Bloomberg Talks
00:02:04 · Libby Cantrill
[00:02:04] S1: Yeah, but by the way, they still need to have a bipartisan vote in the Senate, so I think you could get Democrats on board, too, because I think Democrats are going to want to clear the decks here. I mean, this is such a rebuke. This is not— 2006, which is what we were saying to our clients in the last couple of weeks, that this could look like a wave that you saw in 2006 where Democrats took back both the House and the Senate. This is 1974. Yeah. This is a total referendum against the executive branch. And so you're going to have, I mean, the fact that you were talking about potentially 40 to 50 seats flipping for Democrats, I mean, Democrats are winning in places that they did not even know that they were competitive. They look like they're going to win in Nevada, Congressional District 2. There's never been a Democrat there, right? That was a district created in, like, 45 years ago. There's never been a Democrat represented. So, again, they are winning in places that they didn't even know that they were competitive. So they are going to want to, I think, clear the decks to the extent that they can to try to then really— focus on the things that they were actually elected to do, which is to try to do something on affordability and then also to try to provide some oversight to the executive branch. OK, so let's go to the, you know, given this mandate that the Democratic Party has received here, what can they realistically do? Yeah, so there are obviously still constraints. President Trump is still in the White House. They're going to have big majorities, but nothing close to a veto-proof majority, so of course they can't overturn a veto. So there is going to be some sort of constraint. However, with 55 potentially in the Senate, I mean, you're going to have a Democratic Party that is going to have to have— they' re going to have to show— the voters that they can also govern. So this can't just be an opposition party. They can't just be doing oversight and impeachment of Pete Hegseth or what have you. They're going to have to show that they can govern. And I think that means that there is some window for a deal. The one thing I think that's really important to point out here for the markets is this is going to be a more moderate group of Democrats than we have seen for a long time. There are going to be more blue dogs.
00:04:05 · Libby Cantrill, Tom
This is like, be still, my deficit hawk heart. Because they're winning in places that are, again, sort of more traditionally Republican. [00:04:12] S0: So I've got to rip up the script. How did Jeffries and Schumer bring this more moderate Democrat party into the stereotype of the liberal left Democrats? What a thread and needle exercise. Yeah. [00:04:27] S1: Well, again, I think this is what the voters really did. And, you know, I think to Schumer's great credit in particular. you know, love Schumer, hate Schumer, however you feel about him or dislike him or what have you as the future majority leader again. I mean, he really focused on candidate quality and he focused on candidate quality that didn't pass the purity test at the national level, but actually were bespoke to their local dynamics. [00:04:52] S0: And I'm going to do a shout out. Bret Baier last night on Fox as they were picking up the disastrous pieces. He was brilliant on this and Brett really focused on candidate quality. [00:05:04] S1: I mean, look at what's happening in Mississippi, right? You know, Talarico in Texas, Annie Andrews in South Carolina. These are not folks who are necessarily running on the national Democratic platform. They're running on a very localized platform. [00:05:15] S0: I'm so intimidated by Libby Cantrill. I have to take notes. [00:05:19] S1: Yeah, I know.
00:05:19 · Libby Cantrill, Tom
[00:05:19] S1: Yeah, I know. [00:05:19] S0: That bill's on my lap. Okay. I didn't know this. A veto proof is both houses. Yes. $ 290 million. House members, which is way away from 258 or whatever. Yeah. And in the Senate, 67 senators. Yeah. So the president's got a rock solid veto ban. [00:05:39] S1: Yes, except I will say on maybe a couple of issues. One is on tariffs on Canada. That has a huge I mean, look what happened right in the upper Midwest, like massive rebuke on the tariff agenda or what have you. I could see that actually getting to that veto-proof majority. Also, Russia sanctions. That is something that really upset Republicans on the Hill, also Democrats. I could see that actually getting to a veto-proof majority. But outside of that, I mean, it's going to have to require both compromise with the president, but also compromise with the Republicans. Because remember, Tom, you also need a filibuster-proof majority for most legislation. The filibuster's not going anywhere. That means Democrats need to actually compromise with Republicans on some things. So there's definitely going to be a constraint. But I would be very surprised if Democrats don't pivot to compromising with the president, at least on some things. [00:06:29] S0: Did you see Taylor Swift at the game when the Broncos? [00:06:33] S1: Can we talk about that game? God, that game was ugly. You know what? I really do appreciate that you bring up. The fact that the Broncos record belies how ugly these games have been. But you know what? We will take it. A W is a W in the words of my 15-year-old.
00:06:33 · Libby Cantrill, Tom
[00:06:33] S1: Can we talk about that game? God, that game was ugly. You know what? I really do appreciate that you bring up. The fact that the Broncos record belies how ugly these games have been. But you know what? We will take it. A W is a W in the words of my 15-year-old. [00:06:47] S0: We're migrating from Broncos type to Kansas City Chiefs. Joining us now in Portland, Libby Cantrill. Thank you so much. [00:06:53] S1: Thanks so much. [00:06:53] S0: Brilliant with Simcoe.