mark: i'm mark halperin. john: and i'm john heilemann. and "with all due respect" to the democratic candidates debating here tonight, you can run, but you can't hide. ♪ john: it's vegas, baby, vegas. good evening from the first democratic presidential debate. we are at the wynn hotel here in sin city. although you could call it spin city. this room is one of the main reasons. the press flies out around the country. it's the spin room, the spinderdome. we will be your spin buddies for the next hour as the candidate get ready to debate.

mark, the main event tonight is with national frontrunner hillary clinton and college campus frontrunner bernie sanders. one a household name for two decades, closer to three. the other, a socialist that does a monster impression. what will we look for in that cage match? marco: if hillary clinton makes a mistake, it will be a big deal. bernie sanders can get away with mistakes. if he is himself and is not nervous and is able to talk about policy positions that he wants, he is almost a lock to be a winner tonight. john: it would be good to show some humor and optimism, it would be good to show us a soft side. mark: maybe tell a story about a real person. john, yes, we have seen and heard him speak many times. very strong stuff, but sometimes hectoring. she has different challenges. mark: her biggest challenge to me regarding sanders is she will become a target when something that the moderatator or sanders says makes her calibrate her response. i think how she calibrates

coming back at sanders will tell the tale for a lot of how she is judged. john: yes, and i think one thing you want to look at, or at least one thing i will be looking at is the ways in which experience matters. she has done a lot of presidential debates, 25 debates and forums against obama. she was really good in those debates. she knows how to do those. she comes in with confidence. he has never done anything like this. mark: a raucous las vegas crowd. whose side will the crowd be on? i suspect the clinton people would have been smart and off. are the sanders people smart enough to get supporters in the cheering section? john: they have a little bit of the same challenge. she will tend to be programmatic. she will tend to be detailed. there is no doubt in any democratic voter's mind that hillary clinton is accomplished enough and substantive about being president. it is character stuff she has to get across. sanders has to get across the idea that he can get things done, that he can govern and get

these policy priorities to fruition. mark: it will be satisfying to see how much he smiles. she will use the word "listening" and the word "fighting" a lot more. but, again, i say there will be exchanges where neither of them really wants to win decisively. they want to get through it. john: i wonder if she will call him on the socialist thing. "are you really a socialist, or what does that mean?" mark: those are the front runners, the back runners are martin o'malley, jim webb, and lincoln chafee. john, from those three guys, what are you looking for? john: they are not likely to be the presidential scenario. mark: can you imagine if they ran against trump? what he would say? super low energy. superlow. john: they are almost missing persons on the campaign trail. martin o'malley is a wildcard. this is the first time he will have the chance to actually stand toe to toe with these two people who totally eclipsed him. one expected, clinton, one unexpected, sanders.

i think the big question is, does om malley go negative or not? mark: i hate to keep going back to moderators, but they are the timekeepers. do they give o'malley the same time as sanders and clinton, or give him roughly the same amount of time to talk as jim webb and lincoln chafee? and does he fight his way in? he does have something to say that is different. he is a younger guy. he has been a chief executive. he has things to say. he has been saying them on the campaign trail for months. this is a big audience. he has got a chance to say it. john: hillary clinton is still the dominant frontrunner, even with all the problems she has had. if i were martin o'malley, i would be trying to figure out how to get a contrast going with bernie sanders, whether it's generational, executive -- i believe the same things, but i can get them done. somehow he has to displace sanders as the alternative. i'm interested in seeing how those interactions go rather than o'malley's interactions with clinton. i think he will be pretty nice to her. mark: sanders is not super

specific programmatically. hillary clinton has put up specifics, but democrats have not figured out what it is about. o'malley, can heal the format of debate with short answers convince people that he has a plan that they find attractive? john: it's difficult to raise this. it is a tricky thing. gary hardin is good at it at raising the generational issue. it's one of o'malley's strongest cards. do you, in a new millennium, with a rising, different coalition, do you want a 70-year-old or a 75-year-old president at the head of your party? it's a good question. mark: i predict there will be limits to the debates of other candidates. we will see how jim webb and lincoln chafee do. john: ok. those of the five candidates on the debate stage tonight. it will be obvious looking at that stage that a couple people are missing. that's right, larry lessing not invited. also more notably, no joe biden.

