>> i am john heilemann. i am mark halperin. "with all due respect" to twitter, we heart you. ♪ on our off-off election-year show tonight, obama lashes out. but first, synchronize watches now. about a year from this first tuesday of november, we'll be picking our next resident. will it be hillary, donald trump, or maybe marco rubio? speaking of which, anything that

goes up must come under the microscope. as he is criticized for his senate attendance record, today, marco rubio delayed and scaled back a fund-raising trip to manhattan so he could cast a procedural vote in washington on an agriculture bill related to water quality. that is a move that could play well in the farmlands of iowa but also means fewer dollars for a candidate who did not post a very impressive cash call last quarter. everyone is focused on how he is doing in state and national polls. a little better, to be sure, but what other factors will determine if rubio will continue his right to rise? john: the money thing is obviously huge. how many people will follow paul singer's lead among the donor class on the eastern seaboard? as you point out, rubio was talked up a lot, and it was talked of a fair amount coming out of that debate, but the dollar did not follow. if he is going to fight off some of these big boys who still have

a lot of money and a super pac, he is going to need some demo -- money. mark: singer was the big get, but so far, no bush defections to rubio, and not a lot of new people except for singer signing up, and rubio, so far, despite doing well in the immediate aftermath of the debate -- his people do not expect him to be a great grassroots fundraiser. raising those small dollars like carson and sanders have -- that's a big deal. i do not see why he isn't. john: take away all the various connotations of saying he's the obama of 2016. justin this one respect. he's the generational candidate, the one who talks about the sharing economy, uber. why is that guy not a great internet fundraiser? mark: he has not done particularly well in the $2700 checks. the other variable is the senate thing. he has to go back to the votes. they are saying he's going to

choose between what he needs to go back for, if it's important, but clearly, he is feeling at least some heat about this, and he cannot control mitch mcconnell. he can't control the senate schedule. this could create problems as he tries to be both a senator who does not miss votes and a candidate. john: the last thing, looking at crowd size, it is often overstated as a metric, but donald trump can fill up a stadium or ben carson gets large crowds who come out to see him everywhere. who has some kind of spark in the establishment bracket? are we going to see that with rubio? mark: the thing is, he's got to get the virtuous cycle going. whole numbers up, -- paul l numbers go up better coverage, more money , coming in, and he does not have the virtuous cycle going yet. john: now, we're going to talk about and un-virtuous part of

the cycle. donald trump has apparently been to dabble intime writing a campaign book. trump's tome, "crippled america: how to make america great again," he talked about the aforementioned marco rubio. he called him a lightweight who sweated too much, but today, he got a lot more specific and a lot more pointed, zeroing in on something that trump knows just a wee bit about -- personal finances. marco rubio describes his personal finances as discredited. trump: marco rubio's personal finances are discredited? all you have to do is look at his credit cards. he is a disaster with his credit cards. i love florida. i'm in florida all the time, and for years, i've been hearing that his credit cards are a disaster.

i would think when you take a look at it, you will find that, but his credit card debt and his problems with credit cards and what he did when he was running the party apparatus with credit cards i've been hearing that for , years. >> would you trust him to run the country finances or your finances? trump: he has a very bad record of finances, if you look at what happened with his houses -- he certainly lives above his means. there's no question about that. john: trump also took aim at one of rubio's major donors, paul singer. trump: ultimately, i think marco will be hurt very badly. you have to see where mr. singer is coming from, and when you see where he's coming from, i think people are going to say, "whoa, we didn't know that." >> what specifically did you mean? trunk: a lot of controversy. >> like what areas?

trump: we'll see. i will talk to you. john: donald trump is not the first person to question marco rubio's finances. the new york times did that a while back. he would not be the last, either, i would wager, so how vulnerable do you think rubio is on that issue? mark: we discussed shooting and missing, rubio can say at a -- say to the base that this is all a liberal attack. many people around jeb bush and donald trump think in the end, rubio is going to have to run the gauntlet on this issue at least one more time and there will be a deeper dive into personal finances. it will depend on how you can handle it. bill clinton showed you can survive anything if you handle it well. john: i'm not sure marco rubio is yet in the bill clinton category. mike murphy, who has done more negative ads than any strategist or advertising maker we know you , know he's got whatever it is on marco rubio mike murphy has

, got it. he has not wanted to go negative so far at this early stage, but i cannot believe there will not be a lot of heavyweight negative advertising coming out of right to rise directly on this issue. mark: i will predict based on the past of other candidates he is going to face, if he continues to rise, some issue that none of us have ever heard of in the national media, national politics, and he's going to have to face new facta and he is going to have to answer it and i will be curious , to see if his team is ready for it because they were not particularly ready in the first round. john: i just imagine now that "the miami herald," other papers in florida, that is a swamp politics situation down there. there will be stories. mark: it appears as if the rebel alliance has fallen apart. some of the candidates including john kasich, carly fiorina, and others who have not said so

public yet, refusing to sign a demand -- tor to send to sponsors of network debates. fox business is hosting the debate next week and has sent out a criteria process to get on the stage in milwaukee, you have to reach 2.5% and an average of some polls -- they have not said which once nationally. that could boot some candidates at past debates into the undercard debate. if we do see a slimmed down debate where two or three candidates fall often we get down to seven. john: the candidate to get kicked off, they would be the losers. i think winners will be potentially -- again, double-edged sword. been carson talks about how he wants more time to talk, more time to elaborate. that this rapidfire debate has not worked to his advantage, he believes. i do not know if he has a lot to say, but if he is there with six people, we will hear more from

ben carson. mark: do the math, drop one guy off, the time spreads out pretty evenly. trump said the people at 1% should get out of the race. that wouldn't solve the problem of 10 people on the debate stage. it will be interesting to see if it is smaller if people step up , more. one of the big dynamics from the last debate is they learned if they do not try to but in, they do not get talk time, but putting in -- butting in does not hit their personality. fewer candidates make that calculus a little bit easier. i think it will help jeb bush and suspect him feel less off his game. john: the other big loser i think would be chris christie. a guy who is starting to get a little momentum if he ends up , off the main debate stage, that would cut all the oxygen off. he would be doomed. up next we have polls, the , president, and our powwow with ted cruz. we'll be back in exactly 60 seconds. ♪

♪ john: there are two big mega polls out today. nbc news, "wall street journal" national poll shows ben carson leading the republican field, up seven points from two weeks ago. donald trump is second with 23%. marco rubio is in third. both are down slightly. on the democratic side, hillary clinton has extended her lead nationally and has double bernie sanders' support across the country. the real news is in new hampshire where a poll shows clinton leading bernie sanders for the first time in the granite state since this summer.

bunch of numbers. what interests you most? mark: if hillary clinton can come back in new hampshire, obviously, she could end democratic race in february if she could win new hampshire. second is trump dismissed last week's poll that showed carson ahead, but now, he has to consider that maybe he is not the national front runner. we will see going forward, but that has a big implication for what he might do. john: it is a real industry-standard poll. having carson in that spot really does -- it makes trump wonder not just if he is the wonder if he but will have to start taking carson on, something he has not done so are. i have always thought that the famous home state advantage in new hampshire was overplayed, given the history of the state. i think hillary clinton could win that state if she stays on this role. mark: a lot of polls, people still think he is the best. they think he would not be the

most dignified president but think he would be the best on the economy, most likely to win, etc. i think trump would do himself some good if he could get closer to carson on favorable/unfavorable. john: the guy who has most of the attributes is jeb bush and yet he lagging in the polls. mark: listen to this perfectly timed laser shot barack obama aimed at republicans while raising money for the dnc. president obama: have you noticed that every one of these candidates say, "obama is weak, putin is kicking sand in his face. when i talked to putin, he's going to straighten out," and

then, it turns out they cannot handle a bunch of cnbc moderators? [laughter] [applause] mark: he also pushed back on republican candidates who have been using his presidency as a punching bag. president obama: according to them, everything was really good in 2008 -- [laughter] -- when we were going through the worst economic crisis in our lifetimes. unemployed and uninsured rates were up and we were hopelessly addicted to foreign oil and bin laden was still on the loose. this apparently was the golden age that i messed up. mark: those soundbites are a reminder that this president is still very much a political force even though he will not be on the ballot. how potent a weapon can he be until the election?

john: whatever you want to say about barack obama's governance, as a political performer, he is better than anybody running for president in the republican or democratic party right now, and in a race that will matter in terms of getting turnout up, that guy is still really popular and really good at that. mark: just has a level of performance skill that swamps anybody and clearly will have his heart into getting a democrat to succeed him. i will tell you, mitt romney is being talked about more and more in elite for circles as the guy who could end of the nominee and win a general election against hillary clinton. do not be surprised if in coming weeks you will see mitt romney out there trying to match barack obama as a surrogate. john: his political skill was always right up there with barack obama. that is a really even match if we get to see that. mark: mitt romney pulling right now -- pulling right now -- polling right now better than almost anybody in the republican party. we'll be right back. ♪

♪ mark: senator ted cruz got high marks and justifiably so for his appeal for more substantive policy questions at the last debate. i caught up with him in iowa this weekend and we spent time talking about one of the walkie -- wonkiest things in american politics -- tax policy. take your best shot. explain simply what your plan would do. senator cruz: the current tax plan is a complete mess. there are more words in it than in the bible. it is filled with more loopholes and special-interest carveouts. people are that up with it and the abuse of an out-of-control irs that has been used to target

political speech. i think we need fundamental reform. i'm campaigning on what i call the simple flat tax. it means for every individual, it's a simple flat tax rate of 10% that applies to everyone. that means every one of us can fill out our taxes on a postcard. after that, we can abolish the irs as we know it, and it altogether -- end it altogether. what is that mean for a family of four? for family of four, the first $1000 you earn, you pay nothing. mark: family of four, $36,000, no tax of any kind? senator cruz: not only no income tax, but we abolish the payroll tax for working men and women. for many americans, it's the biggest tax they pay. we take that to zero. mark: those go to retirement programs. how do you make of that revenue ? senator cruz: in addition to the

flat 10% tax for individuals, we put in place a 16% business tax. on businesses we eliminate the , corporate income tax and the obamacare taxes. that flat business tax applies to everyone. the virtue of that is it ends the discrimination in the tax code. right now, you have giant corporations with armies of accountants who sometimes pay little to no taxes or get refunds. with the 16% flat tax, everyone pays the same so that the small businesses who are getting hammered under our current tax code pay the exact name rate that giant operations do. it is fair and even an uniform -- and uniform for everyone, and it generates the revenue. this program gets the article revenue that the current program does, but it gets there in a much fairer way. mark: family of four making $36,000, they pay nothing.

does any entity, individual, or business pay more? senator cruz: i know that every income sees a real cut in taxes, from the poorest to the richest, and every single income sees a double-digit increase of at least 14% increase in after-tax income. if you are a single mom making $40,000 a year, a 14% increase in your after-tax income is an additional $5,600 in your pocket for you to spend, and the virtues of this plan, the nonpartisan tax foundation has scored everybody's tax plan, and it concluded of the 10 candidates on that stage, the best plan is my 4.9 million simple flat tax. wages for everyone

at least 14%, wages going up, capital investment going up, and it has a dramatic impact on economic growth. growth is the key to turning around the challenges we have. mark: i do not get to talk to you about making up lost revenue. you are choosing to keep the major deductions in place for home mortgage, or charitable -- what is the logic of keeping those? the virtue of the flat tax is to get rid of the the base. senator cruz: we preserve the charitable tax deduction. we preserve the home mortgage reduction, capped at $500,000 in principle. we do not have that deduction. the purpose was really twofold , number one, when we sat down to design this, it was annexed as the objective of mine that i wanted everyone to see increases in after-tax income, so that was a component in making those decisions. but secondly you need a plan

, that is political salable. there are tremendous constituencies, very focused on those exemptions. with respect to the charitable exemption, i think it has a huge public policy benefit in that the more you have churches and charities and private organizations caring for the needy, the less government has to step in and do it, and i think churches and charities are much more effective, so preserving the charitable tax reduction is important. let me make another point that is significant. flat tax of 16 percent is what is called border adjustment. that means that for any manufacturer in this country who is exporting, they do not pay the 16% tax, which means suddenly american exports are markedly more competitive -- american crops, american products are markedly more competitive because they do not pay the 16% tax, which means our sales all over the world will go up. now the flip side of that is every import pays the 16% business flat tax, so that is

essentially a new tax on imports of 16%. it is the same tax being paid by american producers, so it has a level playing field. mark: how much revenue would that bring in? senator cruz: the impact altogether at the end of the day after 10 years to decrease aggregate revenue by about $770 billion. i think that underestimates it because the modeling does not capture, for example, foreign companies moving to america and bringing jobs here because it would be much more attractive to create a business here. democrats talk a lot about corporate inversions, and the reason companies are fleeing america and going to foreign countries is we have created a tax environment and a regulatory environment that is so inhospitable that companies and jobs are fleeing. if we enact the cruz simple tax plan, the result will be other countries and 4-8 years will be complaining about corporate

inversions because their company will be fleeing their countries, coming to america and the booming growth -- let me give you an analogy. under obama from 2008 to the present, our economy has grown on average 1.2% a year. if we do not turn that around, we cannot all any of those problems. when jfk ran for president, he campaigned on 5% economic growth, and he enacted tax cuts and regulatory reform, policies the modern democratic party has abandoned. it used to be jfk and jfk democrats understood that tax reform produces jobs and economic growth and we saw 5% economic growth. we can do that again with real leadership. that's what the cruz simple flat tax is all about. mark: the politics of tax reform are so complicated. he talked about his tax plan in iowa. it's hard to do in an interview. it is hard to do it on the stump when you're trying to fire up a crowd. do you think any of those who

have specific tax plans can get political advantage out of it ? john: i think the main place you get political advantage is with elites. rubio has gotten some advantage. >> the wall street editorial page hates it. john: well, that's one thing. he has a cheering section for that, saying it is pro-family, pro-working class. the biggest problem that you raised -- that looks to me like a giant budget buster, that flat tax plan. mark: depends on how you scored. it is not as big as, say, trump's. up next, we put bloomberg contributor sam greenberg in the hot seat over his book. ♪ the only way to get better is to challenge yourself,

and that's what we're doing at xfinity. we are challenging ourselves to improve every aspect of your experience. and this includes our commitment to being on time. every time. that's why if we're ever late for an appointment, we'll credit your account $20.

it's our promise to you. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. ♪ mark: greenberg, where are you? there's going to be a whole

amount which we did jointly. it's going to show extraordinary changes on favorability. it shows us with a net positive favorable, about 10 points or -- more favorable, bush more negative, net negative. that represents good six-point change or more. obviously, we are doing something right. [applause] john: that was a classic clip from the classic 1993 clinton campaign documentary, the war room. joining us now, the man you just saw, democratic pollster and author of the new book "america ascendant." great to see you here. as a way into the topic, which is this book, what has changed in america politically and electorally, since 1992? sam: absolutely everything. everything. the democratic party was dealing with old industrial party and

old industrial order. here we are dealing with revolutions that are changing the country. big, huge revolutions. i argue in the book that we are going to make america dynamic, ascendant economically and culturally, but it is producing disruptive changes to america, the economy, the way of life, conflict between millenials and baby boomers. all of that, big issues to be dealt with. we are pointing to the future. john: bill clinton -- there was a lot of change going on in 1992. as you will recall, bill clinton and al gore were generationally in tune. they were generally in tune with the changes that were happening, globalization, information revolution, the new economy -- they talked about that a lot. the changes happening now -- is hillary clinton as well in tune with the changes you are describing as her husband was? stan: if you look at her candidacy, her pillars that she

has laid out, i'm actually quite surprised on how quickly she has stepped into this kind of perspective about what is happening in the country and about the future. mark: she stopped talking about the four pillars, but maybe she will come back to them. stan: there has been a few distractions. mark: you are brimming with trump-ian optimism, but as you said, there has been a lot of negative stuff. the right track-wrong track number -- the trends you are citing -- which once have to kick and more for the majority of americans to say we are on the right track? stan: i think we are talking about historic changes. we have to go through some really disruptive changes. i don't think what we are looking at is linear. i'm talking about revolutions that are changing, this new american majority that we are looking at electorally but it's

, really a cultural majority, dominant values that will ultimately dominate politics -- mark: are we five years away, 7, 20? so next year? stan: if we have gone from 51% of the electorate being these new groups, racial minorities, single women, millenials, they will be 63% in this election next year. mark: that's a lot of change. it does not mean people will be happy. stan: happy comes when leaders of the country finally say, "we have big, new problems -- wage stagnation" -- barack obama has addressed big problems, but i've been pretty clear and a little critical that he has not educated the country to the kind of structural problems we currently face. john: one of the things about the rise of the coalition of the ascendants, what is now the democratic coalition -- one of the things that has happened is

an argument in the party about the white working class, which used to be a really important part of the new deal coalition. are you now in the camp of those who say democrats can afford to write off the white working-class? or do you still think it is important to argue for them? stan: i do write about it in this book, which i'm sure you will want to read. what i argue is we have massive change. we tend to think of the white working class as coming out of industrialized occupations, blue-collar, more male. there is a white working class that is really struggling and racing problems, but they are more in sales and service jobs, more women than men. we have to recognize it's not the only -- the old white working class. it's the new white working class. john: i think the data bears it out that the barack obama did not perform particularly well with the white working-class in

his election/reelection. how does hillary clinton stand relative to that challenge? stan: president obama has been silent on these issues. look he has been busy. dealing with huge foreign-policy issues, universal health care. i think he will be an historic president judged positively, but on the question of structural economic changes and not just economic, social changes, kids being raised by a single parent working women, 2/3 of households , have a woman as a breadwinner or co-breadwinner, huge changes. there's been no policies to address this. they have not been the center of the agenda, but it will get the center if you look at any of the democratic candidates. that is the agenda they are addressing. mark: you have done a lot of work around the world. are we unique, or is every

industrialized democracy facing these problems? stan: i think we are unique. >> why? stan: in the book, you will see. we just have this unique combination where technology gets centered, where education and research is centered, where energy is ascendant in terms of multiple types of energy, immigration, probably more than anything. the growth of the millenial's. we have a young population, which is not true anyplace else. then combine that with the diversity of the country. and the ability to have a framework for turning that diversity into a common america. i think that's where republicans are most misaligned with what is happening. immigration is the biggest piece. mark: except for your hope and believe that there will be a new democratic president and whoever that is will focus on these

issues, it is still not clear what is giving you this optimism. stan: first of all, i'm looking at a country that genuinely is economically dynamic and culturally very unique. look at what's happened with migration anywhere else in the world, and certainly in europe. one in five migrants in the world are in the u.s., but we have a framework for immigration migrants becoming part of a u.s. multicultural american identity. we are almost alone with that kind of identity which makes it possible to benefit from immigration, but i'm looking at political change -- not political change. i'm looking at reform. look at what has happened in cities and states. there is a lot going on. connecticut i always view as a model. mark: most people i know who live in connecticut think it is the most economically

dysfunctional state in the country. stan: we had industrial revolution that made america ascendant but had huge problems, began with reforms that the local and state level. >> what is the reform in connecticut you are talking about. stan: a rise in minimum wage, paid sick days, paid leave, childcare, universal health care, all of those things aren't -- are part of making work pay in this modern economy. john: i think we have deeply acknowledge that you are a bone-deep democratic partisan. i'm going to ask you now to put aside your partisanship. i know you think the republican party is deeply out of alignment with the rising american majority and the ascendant america you describe in the book. what are some hopeful signs that republicans might get their act together in a way that would be compatible with your analysis,

either something a candidate has said that you can praise, a development that has happened in the party that you can say that republicans seem to get it -- give me one thing like that without trashing the gop. stan: i'm not trashing the gop. what i'm saying is what's happening now is given the fact that republicans have mobilized -- it's not just that we have these trends. they have mobilized the fight and polarized the country to do it and therefore alienated themselves. also, they have created a strong tea party, which i believe will go to trump, and social conservatives, from which i think you will have a cruz emerge. >> give me one thing. stan i think it will be like : 1984. when we look after 1984, the democrats ran with their mainstream candidate. they got wiped out in a landslide.

reformn have the hard democrats bringing in the independents. for me, this is not linear. i think republicans will play a big part of the change in the future coming from the reaction to an election -- mark: we have less than a minute, but republicans are so horrible and out of touch, they control the house the senate. more governorships, dominating state legislatures. they must be doing something right. stan: when you get done reading the book, you will see. this is the last chapter of their battle. that is why they have been able to raise turnouts, nationalize every election, but i think we will look act on that time -- it's not going to continue. we will have a shattering election where these factions will, i think, become a battle over the future of the party.

>> i think it is awesome where you had the opportunity to point to one place where republicans get it and you could not even find one but you think a will get it at some point in the future. stanley greenberg, thank you so much. the book again is "america ascendant." after the break we'll be right , back with the best obama and trump impressions you will ever see from a single human you have never seen. ♪

♪ mark: donald trump's new book is out today. it's called "crippled america," and he was autographing copies, talking to voters, and he was just donald being donald. pretty much all presidential

candidates have books and book signings, but this one is a little bit different, a little bit more huge. it was not at a barnes & noble. it was at the skyscraper in manhattan bearing his name. it was preceded by a long press conference with reporters from around the world. what are the top three biggest threats to your candidacy now? trump: i don't see threats. whatever it is i have to do. who knows? you are in a crazy world of politics. people change their minds. i'm going to make america great again. nobody else is going to be able to do that. mark: first fans in line got there at 4:00 a.m. >> it will be worth it. i want to let him know how much i support him and let him know that college students out there do support him. >> come on, he's really entertaining. he is super smart.

he built this huge business. >> he's a businessman and he's all for the people. mark: he called us over when he heard a story he wanted to share with the world. >> i'm 45 years old. i've never voted in an election in my entire life. i've never cared. i've never paid attention. i know about pop culture. i don't know anything about politics. i'm finally paying attention. i finally want to vote. mark: one fan, a standup comic, showed his love and affection for trump in a special way. we asked him to show us some of his act. pretty good obama. does he do a trump? trump: very good. very good. >> frankly, we're going to make america great again. trump: that's very good. come here. come here.

that's better than the pros. he is a pro. mark: that guy is a pretty good mimic. john: we ought to hire that guy. mark: long press conference, took questions, signed books, but i have to say that he does have -- like a lot of candidates, he does have fans who really like him. to me, being a happy warrior is a great thing for a candidate. the best thing for him about this book tour is he has not come in contact with that many voters like this. he is doing a law of retail with them today. withing a lot of retail them today. john: i think one of the strange discontinuities is that he is the happy warrior in terms of his temperament and goes out and frolics and rolics. granted, there's the subtitle, how to make america great again, but i always think at some point the basic pessimism he has about

where the country is right now -- he does not say that america is the greatest country in the world. he says that we are in the toilet. i wonder if you can win the nomination with a fundamentally pessimistic take on america. mark: if a democratic presidential candidate published announcer: -- mark: if a democratic presidential candidate published a book called "crippled america" -- i think republicans get away with more negative rhetoric. john: the optimistic candidate almost always ends up prevailing in both parties. optimism is the coin of the round -- realm. interesting trump has done so well. mark: i suspect like most politicians, trump will buy some copies for himself. it will be fascinating to see how well it sells. some politicians published books and go higher up on the rankings. it will be interesting to see if his book goes number one or

high. john: he has had number one best sellers in the past. mark: he has. we will see. john: i wonder if after the bible and "art of the deal" this will be his third favorite deal. mark: he said they took all pictures of him smiling but decided in the end if your title is "crippled america," you cannot use a smiling photo. i think they would've thought that through before they take the title. john: i don't think it is the most flattering photo. mark: our 24-hour campaign forecast in just 60 seconds after this word from our sponsors. ♪

♪ john: it's another busy day out there and election land, so let's go live to our campaign forecast center where our chief meteorologist is standing by. what do you see on the doppler for tomorrow? alex: i would not take anything for granted -- granite state, that is. all fronts will be colliding in new hampshire tomorrow. we have an inflow of trump and o'malley. also, an early arrival at a senior center in lebanon that will move to dartmouth and nashua for town halls, but keep your eye on manchester. a classic political nor'easter, a high and a low within four miles of each other. jeb starting his morning with early education reform at the founders academy and rubio teaming up with the chamber of commerce for a life of the party event.

that low energy we mentioned yesterday is heading right into some perspiration. that is your 24 hour campaign forecast. remember, just like a poncho. we have got you covered. back to you. john: what i liked best was mitt romney's face in the sun, a source of all light and warmth. mark: i do think anybody think that at this point either of those guys could win iowa. there will be a lot of national and new hampshire press. they are a big deal. john: i continue to think the answer to the perennial question win in can marco rubio the first four, is not south carolina where some people touted him earlier. i think new hampshire is the place where if he gets hot, that is the place --

mark: third in iowa, first in new hampshire is i think the rubio path. john: not that he was gaining ground there, but he could. mark: that is his theoretical path. the other thing is, again as we , get closer to february, you will increasingly see candidates asking if they want to go to georgia or worry about a march contest. some cycles -- there's doubt about whether those two states will be a big deal. those states are a huge deal, and they will only get bigger. john: there's no doubt about it. i think a lot of people will be making the binary choice. we will see more candidates this time in the in either place all their chips or most of their chips in iowa or new hampshire. rather than trying to play evenly on both. mark: in both sides, i still see even play. even someone like chris christie or john kasich, they will hedge one way or the other, but there will still be a lot of december hedging of bets by almost

everybody. mike huckabee is not playing in new hampshire. a lot of candidates are playing in both. john: i think by the time we get kasich, chrishn christie will be living in new , hampshire. mark: the top establishment candidate in iowa, and right now, any of them could be, it is something to fight for. john: that is it for weather. we'll be right back. ♪

♪ mark: we're on the telly for an hour twice a day, starting at 5:00 eastern and 8:00 eastern,

but we are live 24/7 always at bloomberg.com/politics. you can check out our campaign tracker. john: also, you have to see john mccormick's story about evangelical ground in iowa, and the most important battle over legalizing weed in ohio. mark, do you think it's going to happen? >> i have no idea. john fingers crossed. : we will show you the conversation with james carville and a conversation on a documentary about richard holbrook. until then, sayonara. ♪

rishaad: it is wednesday, the fourth of november. this is "trending business". i am rishaad salamat. ♪ rishaad: chicago, tokyo, take -- here's what were looking at. shares taking off as investors flocked to the $12 billion offering. aiming to double incomes and gdp, president xi jinping will

accept slower growth, but not too slow. informal economy, saying it creates more opportunities than the official sector. follow me on twitter. let's take a look at the trading day. the jakarta session just getting underway. broader markets showing substantial gains. things, also helping playing catch-up, doing the heavy lifting. the services cmi number. texas, 4789,t west have a look at the hang seng index. just below