wake up and listen to President Trump every day.
See your thoughts on the gen battle. This had really devolved into a men versus women election, we were told, and a lot of Democrats are asking today, a lot of women are asking why is America not capable of getting its arms around this idea of electing a female president.
I wish I knew, because I mean, I obviously believe in that a lot. I actually think though that what people thought was going to get her across the finish line, though, was the abortion issue or the dods rolling. And I think what happened, and obviously there's going to be days to come which we can look at this data, but it looks like many women, even in the suburban areas, cared more about security, the border, the economy than they
even did kind of these rights. And also, I do believe the American people, as a pro choice Republican understand that now this is in the States, right, I mean, I don't think that people are The rhetoric that went around about the dab's decision, how no one's ever going to be able to have, you know, female rights, is just not correct, and so I think people aren't believing that message. I think the biggest, the biggest demographic that came out of yesterday is one in theory of color
voters voted for Trump. I mean, that's not that was high in two thousand and four when Bush one reelect, but it hasn't been that high since. And I think that that's pretty it's remarkable.
It's all remarkable.
We should remind our audience as well. You did support a woman for president. You were a Nicki Haley supporter at the beginning of this campaign. Is there a place for you in this party?
Listen? I don't.
I'm just like her. I mean, I'm a conservative. I believe in conservative autism in regards to financial conservative. I'm very socially liberal. But I do believe in Republican policies. And so at the end of the day, am I happy that there's a Republican Senate? Absolutely? Would I do. I not believe in some of Kamala Harris's policies, absolutely, but I do believe in a woman becoming president. Obviously that's not going to happen. But I at the end
of the day, I'm a Republican. I'm going to support Republicans well.
As Ashley raises the Senate, Kristen, we already know that the Senate has gone for the Democrats. It has been flipped. The question now is the margin, and the bigger question is the House. What races will you be watching that have yet to be called?
You know, I'm watching a lot of races where people are doing well. You know, Jim costin California always does well. You know Henry koyar one in Texas, which is great. You know, you look at people who are really strong, like Mary Peltola out in Alaska, who you know, Lisa Murkowski said she wanted her to be back in the House. So races like those, I think, you know, there are a number of them that were flipped last night. It'll be several days, if not weeks, before we know who
has control of the House. But I think at the end of the day, as a House person, you know those members and those candidates who really know their districts and really speak to the voter voters on a local level will be the ones who who ultimately pull out the win here. And for Democrats, obviously control the House is really important so that we don't have Donald Trump as president completely unchecked in his power.
You know what, the loudest question I'm hearing from Democrats today is Kristin Hahn, what would have happened if she picked Josh Shapiro.
I'm not sure would have made that much of a difference. Honestly, I think we had a really strong team and a strong vice presidential candidate and Tim Waltz, So, you know, I think that the you know, any conversations within my party about what if is not productive At this point. We need to all be sitting down at the table and being like, what happened here and what do we need to do differently?
Well, and then there's the question of what happens next Donald Trump and JD.
Vance.
We know Ashley, but who is likely to be in this cabinet? Is this transition gets underway.
I think you'll see a lot of governors. I mean, you'll see a lot of senators, especially if the Senate does end up being fifty four. Republicans say, obviously Cormick's very close to winning and you know, in Pennsylvania and maybe Nevada or maybe not. We'll see, but I think
that those are going to be easy to confirm. And I also think that it gives you a little bit of room to have a vacancy in regards to other votes if the Senators are going up for some sort of confirmation, I don't think if the numbers stay this close one way or the other. And going back to Kristen's comment, I think there's really we're down to like nine races in the House from what I understand about, you know what's going to happen, and I think no
matter what happens, it's going to be very close. But you can't take very many House members out of no matter, you know, if you're a Republican unless we're in the minority. I think you see at least a Phonica somewhere interesting.
She wants what you an ambassador?
That sounds right.
Nice to have you in New York today.
We're lucky.
Ashley Davis with us of course, and Kristen Hahn are paneled today on Balance of Power the day after the race. 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 Noontimeeastern at Bloomberg dot com