Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Affo card playing Android otto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Let's sit down to Washington, DC's talk a little bit of policy here, and we could do that with Nathan Dean. He's a Bloomberg Intelligence Senior policy analyst. Nathan, what's the feeling in DC as the rest of the country starts going to the polls here? Anybody any smart money leaning one way or the other? Or is it, as most folks suggest, really too close to call at this point.
So I think it's too close to call on the presidential race and then the House race. I think essentially I could think I can tell you who I think is going to win, but then I have to give you a five minute explanation, and if I do that, I'm not really explaining anything. But what we can say is is that we generally think the Republicans are going to take the Senate. Why this is a very difficult
race for the Democrats. They're defending twenty three out of the thirty four seats out there, Senator Joe Manchin is resigning. The Republicans are gonna most likely take bust Virginia. They could potentially take Montana as well. You know, Senator John Tester is not doing so well there in the polling wise, But why does that matter? What it means that if President Trump wins, a deregulatory effort can happen much quicker.
And if Kamala Harris wins, it means the Republicans can effectively block under jam up a lot of her nominees for their own regulatory efforts. But just on the main thing of who's gonna win the race, We're gonna have to wait until tonight.
What are the implications for investors here and for markets? You know, what kind of results could we be hearing in the next few days that would move the market that investors would need to know about.
Yeah, So we were trying to think of like the major catalysts of what happens if you get a Harris victory versus a Trump victory. The first one is tariff's I mean, we think that the tariffs are going to come no matter who wins the president next year. But is it a broad tarot tariff sixty percent on all goods coming from China or a very small subset. So once you decide, once we figure out who the president is, will know what the tariff outlook look likes for next year.
The other thing is investment banks. If Kamala Harris wins the Buzzle three end game, a rule that increases capital about nine percent for the banks, well must likely go forward. If President Trump wins, that's not gonna happen. The Inflation Reduction Act mostly cemented if Kamala Harris wins, could be tweaked. So if you have exposure to renewables and the renewables industry,
that's something to keep in mind. And then the last thing is is that if the Republicans have a great night and take the House, the Senate, and the presidency, then the opportunity for reconciliation for massive tax reform next year think multi trillion dollar tax reform at the tail end of twenty twenty five. That comes to play if the Republicans have a great night.
If President former President Trump were to win, what would he do on day one? Would he be a just doing tariffs across the board, because that is something that a president can do.
Yeah, so you know, President Trump, if you look at the executive orders now, our view is is that i'd say about eighty five percent of executive orders are symbolic in nature. It's the fancy way of the president picking up the phone and directing to his or her staff do something either legit slate route or the regular toy route. But the power of the presidency is more powerful in that other fifteen percent, and that's national security, foreign relations, tariffs,
and trade. Now, Congress is largely delegated tariffs to the president, and there's some thought out there that, you know, President Trump would need congressional authorization. Our view is is that there's a lot that he could do nilatterally, and so if President Trump comes in day one, expect those executive orders to come out. Now, when it comes to tariff, I think you would see the red line come across the Bloomberg terminal and say, you know, President Trump's signs
executive order on tariff. Within the language of that tariff executive order, though there'd be languages essentially saying this won't go into fruition for another two hundred seventy days or three hundred and sixty five days. Why, it's a negotiation tool, and presidents don't want to back themselves up into corners. They want the flexibility to see what the reciprocal tariff
would look like before it actually goes into fruition. So there's a little bit of headline risk there, but the ultimate impact of a tariff, if President Trump wins, would probably be in the second or third quarter of next year.
And Nathan, what are you going to be watching for policy wise with the l duck president if we do find out a winner, let's say this week or even next week.
Yeah, you know, it's hard to believe we're talking about lame duck, but Congress comes back next week. And so there are a couple things that the lobbyists around town are all love and see if they can get this attached, because remember we have a government funding fight coming up in December. Now, there's two things that we're really looking on.
First as stable coins.