mark: -- mark the vice president , has been watching at home whether he decides he will run. do you think at this moment, given everything going on in the world, he may have waited too long? mark: i think the bar is higher for him to get in and launch successfully. there was a lot more momentum behind him a few weeks ago. the new york times has always been influential in reflecting the conventional wisdom correctly in a piece that compared him to mayor cuomo. we had it in our focus groups. if you want to be president, why are you not in? if you are equivocating in october, how can you be competing in iowa and new hampshire in february? he is going to have to change scenarios and convince people he didn't dither. john: when i first reported that there was thinking in his world about pushing the deadline from october to november -- the thinking around him among the people advising him was, "let's

wait, hillary is in a freefall. this freefall is only going to continue. let's wait until after this debate. let's wait specifically until after the benghazi hearings." one of the biggest changes is that no one has remarked the extent to which the kevin mccarthy comments and the change in the benghazi issue has a hugely negative effect on joe biden. what could have been a disaster for her now increasingly looks like a triumph. that changes biden's calculations in terms of whether the nomination will come to him. mark: a lot of talk about biden. cnn made a show about having the extra podiums on standby. the democrats i talked to are not thirsting for it, they are not desperate to have him in this race. john: it is the funniest thing in the world that yesterday cnn , and others talk about, is biden going to come in the last minute? do you think there is any chance of he would arrive here? mark: he is not the king of ad hoc-ery.

it is silly. i will say this. he's dealing with a family look. situation. i am not criticizing for this. but the reality is he has left himself a steeper climb than he had a few weeks ago. john: the longer you wait, it changes your calculus. that has happened for him. mark: debates are fun to watch, and fun to cover, but they can also be kind of a mess. john, i think you know what i'm talking about. there is controversy over the democratic party in this debate. here's the vice chairman of the dnc on cnn, one of several interviews she has done challenging the dnc chairwoman, debbie wasserman schultz over her claim that she widely consulted with dnc before she decided to limit the debate process to 6, and only 6. >> the chairwoman has claimed a month ago that she had spoken and communicated and consulted with officers of the dnc about her decision to limit debate to 6 and to put this retribution policy in place, this exclusivity clause.

and that never occurred. i can tell you, speaking for myself that i did not find out , about her decision until after the fact. there was no consultation and no communication. mark: that exclusivity clause means not only are there six official debates, but if you participated in unofficial ones, you cannot be in the official one. john, republicans are gleeful. tell everybody about the reporting you have on bloomberg politics.com about this fight within the democratic party, particularly a lot of ire directed at the chairwoman. john: that story of mine will be up shortly, as soon as i finish the show. but the most important -- well, there are a number of important things. one is that on this particular dispute, chelsea gabbard versus debbie wasserman schultz, on all the reporting i have done, chelsea gabbard is speaking the truth. debbie wasserman schultz did not consult anybody apart from some political consultants and advisors. she did not to talk to any of the vice chairs. many of the vice chairs are furious over the fact that --

mark: there is no other conclusion you can reach than she did that to protect hillary clinton. john: she was a cochair of hillary's campaign. when there was a proposal early taken to the campaign that they might do eight debates, the clinton campaign was the only one that pushed back, saying they wanted fewer. mark: if they say they want 6, which is just enough, and all five people on the stage to keep her from facing off against a smaller group. john: and i will tell you what is also key. among those dnc chairs, some of whom are vocally outspokenly critical, like chelsea gabbard, and those who are not, who are still sitting on their anger about this -- what they see more problematic than the 6 is that only 4 are taking before the -- taking place before first vote in iowa. they don't even regard it as a first 6. the other two are general election. it's a sham of a mockery. mark: debbie wasserman schultz has done a lot of interviews today. she kept saying, i do not want

