mark: i'm mark halperin. john: and i john heilemann. and with all due respect to monopoly, that's not how the real world works. mark: but it is how presidential politics work which is why sometimes you have to take a chance. happy veterans day, sports fans. tonight, rubio passes go, cruz collects $200. but first, the electricity in the waterworks.

it has been 24 hours since they exited stage right at the milwaukee theater. how they do? superduper well, according to some sources. >> we have had three strong debates. do you think this was your best? >> more good reviews for you last night. >> this was a good, substantive debate. >> i thought it was great. i thought it was a terrific debate. >> i feel great. >> i feel good about it. >> people say i won it but i think i did well. mark: if you're dizzy, it might be because of the postdebate spin, although this time we kind of believe it. in your official record of the debate, you scored everyone between a b- and b+. so much of the bell curve. what do you think? has there been a major fallout? mark: the big thing now is, based on their performance, we now have the big four. trump and carson are the front

runners numerically, and cruz an d rubio, who have dominated the last two debates and have rising constituencies and increasingly clear path to the nomination. that big four emerges, and anyone out wide that was probably bush, kasich, and christie will have to fight their way in. john: i agree. we had the big four coming in, at one of the questions was what apple carts might get upset. almost every element of conflict and clash that anyone predicted -- none of them materialized, partly because of the way the business folks conducted the debate. and one of the things that i took away is that ben carson, for all the problems he had going into this debate, and i made much of it, he managed to skate through this thing last night. i thought before going into the debate that these problems might keep going.

after last night i was worried they might fade away. mark: i told him so. the other thing that relates to my first takeaway -- i used to think that two of the establishment guys could emerge to be finalists. i now think the big for me ur they become so entrenched that there is only room for one. they could be that none of those other three guys get any oxygen, but at this point, you have got to think about how you emerge amongst that group of three. john: and i will build on that by saying i agree, but i will go further. on the basis just of the debate performance, not what's going on, just on performance, the only one who can claw his way in his chris christie. i saw nothing from jeb bush -- mark: so preminger. -- so premature. john: i stipulated on the basis

of the performance, and it is hard to claw your way in. you need some big moments. right now, kasich was very poor. bush was better than he was but not fantastic. christie still has within him the ability to create a real moment. we saw it last night. mark: one of the big argument that emerged last night from the establishment candidate was about electability. chris christie, john kasey kahne in jeb bush made that case -- that they know the way to win, they know the way to beat hillary clinton, and the key is electability. >> i'll tell you what i'll bring to the table. the fact that i have one in a blue state. i won an estate that has 750,000 more democrats than republicans. >> when the fall comes and we run against hillary, which will be a disaster if she got elected -- i have 216-year-old girls and i want this country to be strong. we make promises we can't keep under the bright light of the fall, we will have trouble.

>> 12 million illegal immigrants, send them back. 500,000 a month -- that is not possible. it's not embracing american values. it would tear communities apart. it would send a signal that we are not the kind of country that i know america is. even having this conversation sends a powerful signal. they are doing high-fives and the clinton campaign when they hear this. that is the problem with this. we have to win the presidency, and the way you win the presidency is the practical plan. john: we will get to the question of high-fives in a minute. is this a electability argument a strong one for these three guys, who all believe in their hearts and had that they are more electable than the big four? mark: no. i think electability is a big argument in every election if you want to vote for a winner, but in this republican party with the mood they have, they

don't see those electability arguments, which a lot of arguments are why we aren't making arguments of principle, why we are not standing up for what their publican party should stand up for. those sound to me, and to a lot of republican years, like moderates trying to make excuses. mark: and we have seen that every four years and it wins. cup located for christie now, because he can talk about his election between the new jersey economy and the fact that he is head of a democratic state, suggesting he may have appeared before a grand jury -- he has got a tall case to make. kasich and bush can make electability arguments, and there are voters -- if the big four have trouble -- every one of them has older ability. republicans do not want to lose to hillary. john: the other thing that undercuts it is that the guy who