Now, there's this idea that there's a stable coin bill that get passed during the lame duck. I may be a little bit out of consensus. I don't think it's going to happen. I think it's they're going to push the can to twenty twenty five because lame ducks are always optimistic from the lobbyist perspective, but when the reality hits and most people just want to go home because the election's over, they usually don't tend to have much
outs there. The other thing I would just note is Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois will most likely try to reattach his bill called the Credit Card Competition Act. If you've flown through La Guardia Newark, you may have seen the ads about these credit card This bill taking away credit card points associated with airlines and so for like that. Like this this would open up competition in terms of networks on credit cards. Again, some headline risk there. I
don't think it's going to happen though. I think again they'll get kicked to twenty twenty five, but certainly something we have to pay attention to.
All Right, Nathan, thank you so much. We appreciate it. Nathan Dean, he's a senior policy analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence. He's down there in Washington, DC. He and his Tim team, they really focus on policies coming out of Congress and which industries and then maybe down to the company levels which will be impacted. And that's the research that he and his team do, and it's widely valued by Bloomberg customers because we know many many industries are heavily regulated
and dependent upon government policy. So it's good to have Nathan Dean and his team down there in TC.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on applecar.
Play and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Let's get back to this election here. Henrietta Trez has been a valued a source for us all things politics here for a long time. We appreciate getting a few minutes or a time. She's managing partner and director of Economic policy at Vada Partners. Henrietta, we've got early votes. Is there anything we can glean from early voting? And if so, which states should we kind of look at?
Yeah, we do have early votes.
I think there's really only two states that I feel comfortable saying or giving us strong indications right now, and they're both very promising for Donald Trump. I think in
Nevada and in North Carolina, the early vote turnout. The get out the vote initiative that the Trump campaign has embraced this year, unlike the last cycle, is really for in person early voting, and both states have done that in droves, and we're seeing that sort of nationwide and all the early voting, a lot of rural Republican voters have turned out much larger numbers than we saw either
in twenty twenty two or in twenty twenty. So his supporters are definitely getting the email and the memo about getting out there early.
So does that change your forecast at all for who actually is going to win the electoral college? Because if I'm reading the notes, your most recent forecast was that president or Vice President Harris would actually win the electoral college.
That's right.
So the early vote is telling me that the electoral college map that I have passed out for each candidate is still holding strong and looks correct. So I expect Donald Trump to win Nevada. I expect Donald Trump to win North Carolina and Georgia. The two of the last two are pickups. Arizona, Georgia and North Nevada are all pickups for Donald Trump this year that I'm expecting.
And that's what early voting is showing. There's a lot of different opinion out there.
John Ralston, who is excellent in Nevada, is saying that sorry couple areas is going to win by zero point three percent in Nevada. And of course Democrats have eked out wins in the state of Nevada for the last two cycles, and that's based off of sort of the legacy if they Harry Reid machine, and Jackie Rosen continues to pull well ahead of her competitor in the state.
At the Senate level, what you're seeing in Nevada and Arizona is actually that fifteen percent of the Republican constituency in those two states are voting for the Democratic Senate candidate. So if there's crossover that early vote can't pick up. I don't know how you voted, I just know that
you did vote. If there's crossover amongst Republicans into the Harris camp, that is a that's going to be a surprise that is not registered either in the polls, which are finding everything sort of neck and neck, and it's not going to be something that we know from the early vote, because we don't know how you voted, so that could be a shift that we see on election night,
But my expectation that they both go for Trump. But overarchingly, I still anticipate that Harris will win Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania and that gets her two hundred and seventy Electoral College votes, and that's why my odds are sixty percent that.
She will win.
Interesting, Henriette, we had a poll come out in the last couple days from the state of Iowa that was surprising for a lot of people showing that Vice President Harris doing a leading in next which typically is a Republican state. What did you make of that poll in that What does that tell you?
You know, it really reinforces the story of this election cycle. There's been a tremendous amount of focus on the black and Latino youth vote, and specifically the youth mail vote, and how there's been a draw away from the Democratic Party and towards the Republican Party. What I think that whole conversation has missed is that the story of elections is really the suburbs. The suburbs vote the most, They are the arbiters of the election cycle. So in twenty sixteen,
they swung four points for Donald Trump. In twenty twenty, they swung two points for Joe Biden, and they decided the outcome of the election. Right now, in critical states like Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia suburbs are going strongly for Kamala Harris. And so the story of the Seltzer poll I thought was fascinating. The twenty three percent of the Iowa voters in the suburbs plus twenty three for Kamala Harris. That's an indicat that the suburb story is correct, and
I think we can translate that nationwide. I don't expect Tamala Hiris to win Iowa, but the story of the suburbs is what I really want to focus on when I see that poll and then transcribe to swing states.