to talk about -- john: she has equivocated all over the place. mark: do you know what that job involves? john: process. mark: process. john: we did that might on the bell, i like that. there is some news in republican world. first of all jeb bush unveiled a , health care plan designed to repeal and replace obamacare. it would simplify the health care policy. it would offer income tax credits for catastrophic coverage and give states grants to finance healthcare for low income americans. what do you think about that, mark? mark: this is one the first details, and few others. john: the second has to do with carly fiorina. she announced that she has raised $6.8 million in the third quarter. that is not only hard money, but a little bit more hard money than current phenom marco rubio raised in the same quarter. the implications of that -- mark: i'm impressed she was able to build that quickly off the strong debate performance. let's see how she spends it and keeps it going. but no doubt that's a significant development. john: you can't say marco rubio is playing a hot hand without

saying that carly fiorina too is playing a hot hand. mark: and she was starting with more of a standing start. john: we are just getting started. we have got a huge lineup for you over about the next with the hour. greenbacks, maybe even some blackjack -- double down! we will be right back. ♪

john: what are the three things you're looking for in the democratic the base? go. >> i am looking for insight and wisdom. >> i'm interested to see if o'malley will hit clinton. >> does bernie sanders-- i will be interested. no offense to hair challenged people. john: that was a piece of our on the road democratic experts focus group leading up to this

biggest debate. it was like "the hangover," except with no bengal tiger. we will have more of those men weigh in, but now we are joined by our colleague and fellow haircare product consumer, phil mattingly, well as the nostradamus of nevada politics, john ralston. good to see both of you. age before beauty. give us a sense -- the caucus state matters a lot. to the democratic caucus. give us a sense of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the sanders and clinton organizations. >> there is essentially no sanders organization. bernie sanders held his first organizational meeting in nevada just over the weekend. they had a few hundred people to talk about it. he has had not any presence here before that. hillary clinton has had an infrastructure set up for months. she hired all the people who help to beat her when obama was in the caucus in 2008, and people who helped her in that caucus. so she has latino leaders,

latino voters obviously important here. so she has him far out. she the only one with any organization. mark: what would you guess the floor and ceiling is on the size of the electorate when we get to next year -- what is the most that will turn up, what is the fewest? do that think there is going to be much interest, right now, mark. it's going to be tough to tell. certainly not what it was when 30,000 i think? , mark: might be lower. jon: potentially lower. it's still october. we look at this in these silos by the day. by the time that comes around, there could be excitement. i'm expected to be lower than 2008. john: phil, let me ask you. you spend most of your time in d.c., the capital of the u.s. there's a certain amount of chaos going on in the other parties to creep in?

campaignhink if her had the way, everything she said would be in contrast to the 15 people currently in the race, whether paul ryan or the caucus. i don't think it seeps in much tonight. they start to come in more, but what happens next week is when that goes full throttle, when hillary clinton starts testifying in the select committee on benghazi. that becomes front and center. and her team, if she gets through tonight ok and i get to , that moment, that can be a turnaround moment for her because of the contrast. mark: fingertip feel. i don't get the sense in talking to the representatives of the campaign that it's tension city here. it seems much more relaxed than a normal debate. is that -- phil: yeah, i think that is right. there is a recognition that they will need to, not attack one another, but make sure differences in policy are laid out. but they are not probing major attack lines. it doesn't seem like everyone is nervous and expecting a knockout fight. yes what you said earlier is , true -- hillary clinton doesn't want to make any mistakes tonight. bernie sanders has to present himself as presidential, but he

can still make a few mistakes. and i think if sanders comes after her at all on not being consistent, on ppp or anything else, she has to show some kind of humor. she has to be disarming. by the way, mark, real quickly. with republicans it was actually , 120,000 turnout, and much bigger number. i think it will be much lower than that. john: jon, do you think hillary clinton can tap on the keynote speakers tonight? jon: i do not think there is any chance at all. there has been some polling in nevada that shows he is very weak across the country with minority voters. she has very smart people tapping into that. the culinary union is the key organizer for the latino vote. she has gone out of her way to appeal to them, after going after them in 2008 when they endorsed obama. mark: sanders is iowa and new hampshire. is this a firewall that is impregnable, or can the unions start to have second thoughts?

or the members were with bernie? i don't think the membership or leadership of the culinary union is in love with hillary clinton, but she set up nevada to be a firewall with her organization. a long time ago she believed that she might have problems in new hampshire and wanted to make sure that she won nevada. john: i would ask you what you suspected after this event, that's martin o'malley, but we don't have time. thank you for being here. also, thanks, jon ralston. we will have more debate talk and more vegas after these words from our sponsors. ♪

♪ mark: who has more at stake in this debate? >> hillary because he is the front runner. >> it's the most difficult for her. >> every word that she utters is going to be instantly fact checked. >> the three guys are 1%. this is their last and only chance. mark: high-stakes indeed in las vegas, the most exciting thing in the country, except l.a., new

york, and chicago. also boston. boston is a nice place, indeed but this is a great place. , we are joined from our guest at washington. and with us is our colleague. mr. president, thank you for joining us. are you a capitalist? >> i'm sorry? mark: are you a capitalist? [laughter] >> no, i'm a trade unionist, quite frankly. mark: so you reject the label capitalist for yourself, just like bernie sanders does? [laughter] mark: is that a laugh that it's a yes, or a laugh that it's a no? >> it's a laugh because it's a silly question. mark: some people say his answer might be harmful to him. >> i am sure in some segments, it well, and in other segments,

not. other people are more concerned about the issues that he's addressing and how he is addressing them. look, american workers and the american public are angry because they think politicians and leaders in this country are not listening to them. he has been listening to them and he is talking about what they want to hear. speaking to the issues i think is going to make for a good debate tonight. a great conversation about the economy. and it's going to get people a lot of support in the process. john: mr. president, some months ago you talked about how important it was for hillary clinton to eventually have a position on tpp, and that it would matter in terms of her ability to court labor support. now that she has a position, where the political implications of that position are? >> i think it's helpful to her to come out against tpp. she looked at it, as we have becauseshe looked at it, as we have looked at it, and it doesn't meet the needs of the american economy, the country,

or the american workers. it's a bad agreement and she came out against it. workers that identify with that are going to thank her for it. >> when you are deciding which candidate you are going to choose, how important is electability to you? : here's the process we are using to get to that candidate, or candidates, perhaps. we have asked all our affiliated unions to go back to their entire membership, give them the facts on what each one of those candidates stand for, issue by issue. then have a genuine conversation and see what our membership has to say. then it will come forward. i think electability is what we make it. if you start talking to the people's issues, things they want to hear, if they are convinced that you're going to rewrite the rules to the economy to help working families, they are not only going to give you your vote, they are going to give an active support.

and they can elect people that way. rumka, you are a nonpartisan organization and have plenty of members who are democrats, some republican, some neither. if you were to appraise the republican field, which 1-2 candidates do you think are most in line with the house of labor? most what? are mark: most in line with of labor agenda with you and your members care about? mr. trumka: this field of candidates -- it has been difficult to find any of this candidates that really align with the best interests of working families. we invited to come to our executive council talk to us about issues. all of them declined except one, mike huckabee. he came and gave his position, some of which were in line with ours, most of which were not. thank youmr. trumka,

for joining us. we hope you enjoy the debate tonight. we enjoyed having you with us. and melinda, thank you for joining in. thank you, we will be back with more hedge bets after this. ♪

♪ john: hey, mark. hey, mark. what do you call a quick shot of las vegas boulevard? a striptease. speaking of teases, here is what our roving democratic panel said when we asked them what advice they would give to martin o'malley. >> give it your best shot because you are in extreme jeopardy. >> distinguish yourself somehow, someway, between the two

front-runners. >> you have got to start attacking the other candidates and drawing contrasts. >> you have got nothing to lose nothing to lose. , john: we will be right back.

♪ john: secretary clinton, if she makes one error, that will be a huge story. >> she is in a position to have a pretty good lead. it has always been the case. >> she can't go into the debate with that mindset. to the extent she has not done as well as people hoped, it is the result of excessive caution. mark: mistake or no mistake, there was one big winner tonight, that is you. because we are on for an extra half hour for the debate and we begin in right now as democrats in las vegas get ready to tear each other apart or maybe play nice with each other. who knows? we will see. we are here with former los angeles mayor and hillary clinton mega supporter antonio