>> i am campbell brown. >> i am mark halperin. ♪ >> on the show tonight, hillary clinton, chris christie, and editor-in-chief mike pence, but first, the richest appraisers in america, the koch brothers, have determined they need to shell out with their allies about $900 million for the 2016 election, and they are prepared to pay in cash money. our bloomberg politics campaign finance reporter is in our washington bureau, and she joins us now. julie no doubt, i think they

can raise the $900 million. what do they plan to spend it on? >> i think that if 2012 is a guide, they will save those resources and pump them directly into the general elections. they do not typically dabble in republican presidential primary politics. they save their resources, and they will deploy them against hillary clinton or whoever is the democratic nominee. >> what about democrats? how are they reacting to it? do they think they have to raise the same amount of money? can they raise the same amount of money? >> that's a great question. the democrats i have talked to today and tonight are reacting with a mix of fear and glee. glee because there's no better way to raise money than talk about other peoples money. we've already seen five or six pitches today from democratic groups mentioning the koch brothers, the $900 million figure, trying to raise grassroots money to compete. >> thank you so much. appreciate it.

so campbell, democrats think they can match it may be. how big a deal is this? there is a lot of money in campaign politics. is that close to $1 billion not going to make a difference? >> is going to be huge, but julie's point was right -- will they or won't they play in the primary? i cannot imagine they would because the network is pretty diverse. everyone i talked to really love rubio coming out of it, but a lot of people coming out of the network, jeb folks, so they will probably hold their fire and a aim it at hillary clinton. >> the organization is lots of different groups. the money gets spread out. i think the brothers -- i think david and charles are going to find a candidate -- maybe different candidates -- but i think they will want to play in the primary. you cannot have a smart general election strategy unless you end up with the nominee you think is going to win the general

election and you like. i think that they spend more than $1 billion overall. >> also where they will be key and very much needed is there are senate races on the republican side where there are a lot of vulnerable candidates. if they got into those races early on when nobody else is really paying attention, they will be extremely vulnerable this time around. >> one big question people have not focused on enough is who is going to go after hillary clinton early? while the republicans fight amongst each other for the republican presidential nomination? is someone going to make a great negative tv ad to keep her growing in strength? if she's not being criticized by democrats or even if she is, if there's no one going at her on the right, she can build up her favorables before any republican candidate can turn on her.

>> why would they do that? >> i'm wondering if they spent close to $1 billion, how much of it will be spent not waiting for the general election, but basically saying they will go after hillary clinton. someone could go on the air now without much money. they could make her weak in iowa. they could even go on the air attacking her on the left in iowa to try to make her more vulnerable. >> remember when a problem that was for romney in 2012 during those few months when he was off the air, when they did not have any money to spend, and no one was essentially playing that role. >> that was in that intermediate period. i'm talking about going on the air now, attacking her from the left and making her vulnerable to a challenge from a bernie sanders. why not? >> the potential to backfire. >> we'll see. >> what does hillary want, speaking of hillary, but these days, people are asking what does hillary need. the daily beast says she needs more advisors who are not white men. politico says she needs a better attitude towards media.

mark, whether she actually need? -- mark, what does she actually need. >> she'll have plenty of nonwhite male advisors, and she has to deal with the media better than last time. she needs to have a better understanding of a message on the economy than she has got an is and in public, and she needs to take her authentic self which does exist, and display it every time she is in public. she has got to be just let it loose in public. >> your think the relationship with the media matters? she hates the press. >> it matters a ton, but john podesta, who was going to help pick her communications director, is going to pick a better relations, and i predict she is going to have to have off the record sessions with leading political reporters the way mitt romney did last time and some of the others have done. just say she's one of the most famous people in the world but i was sit with you and talk with you and when she does that, she is pretty good. >> you will still get a call threatening your children when you write about her, but the