How of each candidates kind of catered toward towards that suburban vote. Are there certain issues that you study that resonate more with the suburban voters that the candidates have been I guess trying to touch on democracy.
This concept of democracy being on the ballot is a really big deal in the suburbs. They think that that issue is critical and then beyond that you have abortion that Democrats try to hammer home, and on the right you have immigration.
It's really those top three issues.
The economy is important, but it's such a misleading or misguiding polling question these days because your view of the economy is mostly defined by whether you support Joe Biden or Donald Trump Biden's administration or Trump on the camp pay trail. So if you side with either of those two parties, that dictates your view of how the economy
is going. I think once now that inflation has been tamped down and gas prices are back well below their twenty twenty two levels and are down now to three dollars or less nationwide on average, it's an opportunity for the two campaigns to talk about other issues besides just the economy, and we see abortion, immigration leading.
And then democracy in these suburbs is really critical.
And we had a summer suggesting that we may not know the winner of the presidential race for days. Isn't that in and of itself a problem for the US should in our country, with our technology, be able to know almost in real time kind of how the voting's going. I just don't understand where it feels it feels like our system is so antiquated.
I completely agree, and I think it's a great point to make. Right now, Why can't we start counting ballots the second that they start coming in? You know, I think that's a little frustrating. So you have a state like pennsylvani where all these poll workers and they have so many this year that are you know, really doing the large work. They're you know, they're early, they're expanding voting hours, and they are you ready to put those ballots through the machine to have them read. We should
definitely be capable of starting that early. They had the opportunity in the last couple of years with all these different refinements in the ballot process and collecting and changing of laws like we've seen in Georgia, for example, they're going to start reporting out different county data at eight pm, which is going to be one of our first arbiters of how the night is going.
But I completely agree. I wish they could move this along.
Yeah.
Interesting, I'm sure some kid in garage that in Palalatha could come up the napp and like, you know, a day. Henrietta Trez, thank you so much for joining us. Henriette. It has been so helpful to us during this whole election process. She's a managing partner and director of Economic Policy and VATA Partners. She is down there in New Orleans, I believe Louisiana's where she's Basically.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence part Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Focarplay and enroud Otto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Damily Graffeo sitting in for Alex Steel on Pulse when you were live here in our Bloomberg Interactive Broker's studio. Complete coverage of this election throughout the day, markets, trading, hires, John is just reporting. Let's check in with Jennifer Lawless. She's a professor at the University of Virginia. Did you arrange this? Is this you're doing? This was a pleasant spri very good. Emily Graffeo was also a proud graduate of the University of Virginia down in Charlottesville. Jennifer, what
are you looking for today? What should we are our listeners, our viewers, what should they be paying attention to today?
Well, The most important thing is that every listener who hasn't already cast a ballot go out and vote. And looking at the length of those lines, just getting a sense of the enthusiasm at the polling places, I think will at least let people know whether this is going to be a high turnout election or not.
But we're really not going to know.
Anything until this evening, when the polls close and the early signs will be in North Carolina and Georgia.
What are we hearing so far? I guess how are you understanding the closing messages from both candidates? I know that Trump is set to speak at eleven am.
Perhaps it's uncertain, so we'll see.
So but what are we understanding right now? Professor Lawllace about the closing messages from both candidates.
Well, it seems to me that the closing messages for the Harris campaign are the messages that she's been conveying for the last ninety or one hundred days. She's been very disciplined and on script, and that's basically that it's time to turn a new page. If people want new leadership, if they want a new generation, if they want new policies. Kamala Harris is the way forward, and Donald Trump is basically trying to make the case that the Biden Harris
administration broke it and he can fix it. It's a challenge for him, obviously, both because he has a hard time stay on message, but also because he's been president already, so he's trying to portray himself as the change candidate and she's trying to portray him as the incumbent.