was writing the electability train without talking about it is marco rubio. it is hard for any of those guys -- you see what i am saying. between the years, the hispanic origins -- those three guys have a hard time making a case that they are more electable than marco rubio. mark: bush and kasich and christie -- just like john kerry did. he was given up for dead in 2004 and made the argument and got the nomination. heard jeb bush claim that everyone at the clinton campaign were high-fiving watching the republican debate. instante to provide an back-check was the secretary. "we actually are doing high-fives right now." mark, my question to you, do you think those people in brooklyn were high-fiving? and if they were, were they right to be high-fiving? mark: there was a lot of rhetoric, and in the

campaign more broadly, that is hurting them, and the democrats don't have to soak it. it is all just out there. aboutspute in my sources, whether they fear rubio. james carble thinks he is the only republican who could be here. -- i know a lot of people in the clinton wrote think you would not be hard to beat. john: they were high-fiving literally in brooklyn. high-fives were exchanged. and you are right -- on immigration, on taxes, on a variety of issues -- they feel like they are seeing this dynamic where mainstream candidates -- jeb bush among them -- being dragged to the right in a place where they don't want to be. it is 2012 all over again and they point to his comments about the dream act. mark: and his position on abortion. one of the electability arguments jeb bush wants to make is rubio opposes abortion. 0 issue.a 9019

the clinton people can do what george w. bush did, what obama did -- eliminate the republicans, and clinton can win no matter what. when we come back, the most exciting rise in politics -- marco rubio, and what his rivals told me last night in milwaukee about the question of age. later in the show, our brand-new segment with no due respect. fraudulent political theater of the day -- you won't want to miss the debut of that. we will be back in 60 seconds. ♪

mark: marco rubio -- john: marco rubio has gone to

the darling front runner and many in the establishment -- he departed the theater last although wered, did glimpse a few of the ways his rivals may try to gun him down in the future. let's start with ted cruz, who mentioned rubio's name, and was clearly thinking of him on immigration. >> the democrats are laughing, because if republicans joined democrats as the party of amnesty, we will lose. [cheering] know, i understand that when the mainstream media covers immigration, it doesn't see it as an economic issue, but i can tell you, for millions of americans at home watching this, it is a very personal economic issue. i will say that the politics of it will be very different if a bunch of lawyers are bankers were crossing the rio grande. john: two biggest questions right now -- how vulnerable is

rubio, who will come after rubio, and how well he defended himself. he will take it from all 5 -- democrats will say he flip-flopped. the republicans will say he was always for conference of reform. how vulnerable is he? mark: pretty vulnerable. he has got the problem we just identified -- he has been on multiple sides of the issue, pleasing no one. no one is ready to defend him. he doesn't have a real explanation for how he went from where he was to where he is. the place where his heart is, where he started out, give some grateful her ability. ted cruz, donald trump, and others. john: one of the undervalued aspect is his political skill. when they're attacked, they don't just play defense. they are going to come back at anyone who comes after them on immigration with their own attacks. i think that rubio does have to

worry about his electability, because it is such a hot thing, which is why he fully. mark: how do you get yourself in a place where you can get through this nomination fight and fend off attacks from the far right while still emerging in a place that doesn't render you unelectable with enough hispanic voters? a very hard needle to thread. john: he skated last night even after cruz brought it up. he took a pass when asked about it, but it is coming back. when negative ads start against him -- mark: he has the personal financial stuff. let's look at another instance -- ted cruz taking a subtle shot at marco rubio. he brought up the u.s. sugar industry subsidy, the program he supported in the past because it benefits the sweet sugar industry special interests in florida. >> i mentioned that this is one

of the 25 programs that i would eliminate -- among them are corporate welfare like sugar subsidies. let's take that as an example. sugar subsidies. on roughlyrs farm 0.2% of the farmland in america, and yet they get 40% of the lobbying money. that sort of corporate welfare is why we are bankrupting our kids and grandkids. i would and those subsidies to pay for defending this nation. john: i like the way -- he takes issue out of the year. sugar subsidies, how about that? he defended his position. >> i am prepared to get rid of the sugar program. the problem is every country in the world that grows sugar has a program of th subsidy. when they get rid of theirs i will get rid of hours. free trade. i'm not going to wipe out an american industry that happens to have a lot of workers in florida by unilaterally

disarming. john: mark, how convinced are of buy that line of defense, his indulgence and corporate welfare? mark: when these guys face off, invariably -- both of them have enough strength that they will be toward the final night. you will see a stylistic matchup that will matter a lot more than the substantive attacks. cruz is a harder driver stylistically. what happens when cruz comes into rubio's space? we got a preview, and we saw a rubio respond. will rubio be able to get the better of those exchanges? i don't know. john: i have not seen in my career a lot of corporate welfare attacks work well. americans who don't think hard about economic issues or the ideology behind them -- you make that argument. maybe it is more my state, but immigration is a hot button issue.

corporate welfare not nearly the kind of issue -- finally, the age-old question for this not so old candidate. for months, is he too young at 44, still in the very key demographic, to be president of the united states, to convince voters he has the experience? it hasn't helped that the current president is often derided as someone who came at a young age. so after the debate last night, i asked three of his opponents what they think about the idea of a 40 something president. >> can someone in their 40's in general be ready? >> i think so. >> so you and say rubio -- >> i think the 40's will be fine. we had a lot of professionals on that stage. i would not be one to say -- i could have done it and i will not be one to say no. i could say no and it is easier but i will not say it. >> are you ready in your 40's? >> not sure anybody in their 40's is. >> obviously we have young

leaders in america before. they have done great work. i think this job is much more daunting than we have ever seen, and i think -- let's put it this way. the more experience, the better. it is clear that being young and new is both an advantage and disadvantage. where will it end up? john: if he continues to perform strongly, if he has command of the facts, if he doesn't have moments where he is grabbing for water bottles, it won't be a problem -- it is huge asset. but because there are people with other eyes on it -- one moment where he looks like he is young, people will seize on it. events think that the will matter, the framing will matter. if the guy he was matched up with at the end, if that person

has a way to exploit it, it may be his biggest vulnerability. not that it will stop him but it is his biggest vulnerability. everyone else he is competing against has more experience than he does. up next, the one and only albert jr. and his hot take on last night's debate. ♪

john: with the focus of last night's debate on economics, we thought it would be wise to consult an oracle on the topic. luckily for us, we have the

ultimate such sage plugged into the number one slot on our speed dial. specatcular albert reinhold hunt, jr. a look at one of the more contentious moments from last night between marco rubio and rand paul. >> the family is the most important institution -- i do want to rebuild the american military. i know it around is a committed -- i know iran is a committed isolationist but i am not. [cheering] >> how is it conservative to add $1 trillion in expenditures to the federal government that you are not paying for? how is it conservative to add $1 trillion in military expenditures? you cannot be a conservative if you are going to keep promoting new programs you will not pay for. >> we can't even have an economy

if we are not safe. there are radical jihadists crucifying christians. a radical shia cleric trying to get a nuclear weapon. chinese taking over the south china sea. i believe the world is safer, but i know that the world is a safer and better place when america is the strongest military power in the world. al, i thought that was one of the most interesting exchanges i have seen in any of the republican debates so far. who anything got the better of it and what does it say about the party? al: i think marco rubio got the better of it. two years earlier, it would have been much closer. the party, including the country, were sick of war and foreign ventures, but then issa started beheading people. won.lastclearly he night night.tingly -- won last

marco rubio has the cheney views and some of his people working for him. a more fundamental question will be, will that also prevail in the long run? i'm not sure if that. john: you're talking about within the nomination or the general? al: both. even the nomination fight. i'm not sure that the dick cheney views -- and he does have a number of top cheney people -- cruz and bush both separate themselves a little bit. cruz says let's go in, but i do want to do any nationbuilding. mark: on the economy, which is being presented as understanding the good economy? al: mark, this will shock you, but if you look at it substantively, the answer would be john kasich. his budget, his tax plan, is the only one that holds together. bute of it is unrealistic, l

it holds together. the others do not. but john kasich not have a good night last night, and he will be remembered more for some slips like the banking issue. john: stylistic problems overshadow the substance. al: absolutely. mark: what do you think was the biggest flub of the night? al: well, there were a number. of the most intriguing flub was the way ted cruz made a flub saying he was going to eliminate rick perry did that for years and couldn't read them. cruz, instead of stalling, basically just said commerce twice. ey, didn't you-- h double count commerce? it showed how quick he was, that he was able to segue to sugar subsidies. he joked about that today.

mark: the other big fight was on the bank bailout question, whether banks should be too big to fail. that is a dispute between ted cruz and a bunch of other people. who got the best of that argument on substance and theater? al: i think cruz did. left-wing winghe of the democratic party or the right wing of the republican party, they hate big bands. they think wall street may not like them, and when ted cruz said no more bailouts, i'm not sure that's a realistic policy, but he clearly won the crowd. john: you mentioned several times that cruz is touching a lot of the hot buttons of the party. busy vulnerable at all within the base? is there any position he has where you think he is vulnerable? al: i'm not sure he's vulnerable within the base at all. there is a different issue with the general election. if there is a problem that ted cruz has, nobody speaks better

from the head. he doesn't begin to approach marco rubio's eking from the heart. -- marco rubio speaking from the heart. mark: one of the things we love about al hunt is that he speaks from the head and the heart. thank you, al. coming up, we are counting down the weeks before the voting begins. what of the candidates need to do before then? courtesy of big brains. ♪

john: the starbucks right cups are out. four morereau more --

republican -- more presidential debates. here to speculate with us, then ginsburg. kerrick.a., bill ben, let me start with you. moving into this new phase of the campaign, what do you think these candidates are going to be focused on as we head into the holidays and into a time when debates may matter a little bit less. ben: absolutely the time where they need to target their states and target their voters within the states to be sure those voters are going to come out and vote for them. there will be a lot of messaging geared at particular segments of the republican primary electorate, especially in iowa,

new hampshire, south carolina, and nevada. mark: you have spent a career making a lot of tv ads. ads not seen jeb bush move his numbers in the right directions. would you think you could drive poll numbers in the early stages with paid media on television? bill: it is very hard to do it with early media. late withut success media. early media seems to evaporate. firepower on the media site at the end is very important. , hard to what we saw get a message across, having big rating points at the end is what matters. mark: what does the end mean?

through that?ak bill: it means the last month, basically, is when you need media. that includes social media, radio, cable, anything you can buy. the other thing, super pac's are going to pay much higher rates than the candidates are. the way the republicans think, i am curious how soon you think mr. rubio is going to start to see a lot of negative incoming over the air that bill was talking about. when does that start? iowa,bout six weeks from maybe mid-december for a pre-christmas present. it will be a very heavy january for the negative.

john: some hints in the press that mike murphy is going to be moving away from the positive histegy, famous for negative advertising history. >> that is sort of the more proven pattern. the march 15 florida winner take all primary, if you are jeb bush or marco rubio, you have to win that. does that affect the amount of dollars you have early on? mark: on the republican side, ted cruz is more focused on iowa than new hampshire. chris christie is focused on .ore -- on new hampshire

but they continue to visit the other states. is it smart for them to keep hedging their bets? think since 1988, what we have seen in both parties, iowa and new hampshire tend to be one campaign. if you are in iowa, you will get andred in the boston market the new hampshire markets. new hampshire, you will get covered in iowa. it is inevitable. you have to think of that as one campaign. --oneve to make sure thing about the early timing, back in 1988, when did gephardt one in 1988, we went on the week before christmas in iowa on television. we were the only ones on by ourselves. you have to think out-of-the-box

. yout the super tuesday, have to think out-of-the-box about what markets you will target and where you will play. we have seen people do that cleverly in the past and we have seen people bungle it. mark: should chris christie keep going to iowa or focus on new hampshire? ben: i was new hampshire are going to be as much about exceeding expectations as they are about winning the state. that is a function of the calendar changing. and aarder to put it away burst of momentum for chris christie finishing fourth in iowa will carry over into new hampshire. same if jeb bush exceeds expectations. john: let me ask another one of these double-barreled questions. trump,son, donald

clearly the head of the pack. what do those two guys who campaigned in nontraditional need to dodo they between now and say christmas? what ways would you advise them to change their approach? night, we sawlast a little evidence that this is getting out of his box. this is moving pretty fast. the growth of rubio and cruz as communicators is putting him in a bind. tot night, when we shifted substance, when they did that, it advantage ted cruz and rubio. the velocity was a little bit

last night.mp we will see if he is capable of running the campaign as opposed to being the circus coming to town. i never thought he would disappear overnight. i was that he and carson are likely to disintegrate gradually. were advising those two guys, would you say, time for some retail politics. time to spend time on the ground . ben: i am not sure they will be in trouble, but i would spend more time on the ground. one of the things about there only being one republican debate between now and christmas means substance being tested is not likely to come. both trump and carson have shown themselves to be able to put on big events to attract large clouds -- crowds. -- there being only

one debate for six weeks will spell this out to great detail. , we: a couple of weeks ago did focus groups and new hampshire, a lot of people thought bernie sanders would win the primary. what does bernie sanders need to do beyond this question of hillary clinton's inevitability, to position himself to win iowa or new hampshire? >> this goes for both parties. said carson and trump have been able to draw big crowds. you have to draw little crowds in 99 counties at each precinct in iowa. but they better all be organized. we have to see if sanders is organized.

organizedoing to be at the precinct level? it is a hell of a task. --s is a campaign, nobody and this is a campaign nobody has run before. we know they come from states like texas and florida where that does not really matter. that is a big test for all of these candidates, how will they organize iowa? john: there is a debate on the democratic side coming up in iowa this weekend. if you are advising bernie sanders, how negative to go and how to be negative, what is your advice to him if you are doing debate prep with bernie sanders? >> it is pretty clear that he does need to draw a contrast. you asked the question about

negativity on marco rubio, it is a similar question about mrs. clinton. if you are bernie sanders, you need to change up the current dynamics of the race. the classic way to do that is through negative advertising and drawing contrast and debate. if he really wants to win, you will see that. mark: what would you list as hillary clinton's three biggest vulnerabilities against bernie sanders on issues? obviously has done a good job of positioning himself as anti-wall street, playing into the anticorporate feelings in the democratic base. because of secretary clinton's history and the democratic party and knowing a lot of people who are very generous donors, she has some vulnerability. knowizationally, we don't if they will make the adjustments.

they really have to focus. she has -- she has a pretty good temperature. she is pretty cool right now. she has to maintain that. that will be difficult because i totally agree with ben, the big challenge for bernie is evil have to draw a contrast, he will have to make this a choice -- if he will have to draw a contrast, he will have to make this a choice. studying thoseen beards this entire segment and i cannot decide which one is better. let's call it a tie. how will the secret service protection change the campaign of mr. donald trump and dr. ben carson? ♪

mark: milestone day on the presidential campaign. trump and ben carson got a little bit larger today, both men took on secret service details. their codenames, mogul, for trump and eli for carson. josh king, former white house director of production with the clinton administration. andld trump has security his own private plane. ben carson has had a low key operation. how was the rhythm likely to change?

josh: they are both different candidates from what i have worked with. it is a mixed blessing. for people who work close to the candidate, and i started by driving paul and jean simon all around new hampshire in my own rental car. it is a certain loss of intimacy for the person you knew for six months. on the other hand, for a guy like ben carson and certainly donald trump, it is a symbolic lift for them. the very appearance of post suggests a certain authority they did not have 24

hours earlier. everything about it in closer to them becomes more of an attractive idea. the service, although they are doing such an important job, and they would not be there until secretary johnson determined the threat level was high enough to warrant them, makes it look like a real campaign. for the next 60 days, everything -- the one thing donald trump did not have going for him, he now has, which is the u.s. government has determined this gentleman is important enough and threatened enough to warrant this kind of protection. john: talk about the symbolism. i am thinking about how retail politics work. hillary clinton goes to the iowa state fair and she is trying to move and she cannot move more than a few feet. -- what is the downside?

just the secret service is the problem, it is the norwegian press. we made it work. would say, weton may be done on the official schedule, but we will work this quite event. the service knows how to work that. a couple of guys behind, a couple of guys in front. the detail leader on your shoulders. it did not prohibit him from reaching out and grabbing as many hands as there were to offer. i feel for secretary clinton when she goes to the iowa state fair and because of the crush of interest in her, it is impossible for her to move relative to the way it is for marco rubio or ted cruz. it is about whether these people want to really reach out. whether they want to say, let's

go get a beer. mark: to the ever say, no, you cannot do that event? no, youey ever say, cannot do that event? josh: the service will do anything they can do to bring the candidates wishes home. event on the schedule is done for the day, they are back to the hotel or their homes. mark: if ben carson wants to go out to dinner tomorrow night without his detail, can he? josh: once secretary johnson assigns the detail, it is verboten to lose them. as you guys know, once a candidate is finished, once they make their concession, they are back into rental cars. ,ark: our brand-new segment

with no due respect. bs on the most fraudulent political theater of the day. ♪

john: welcome back. tongues in our cheeks whenever we say the name of the show. but now we turn things around. it.ven made a graphic for this comes courtesy of two of last night debate participants -- donald trump and carly fiorina. putin wants tos

go in, and i got to know him very well -- i have met him as well. in a private meeting, not in a green room for a show. john: trump says he was stable mates. that is a pretty big stable. as for fiorina -- >> i met him in beijing. roomre in sort of a green setting, two of us were giving a speech. at a major economic conference. the two of us were sitting in a chair like this about this close for 45 minutes.

john: my question for you, first of all, why must these people who are famous and accomplished, truthst the embellish the of their encounters with vladimir putin? mark: the trump one is ridiculous. it had nothing to do with any real association. with carly fiorina, she has boasted about her relationships with world leaders. to say there is a distinction between a green room for a tv show versus a green room for a conference. it was a longer meeting, but man, what a ridiculous post. -- boast. john: whether donald trump and vladimir putin met on 60 minutes, whether carly fiorina

met him in a green room, what does that prove about your ability to be president of the united states? what does it prove about your inability to negotiate, stared down putin? mark: she sized him up over the danish. john: i find the whole thing preposterous on a grand scale beyond the obvious lies. it makes no sense to me. that is our new and sure to be back segment. we will be right back. ♪

mark: that debate last night was a lot of things. how to describe it question donald, can you help me out? donald trump: it was an elegant evening. the moderators were elegant. i thought it was a very elegant evening. it was elegant, and elegant debate. it was an elegant evening. john: the word is elegant. then, sayonara. ♪ buddy- nice place, nice car what happened?

well, it all started with my free credit score from credit sesame.com. they gave me so much more than a free credit score. credit sesame's money management tools and personalized offers saved me tons of money and helped me reach my goals. i just signed up with their free app. what's my credit score?

your credit score is 650. that's magic! no, that's credit sesame.com you get so much more than a free credit score so do more with your score at credit sesame.com >> i am cory johnson, you are watching bloomberg west. according to ap, the debate was the most-watched program in the

network's history, but the least watched of this year's debates. the suspected bombing of an ejection -- a russian airliner over egypt is raising security concerns. after a series of drugs and weapons charges, they are making changes. bill ackman is dismissing criticism. ant's raising of prices is immoral. coca-cola joined in, saying his comments are irresponsible.