jennifer will call you and apologize. i think her biggest challenge right now is the enthusiasm issue, the energy issue. look at what we are talking about more than anything else -- the republican primary. there are a lot of people running. it's a lot more interesting. she does not appear to have a challenger who really matters at this stage of the game. for her, when you are starting off with the enthusiasm deficit, you could have a situation more like obama coming out of 2008 where whoever the republican nominee is, because he has gotten so much attention. >> she could get that enthusiasm if she has a message on the economy, and as i said before, if she can be authentic. people, women, democrats, the whole democratic coalition -- they are ready to be energized about her -- particularly if republicans go after her. it is so obvious -- if she can show her true self, her chances of winning are much better, and stop looking, calculating

political, and hiding. , we never see her. >> are you even seeing an inkling of that? she is still being so cautious. >> i said she needs it. i did not say she's got it. >> we have breaking news. according to reports coming out of indiana, the governor is awesome. multiple sources have confirmed his awesomeness, and we are told that just moments ago, the governor emerged room a burning building having saved not one adorable puppy but two adorable puppies. mark, my question for you -- mike pence -- great governor or the greatest governor ever? >> what you are talking about is governor pence's office announced they were going to have some government employees putting out news reports. there are questions of are these just normal press releases, but a lot of journalists in indiana are saying this is the government getting involved in producing journalism. >> what do you think? >> this white house does stuff like that. they put out videos, go on social media. it is a slippery slope, but if you are putting out things that are meant to look like journalism and giving them away

to news organizations which might run them, i think it crosses a line, and i think governor pence realizes that. that's why he clarified it. >> i think it is the future, and i think your opinion of it is totally irrelevant because it is what it is. it is happening. >> you cannot use government resources to put out new news stories. that's what is happening in china. >> they are already doing it. it's just packaging. they are taking news releases now and turning them into stories. >> i guarantee you, there will always be some of that, but you know when it crosses the line. when they make a try to seem like journalism and not just like a press release. >> but it's different now. social media and technology have given them distribution channels that did not this before. they don't need you. they don't need this show. >> the press and the public has to say this is too much, it crosses the line. you can put out a press release, but if they are writing profiles of administration staffers or other things that could look like journalism, no way.

it crosses the line. >> here is where it gets interesting. look and see how these presidential candidates take that same idea. i bet that you will see them basically developing their own bloomberg politics, every one of them. they will have their own cable channels before this thing is over. if hillary clinton will not do any media with anybody except some friendly person, you will not run it? >> it's going to be a tough choice. what i care about is they still have to give access to real journalists. that's where it becomes totally dangerous to me. where they say that we have already put out our story. >> i think we will get less access than ever before. >> now, our speed round, our tuesday theme is do they really need it? rupert murdoch tweeted that mitt romney had his chance, 2012, and lacked a vision for the country. "the new york times" now says that romney cannot please rupert. my question campbell, does romney really need rupert to run and win? >> it would help. "the wall street journal" editorial page matters. foxnews matters. you don't think they matter? >> they do matter, but he does

not need them because they get inside his head and make him crazy. he should forget talk news and forget "the wall street journal journal" will never have them. he should move on. does not need rupert. chris christie tentative in iowa on saturday, but in the past 24 snowy hours, back to his bold self. >> i think this is great for him. he is in a hugely crowded field. it's a way for him to stand out. there are some people running that have not done much for the last few years, and he gets to remind everybody he has a day job, and when things are going back at his day job, he is actually pretty good at it. >> wrong. it's a crutch. this gives him a false sense of acting commanding. he needs to be commanding if he is going to run for president and do well. he needs to be commanding without a storm. he's got to create his own weather. this is like giving him a false sense that he is back. final question -- scott walker just formed a group for his

presidential efforts. does this guy really also need a super pack pac? >> all these guys need something because they are all running and they need the resources to start hiring people, and they do not want to make an official because reporters start covering the -- >> brilliant to not do a super pac. if you do that, people expect you to give money to candidates. it's too, located at a waste of time, and sometimes you spend so much money not giving to candidates. all he needs is to hire staff and travel around the country. 527 can handle that. smart move, scott walker. coming up, our old friend bernie sanders. last time he was on this program, he did an impression of george steinbrenner. what would he do next? ♪