Jennifer, how long are we gonna have to wait, you believe for the presidential election to be called? I mean, this is going to be a dicey situation from what we understand because of some of the mail inboundings, and just because it's so close.
It's difficult to know. But if Harris performs well or wins in North Carolina or Georgia, it's hard to see a Trump victory, and then we would likely know early.
We would probably know by tomorrow.
If Donald Trump wins in North Carolina and Georgia, both of which are states that he's been actively campaigning in and Republicans typically win, then it could go on for a lot longer because we're going to have to wait for all of the counting in Pennsylvania and perhaps Arizona, both of which are notoriously slow and don't start counting until late.
You have written a number of books that have to do with gender and politics, and I'm wondering, when you look at this presidential race, to what extent has gender played a role? Have you been surprised? I guess maybe about the lack of gender roles. At least it seems like Vice President Harris has not played up as much that she is a woman running, and she has perhaps brought up other issues a little bit more. But I'm wondering what you think that's right.
Kamala Harris has not played into the breaking the glass ceiling. She would be the first woman in the White House narrative that we saw very prominently featured in the twenty sixteen campaign of Hillary Clinton. But gender is still very
very significant this selection cycle. Not only do we have a substantial gender gap where women are more likely than men to prefer Harris and men are significantly more likely than women to prefer Trump, but the issues on the agenda have also been speaking specifically to gendered roles in gendered concerns, and so the Harris campaign, for a example, has really been highlighting reproductive rights and freedom and abortion rights and what a Trump administration would mean for women's
bodily autonomy and the Trump administer The Trump campaign has basically seeded a lot of those female swing voters and has tried very very hard to motivate young men, especially those between the ages of eighteen and twenty nine, to come out and vote under this threat of their country
being taken away from them. So, even though the sex of the candidate hasn't been as prominently featured in the campaign narratives, the issues and the vuying for male versus female voters has been on high display.
Jennifer Below the presidential election down ballot, what are the key races for you?
The key Senate races to watch are John Tester in Montana. If he somehow manages to hold on, then it's going to be a very good night for the Democrats and Colin already vying against Ted Cruz in Texas. If already manages to knock out Ted Cruz, that would be the shocker of the night. It's likely that the it will go Republican, but there are a couple of indicators that could be harbingers of success for Democrats.
So what is the What does a professor of politics at the University of Virginia do an election night? Do you stay up all night and hope that a decision comes in or do you just go to sleep and know that this is going to take a while because I'm wondering, like what we should what we should all be doing?
Well, I committed to you guys for five ten am tomorrow morning, so a lot of sleep will not be had. But yeah, I mean it's basically the election day is where it all comes to an end. There's nothing to do anymore, there's nothing to watch, there are no events, there are no final you know, strategies to assess. This is it, and so once the returns start coming in, it's just a matter of watching and trying to analyze the results of the exit polls that are released and
getting a better sense of where the numbers are. But if we look back to twenty twenty, I don't think I slept for five days. The winner wasn't announced until Saturday. So it's just a matter of watching those ticking screens the same way that everybody else does and trying to figure out what's going on. But I would tell people that you know, if Harris doesn't win North Carolina or Georgia early, they can go to sleep because we're not going to know tonight.
All right, Jennifer, thank you so much for joining us. Jennifer Lawless, she's a professor at the University of Virginia. Joining us from Charlottesville via zoom.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on applecar.
Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business Act.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Yeah, Mylikafreo sitting in for Alex steel On Paul Sweeneyer live here from a Bloomberg Interactive Brokers studio in New York City to our world wide audience streaming live on YouTube as well. All right, Swing States, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Arizona, Nevada. Do we just look at the state or do you drill down even more to maybe local towns or local counties and to see how this thing is going to go. I have no idea what
our next guest does. David Paleologus, director of the Political Research Center at Suffolk University, joining us from Boston, mass via that zoom thing. David, again, we know the swing states. Do you go even more granular to look at certain parts of the states, certain towns? How do you do it?