>> our guest tonight has been a monster, owner of the new york yankees, and possible presidential candidate, all on this show.

senator bernie sanders of vermont, thank you for coming back. we want to talk to you about the others cope, hillary clinton and football, but first the trillion-dollar infrastructure plan. you have five years to create millions of good-paying jobs. what would be different for america if your plan were approved and signed into law? >> just stop and think, if -- in 50 states in this country, we were rebuilding crumbling roads, bridges, water systems, wastewater plants, airports rails, levies, dams, we would make america more efficient, productive, and safer. so when people went over a bridge, they would not end up in the water, but would get to the other side. equally important, we can create at a time when real unemployment is over 11% -- we can create an estimated 13 million decent-paying jobs, and that is exactly what we have to do. this bill accomplishes two goals -- it addresses the fact that we have neglected our

infrastructure, which gets worse every year. second of all, it creates jobs when we desperately -- desperately need to create decent-paying jobs. >> bring this home for people. you talked about safety and the potential for someone to be driving on a bridge and it collapses. give us specific examples. name one or two projects where if they do not get addressed very soon that people are going to die, that there is a real safety issue. >> we have i think one out of nine bridges in america in disrepair. nobody would be shocked to find that next week, next month a bridge collapse similar to minneapolis. those things happen. >> are there specific ones? >> i don't have a list of all the bridges that are in disrepair, but everybody, every state commissioner knows which roads are in desperate need. i can tell you there are many bridges throughout the country where they say people cannot use those bridges. cars cannot go over those bridges. but it's not just bridges that are going to collapse.

we are wasting tens of billions of dollars every year when people are in a car and go over a pothole -- happened to me, maybe it will happen to you -- and you end up paying hundreds of dollars in repairs. we are spending huge sums of money. when people are waiting in traffic jams, polluting the air rather than getting to work. at all of that stuff up, it's tens of billions of dollars every year. i am a former mayor, and i can tell you absolutely roads and bridges do not get better by ignoring them. we have to invest. now is the time to do it. let's put people to work. >> the koch brothers announced yesterday that they plan to spend close to $1 billion. i know you're not a fan of secret money or big money in politics, but whoever your party nominates, should your party cost rich donors unilaterally disarm or contribute as much as it takes to keep pace with the koch brothers?

>> with all due respect, i don't think that is the right question. the right question is should we overturn citizens united. >> with all due respect, that will not happen between now and the 2016 elections, so what should well the members of the democratic party do? should they contribute hundreds of millions? >> you cannot disarm unilaterally here, but i think when you take a deep breath and think about how the koch brothers are prepared to put together a political organization which in all likelihood would be more powerful than either republican or democratic parties, that is not democracy. that is oligarchy. that is a handful of billionaires -- >> >> i hear you, senator. i just want to pin you down on this one point. sometimes you don't like my questions. you said not unilaterally disarm. you want wealthy progressives to contribute and keep pace with the koch brothers -- >> no, i don't want it. you are asking, you are trying -- you are trying to trap me.

the koch brothers are spending $900 billion. what should the opposition to the koch brothers do? should they say, no problem we don't like the super packs? i think that is produced to be. the real issue is that we have to end an absurdity where one family can spend that kind of money. that is oligarchy, and it is destroying american democracy. >> we are almost out of time. let me quickly ask you about secretary clinton, who has been very cautious in preparing for a presidential run that we all assume is coming and has not taken positions on things like the keystone pipeline. is that frustrating for you? do you want to see her be much more clear that she has been about these issues? >> nope not frustrating to me at all. i am against the keystone pipeline. i think when scientists tell us that climate change is a huge crisis for this planet, we have to move away from fossil fuel and into sustainable energy. >> do you think she ought to be clear about her position? >> you can ask her.

that is her position. she has to deal with that, not me. >> can you help us book or on her on the show? just kidding. i love when you laugh. senator, you are in new england are. new england of the patriots. tom brady -- telling the truth not telling the truth? >> new england will win the super bowl. that's what i will tell you. >> come on now. what do you think? >> is this one of the important issues facing our society today? >> every time you come in the show, we do some important issues and some humanizing. we want people to get to know you. >> the koch brothers and infrastructure. count me in as a strong tom brady fan. i think he is a great quarterback, and i think he will do well sunday. i think new england will win. >> nonanswer on that. senator, let's close and talk a little bit about where you stand in your deliberations about if should run for president. what have you heard lately that encourages you that it would be a good idea for you to run? >> we got a lot of support. we have thousands of people who have contacted us who want to

participate in the campaign. when we go to iowa, we get really good turnout. really good support. >> any specific conversations you've had lately that have encouraged you? >> a lot of conversations that have encouraged me. but what discourages me is just the issue you talked about. taking on people who have unlimited sums of money, and when you are prepared to run against the billionaire class and the koch brothers and wall street, can you get the financial support that you need to run a winning campaign? can you put together the millions of people you need in an unprecedented grassroots effort? those are the issues we are dealing with now. >> who is your favorite billionaire in america? >> i think warren buffett has said some decent things. when you have a billionaire who talks about raising taxes on the rich, i think he deserves some credit. >> i'm not trying to coach your answers, but when you are on this show, you should say you

michael bloomberg i like a lot but buffett is a good answer as , well. as always, we appreciate you making the time. the infrastructure project is one you will continue to talk about, and we will follow mostly if you can win over your colleagues. thanks very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> in a minute, an apology from the most powerful people in america, the nation's meteorologist. we'll be right back. ♪

>> the predictions were wild, and the result was mild. we did not get a blizzard in new york city, and the day of reckoning has arrived for the people with the best job in the country -- able to say whatever they want while being accountable to no one, meteorologists. today, they apologized for doing such a bad job, and to us, it was really emotional. >> my deepest apologies to many

key decision-makers and so many members of the general public. >> it's not nearly as bad as they thought here in midtown manhattan. >> you were working off the same information we were working off. >> you made a lot of tough decisions expecting us to get it right, and we didn't. >> once again, i'm sorry. >> look, we are not going to hype what is happening here. >> but not that bad. >> but his caption is he wanted more, and he is a little disappointed. >> if the forecast has to be wrong, i would rather it be overestimated, but i'm sorry it ended up this way. >> put simply, we got about half as much as what a lot of the projections had been. >> the euro model, the most reliable of them all has failed. will the city see a foot of snow?

probably, but all of us have failed to an extent. >> even looking behind me now, i see taxis going up and down fifth avenue. >> the weather forecasters do the best they can. i do not criticize weather forecasters. i learn. >> still, blame is on us as meteorologists. it cannot be placed anywhere else. >> it is a difficult day for us anytime a forecast does not work out. >> sad, sad day. will be right back. ♪

>> there's latebreaking news about former texas governor rick perry. a state judge denied his motion to dismiss the abuse of power charges against him.

as of now, it looks like rick perry's ethics violation case may go to trial. >> is this a big deal? >> if he gets off eventually, it could help him because it's a great rallying cry, but it will eat up time. he will have to prepare for the case. as much as i think the charges are absurd, i don't rule out that he could be convicted. >> wow. >> no republican wants to sit before an austin jury. >> no there you go. , in the meantime, today was super bowl media day, not a time to talk about serious things like domestic violence and cheating, but it's time to sing. >> [singing katy perry's "roar"] that wasn't bad. >> if i were the kind of got to make that keep your day job joke i would. i'm not wearing my iowa state gloves tomorrow, so enjoy them

today. up next, "taking stock," and on the radio, bloomberg law, but for now, we thank you. sayonara. ♪

>> hello, i'm pimm fox and this is what i am taking stock of this tuesday, january 27, 2015. apple posts blockbuster earnings. shares are rising after reporting a first-quarter profit of $18 billion. apple iphone sales topped 74 million units. the performance surpassed analyst estimates. yahoo! shares are rising on the after-hours trade. the company announced a tax free spin off of its stake in alibaba, putting them into a newly registered firm called spinco. at&t top profit and sales estimates, adding more customers than expected. caterpillar's disappointing