Yeah, we do, and we've gone mainstream with the weather model of the bellweathers are areas that correctly predict where the statewide vote is going to go. I just tweeted a list in the swing states, so what counties or cities to take a look at. But the first three states that you mentioned, Paul, are really the ground zero Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. According to a lot of the aggregator models they have wascon they have Georgia, Arizona, and North Carolina
attacking toward Trump. So that puts a lot more pressure on those three Russ spelt states. And within those states, we're looking at specific counties, as.
You say, and what makes a county worthy of an extra eye. I know that you've written Northampton, Erie in Pennsylvania, Kent in Michigan, What specifically about those counties makes them worthy of watching so closely?
So it's a proprietary model, but Generally speaking, what we look for is, does the county flip when the state flips or vice versa from Democrat to Republican back to Democrat A and B. When it does flip, does the county vote close to as close to perfect accurately reflect what the actual percentages were when the flip happened. So it has to not only just flip. It can't flip sixty forty and it'll be a two percent flip on
the state. It has to be if it flips and it shows a candidate winning by three or four, the state should show the same. So, and there are a bunch of other indices that we use in our screening process.
But those counties, when you're watching tonight and you're hovering your mouse over the map and you're looking at your own sort of prediction of how the states are going to vote, Northampton and Erie have been remarkably prescient in terms of predicting the state wide outcomes in Pennsylvania, as has Kent and Door County in Michigan and Wisconsin, respectively.
David our last guest, had the prediction I guess Harris two and seventy electoral votes Trump two at sixty eight. Do you guys Suffolk have a similar type of prediction or you're none in that business.
So we don't model. We do poll and we give our information out to the public and it's consumed by aggregators like Nate Silver and five thirty eight and Tie Cook and Larry Sabateow and they take our information with others and they run their own models. But it's a really close race, you know. And I can tell you that just by virtue of polling some of these bell weather areas. And what I'll be looking at though, is
maybe a little bit different. I'm gonna be looking at New Hampshire first off, because we're gonna get New Hampshire numbers fairly quickly, and it's got an evenly balanced party affiliation. And in Biden one on New Hampshire in twenty twenty by seven and a half points. Kamala Harris wins by between six and nine points, no need to worry about
New Hampshire. But if she wins by twelve or ten in New Hampshire, that signals to me that independents who really make up the undecided, it's a swinging blue and you could see that reverberate across the country. If Harris only wins by one, two or three, will loses New Hampshire. I think the opposite could be to it. You could see Trump carrying in some of those other states. So I'm going to keep a little bit of an eye on New Hampshire and how those results are coming in.
And I've also listed a couple of the bellwether towns in New Hampshire. Hampton is one of them in Jaffrey, New Hampshire.
I know it's so hard to tell right now, but what is your sense for just how long the counting is going to take and how many days we'll have to wait to see when these results come out.
Maybe I'm just an optimist, but I think we're going to be pleasantly surprised. I think, you know, there's a lot of trusts in our national poll of local precinct warden. People have a lot of trust in their own local community's ability to process and count votes, and I think they don't want to lose that trust, and so I think they're taking great pains to try and improve the efficiency of their own operations. They improved a little bit in twenty twenty two. I think they'll do a little
bit better. I hope it doesn't carry on for days and weeks, and I think, you know, I think we're going to have at least due diligence on the part of the counting process as best we can. So I'm hopeful that it will only be a day tops or two, not weeks.
David, thank you so much for joining us. Appreciate getting your perspective. David Palio Logos, director of the Political Research Center at Suffolk University. Again, they're one of the sources for a lot of this polling data for the folks that are in the business of making predictions. So we'll
see how it goes. But again, the message has been very clear, too close to call here, so I'll be interested to see how the networks handle it this evening in terms of kind of what we've been you know, I kind of grew up with you kind of knew this stuff by nine or ten o'clock and networks were making the call, and I'm not sure we're in that environment this year.
It's so interesting to see just how carefully these pollsters and these as data scientists zoom in to counties. Yeah, it's just really incredible, and.
It's also incredible is I don't know. I have to see how accurate they are or not.
Coming forward, you're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on applecar.
Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station Just say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
It is Emily Grafoe sitting in for Alex Steel. I'm Paul Sweeney. You're live here in our Bloomberg Interactive Brooker Studio and our streaming live on YouTube as well as to check us out there at Bloomberg Podcast is where you can go search for us. You know, every cycle, every election cycle, seems to one of the key key issues is always it's the economy. You know, focus on the economy. Are you better off now than you were four years ago? And so on and so forth. Our
next guest thinks about that stuff as well. Christopher Smart, managing partner in our Growth group and former Special Assistant to the President for International Economics, join us from Boston, Massachusetts, via that Zoom thing. Christopher, how again too close to call? We get all that how are you kind of framing out this election and kind of the risk and opportunities just from an economic policy perspective.
Well, I think, as you were mentioning earlier, the market really does focus also, by the way, on the economics. And weirdly, as all of our political tools to predict the outcome of this election seem to be failing us today, the economic data seems like it's actually painting a pretty consistent picture.
Good growth, low.
Unemployment, inflation coming down. Rates will find out Thursday, but money likely to become cheaper, and that I think, more than anything, explains what's going on in.
The market overall.
I think what's also a little bit strange is that, you know, in one way, we don't know what's going to happen tomorrow or tonight, But in another way, neither outcome is going to be a huge surprise for the market, the way it was, for example, in twenty sixteen when President Trump first won against Hillary Clinton.
And so I guess, you know, with some.
Certainty about who the next president is going to be, we hope we find that out tonight tomorrow.
That should lead the market to rally a little bit.
But I'm not sure we could expect a big move one way or the other, except in some of these key so called Trump trades, either rising or falling depending on the outcome.
Christopher, to what extent do you think prediction markets and I guess the rise of betting on the outcome of the election have somehow changed this election versus what we have seen in prior races. What role have those prediction markets played here?
I think that's a great question, and I'm not sure I have a good answer yet. I mean, I think we need to sort of see these markets develop over a couple of cycles.
I'm not sure I believe you know that they are great predictors of the outcome.
I mean, you've seen actually them moving with the polls to some extent as President Trump's momentum seems to have flagged of light.
You've seen some of those things tighten.
You've seen the bitcoin trade come off except for today, you've seen the peso bounce a little bit as Vice President Harris's odds appear to be improving in the polls. So I think we'll be looking at those markets more closely in terms of how deep they are, who's participating, who's got the really big bets, on are they big enough to actually move those numbers? But I think they're kind of interesting, but maybe not gonna move a lot of money one way or the other.
Chris, I hear a lot about the Trump trade. Is that anything more than I do know? Long the dollar short bonds? Is that a reasonable way to think about or is a more nuanced than that?
I think that's very well, it's more nuanced.
And when you dig down into clean energy stocks versus oil stocks, when you look at, for example, retailers that are very sensitive to tariffs, they are they are the anti Trump trade versus banks that are probably less sensitive to tariffs and maybe hoping.
For some deregulation.
So within certain sectors, I think you get a differentiation, But I think overall there is a sense that a Trump presidency will, ironically for Republicans over the past number of years, be the less the less fiscal hawkish administration. Uh. And so that is a trade where you know, if he wins, the expectation is more inflation, a bigger budget deficit, maybe higher tariffs with I'm sure higher prices with tariffs,
and a crack down on immigration. That I think is what what captures it all in terms of what you're seeing in bond yields as well as maybe stock prices.
How much do you anticipate the f o MC meeting in the in the FED decision on Thursday to drive markets when it comes during you know, such a pivotal week for the future of the US presidency.
Well, I think a lot of us have forgotten that there was an f MC meeting this week. With all apologies to Jerum Powell, he may appreciate the fact that the spotlight.
Won't be so glaring on him on Thursday.
I think the FED has done an extraordinary job, through an election cycle, through a very partisan period in our in our in our history, to really focus on its own knitting, really focus on the data, really focus on, you know, when it feels it can.
Bring price interest rates down and.
Other than a few partisan voices on one side or the other, I think the markets don't believe that this is a partisan move on their part, and I think that's why they have, you know, really tried to make sure they are delivering that message.
And I think that's what most people believe.
All right, christerpher thank you so much. We appreciate that. Christopher Smart, he is a managing partner at Our Growth Group and a former Special Assistant to the President for International economics, joining us from Boston.
This is the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast, available on apples, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday, ten am to noon Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the iHeartRadio app tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal.