john: i am john heilemann. mark: i am mark halperin. with all due respect to ted cruz and marco rubio, you guys might want to take this thing outside. ♪ mark: in our playlist tonight, the one with the dentist, but first, the one with a pretty interesting immigration debate. we have been watching marco rubio and ted cruz getting closer to a head on collision. today, we got a glimpse. after throwing some amnesty in tuesday'so

debate ted cruz went on the , radio today and amped it up. >> we had an epic battle in congress a couple of years ago on the question of amnesty and the argument that we need to secure the border first was an argument i was making over and over again. it was an argument jeff sessions was making over and over again. all of the folks on the other side dismissed it saying we were , anti-immigrant for believing we should secure the borders. i have a deep and genuine disagreement with that view. the voter, when politicians are saying the exact opposite of what they have done in office, i treat that with skepticism. mark: ted cruz hits rubio pretty clearly on amnesty. now it is rubio's turn in south carolina.

he made the case that he and his rival were not so different on this issue of amnesty and immigration. >> when the senate bill was proposed, he proposed legalizing people that were here illegally. he proposed giving them work permits. he has supported a massive expansion of the green cards. he supported a massive increase program.1b if you look at it, i don't think our positions are dramatically different. mark: despite what he said, there are some differences. rubio made news in another way today. he went on fox news and made a -- it clear that some people who were in the country illegally would have to be deported before there can be a talk of additional immigration. john in this fight over , immigration, if ahead towards a showdown, who has the upper hand?

john: i think ted cruz has the upper hand. his position is clearer, and more consistent with what we think we know about these guys. ted cruz is not a member of the gang of eight. marco rubio was a member of the gang of eight. we will discuss all the intricacies of amendments in a stuff that rubio is counter-claiming by ted cruz is a restrictionist and marco rubio is the one with a muddled position. mark: the things he proposer nothing like a path to legal status. or citizenship. this is at least the second time that rubio has staked out a position on immigration and moves and farther to the right and it will be harder and harder for him to avoid criticism. if he becomes a nominee, fortional criticisms staking out these traditions in an ad hoc way.

john: we talked about this yesterday. i think muddle is a bad place to be even you are pleasing no one. it is likely that rubio will never convince the restrictionist in the party that he is with them. every time he tries, he makes his prospects worse by putting himself in a more conservative place. mark: i don't think talk radio and the grassroots are going to buy that position. john: not at all. we have also talked a lot about the role of opposition research and investigative reporting and , how those things will play out. on the republican side today, once again, in this venue, the target is dr. ben carson. the ap writes about his connection to a pittsburgh dentist who pleaded guilty in 2008 of charging patients for procedures he did not perform. he is a dentist doing oral surgery, allegedly heeded did not to some of them and then charged people.

carson has close personal ties to him. carson wrote a letter to the court during his fraud trial asking for leniency. a couple years later, carson wrote in one of his books that anybody found guilty of health care fraud should face no fewer than 10 years in prison. the dentist avoided prison time with the help of dr. carson and served just one year of house arrest. in a statement to bloomberg politics, carson said " i know his heart, i am proud to call him my friend, i have always and will continue to stand by him, that is what real friends do." mark, ben carson, a new flap, how big a threat is this one? mark: this story has two elements. one, carson is one of his best friends. i don't think that will be a problem. this other issue of apparent

or maybe hypocrisy saying specifically, anybody who commits medical fraud should go to prison or face penalties, he didn't think that was true in the case of his friend. we don't have a clear answer from the carson campaign on that i also don't think that will be one a big deal. worst case i don't think his , core supporters will matter, it is another brick in the wall, though, of his long-term problems in dealing with controversies from his past. john: john: as people start today in, we understand that carson's association -- that he profited off of those deals. nothing wrong so far has been alleged there. you know that is the next phase. if you are profiting from your association with a guy who was a convicted felon, there are some things that people will be looking into. all i am saying is that he is becoming a riper target for investigation. that is all i am saying. mark: not a problem in and of

itself. time for a classic shot and chaser. ben carson said this week that china had some sort of military presence in syria. here is armstrong williams today on msnbc defending that stands. dr. carson said the chinese are in syria, which is not accurate. >> from your perspective and what most people know maybe that , is inaccurate but from our , intelligence and from but dr. carson has been told by people who are on the ground, the chinese are there. just because the mainstream media and other experts don't want to lend credibility to it doesn't mean that some way down , the line that that story will come out and it will be reinforced and given credibility by others. chase or the

democratic counterpoint courtesy , of susan rice, who says it she doesn't have a clue what carson is talking about. also on the foreign-policy front, he did an interview with iowa radio, and here is what he said he would do if president if russian planes violated a u.s. no-fly zone over syria. >> if we declare this no-fly zone, and russian migs are in the air, and we are challenged do we shoot down a russian mig? they are not flying in that area. they are flying over iraq. >> they are flying over syria as well. but what if they go there? >> if they come into the area after given adequate warning, you shoot them down, absolutely. >> all right. there is the whole butterfly effect. if you shoot down a russian mig, what happens next? they will respond, no question. >> whatever happens next, we deal with it.

we can't continue backing down. mark: this is not the first time he has a controversial things on foreign policy. he said them to us on this show. the first thing most foreign-policy experts do not agree with him, his camp says maybe something will come up -- the second thing, i am not sure if most people in the party would my net position. is it a problem? john: the first thing is a problem on two different levels. it is not a question of democratic counterpoint. the national security advisor is saying what everybody believes. that the chinese are not in fact in syria. mark: politically -- so what, politically? john: it makes it sound like an amateur, it makes him sound like herman cain. now he has an advisor on television claiming that they have better intelligence than the white house. mark: who is that going to hurt him with? john: it is going to hurt him with anybody who might seriously give any thought to whether he should be president of the united states. thingse said so many

about foreign-policy that are just as unsupportable. john: if you are try to tell me that this is another reason why this man does not have a leg to stand on in terms of policy, i agree. where theact, this is phases matter. if he said these things before, no one would have cared. as a front runner and getting close to iowa, this stuff more than any of the other flaps -- john: we agree. not hurt him before, but now it could. john: voters are going to start a focus in that matters. i like it when we agree. chris christie has been on a run lately. it seems like he might have finally put the shadow of bridge gate behind him. now, like a bad hollywood reboot, bridge gate is back with a weird subplot. lawyers are trying to get their hands on documents from his office in a court filing yesterday. they also claim that christie's

high school classmate who pleaded guilty to corruption charges stole a hard drive that was under subpoena from the port authority offices in 2013. mark, a two port -- part question. is bridge gate back? if it is back, how big of a problem is it? mark: bridge gate was never christie's main problem, it was too close to president obama after superstorm sandy, and what was he selling from his new jersey record, given new jersey's problems? unless bridge gate gets directly to him to show that he line, i don't think that it is his problem. john: i disagree. i think bridge gate has been a problem for chris christie in general. it consumed a huge amount of his time and focus when he was the de facto front runner. it made him into a national laughingstock, the but of jokes

throughout the country. it cannot the good for people to be reminded of the chaos that ensued there. i don't think it necessarily derails his comeback but it is not great. mark: the super pac in iowa, i am telling you, christie thinks he can steal iowa and the game and get into new hampshire. he is playing a smart game, leveraging all he has got. john: what does he need to finish in iowa in order for people to think he stole it? mark: he needs to be first or second finisher in the establishment lane, and finish well above where everybody expects. which right now is nothing. john: up next we will run , through the likely scenarios for that great political journalistic fantasia, the contested republican convention next summer. benf bush super supporter,

weber will be here with us. we will be back in exactly 60 seconds. ♪

♪ john: for a while, the political world has been wondering if the republican nomination contest was headed toward a super bowl of political nerd-dom, a contested national convention. it is fun to think about in the abstract but with primaries and , caucuses approaching, it is now more likely than ever to actually happen. the wall street journal today noting that none of the candidates looks likely to pull away from the pack to secure

enough delegates to secure the 'srty policy -- party mantle before the nominating convention next summer. it is one thing to talk about this in the abstract, we fantasize about it every cycle. what are the actual plausible scenarios by which we end up here? mark: the five guys up on our giant wall right now, those five are the most likely to be able to continue past the first four states no matter what. all five of them could say no matter how i performed, i want to go forward because i have the money and the opportunities down the road. i think the other people are weak. john kasich and chris christie have to perform well in order to go on. if four out of the five feel they can go until march, the -- and then mathematically, we may invariably have a brokered convention as long as people don't give up. i think that these five are not

going to be inclined to give up. john: to me, the likely scenario is a simple scenario. either donald trump runs the table in the early contest, winning the first states, or ben carson does the same thing and they go on a tear in the first few contests they drive a bunch of people out of the race. then when you get to the multi-primary states, there is consolidation on the establishment side, whether it is around bush or rubio. they have accumulated so many carson or the trout guy, but they cannot be but then the establishment kept out of the convention but then the establishment coalesces , and they get enough -- mark: i don't think that is likely. if trump or carson runs early, they will keep winning southern contests. they will win florida, and i don't think you can stop them. if one guy runs the table it is , done. john: it is a matter of timing.

how quickly does consolidation happen? once you get to trump or carson versus an establishment candidate, we have never seen a sign the donald trump is a guy who can get 50%. mark: you are going to have it at least two establishment people coming out of the first two who think they have a claim on going forward. if you are so weak that you couldn't beat trump and i am are new hampshire, i don't think the establishment will say that the strongest of the weak guys, let's consolidate their. people will just say, there are fundamental weaknesses in the field. john: one way or the other, and one of our scenarios, who has the upper hand? the establishment wing or the anti-establishment? mark: normally it would be the establishment. this time i don't know. , when we come back, we will talk with a supporter of jeb bush, vin weber. that is right after this. ♪

♪ mark: joining us now is a backer of jeb bush and the former minnesota congressman, vin weber. when you backed jeb bush you thought he had a good chance to be the nominee. he has gone through a rough patch. what ails him now? what is the problem keeping him from being a clear front runner? and what is the solution? >> i support jeb bush because thought he would be the best president, best qualified. i think that is true. what is surprising is that there

-- is that all doesn't seem to matter. we have two people leading the republican race who have no experience in government into don't match up well against a highly experienced candidate like hillary clinton. mark: what ails him and what is the solution? >> it is not to start being something other than what he is. i liked him in the debate the other night, policy-oriented. he was defending his position on immigration. i didn't particularly like the last debate when he criticized marco rubio which i don't think , is in his character. you have to just move ahead and talk about policy. take on trump on some of the ridiculous things he says. and hope that in the course of the campaign, that is what penetrates. i think people ultimately will want to choose a candidate who is qualified to be president and go up against hillary clinton.

john: do you have a sense that he wants this or not. does he you're in for the presidency? will he do what ever is necessary? does he have that fire? >> i think he wants to be president. there was a time when people thought he was an. he launched early to make it clear that he wanted to do it. he is working very hard. much of the campaign is going well. we are raising a lot of money. he is still hanging in there in the polls. we have this phenomenon of trump watch you guys i tried to explain to the country, we don't know it. trump got into the race and froze the race. he shot to the top for reasons we still don't understand. we are still trying to explain it. he froze the race for three or four months. i think the race is now unfreezing of little bit with carson moving up, rubio bouncing a little bit. i think it will melt even more and other candidates will have a chance. there is no question something

happen in this race over the summer with donald trump that no one anticipated and still can't explain. mark: we talked about whether his allies can go negative on marco rubio. no bush has won the white house without doing negative campaigns against their rivals in the nomination fight. is there a reason that jeb bush should be reluctant to say, here is what is wrong with marco rubio? >> it is tough to take on rubio because -- first of all, polls show preferences. they are thinking about 3-4 candidates. even if they say they are for one candidate or another. that means they don't necessarily want any of the candidates to be too badly roughed up because then maybe , somebody they end up supporting. in the case of marco rubio, you have a party that has problems with hispanics and young voters. a lot of people, including those not supporting him for president, don't want to see him

damaged too badly. mark: and his allies and super pac? >> i think they have to be very careful how you take on to marco rubio whether it is bush or , anybody else. he is an attractive person to much of the party. john: that's fine. you have to be careful about it. that element of teflon you are describing is an incredible attribute that he has your you have to be careful about that. you can't just let him skate. >> i think you can take him on his points but it has to be , strictly on the issues and raise the question of has his conduct on issues proven that he is ready to be president? mark: will jeb bush win on issues or experience? what is the issue? when can jeb bush say my issue

is better? >> i will not define find it for bush but i think other candidates will do that. i think that you have to stick to the issues or you will end up in a personal fight and that is , not what anybody wants. john: marco rubio says he is against abortion even in cases of rape, incensed, life of the mother. a lot of people think that is a difficult position to hold. is it ok for republicans to prosecute that issue? >> i think you are right at that -- that that position is damaging in an election. to take on a candidate in a primary for being too pro-life is a strategy that is not likely to work. mark: who will the nominee be? >> i still think bush will be the nominee. i would be dishonest if i said that i was shocked by the way the campaign has developed. i thought bush would be running away with it by now, i am surprised.

i think he is the best qualified candidate. mark: everybody in the party says, i will support whoever the nominee is. they are all better than hillary clinton. if donald trump is the nominee, will people like you say that is a bridge too far? >> i think we saw in the debate the other night some real fissures in the republican party unfolding. somebody like donald trump who says he wants to deport 11 million people, wants to start a trade war with mexico and sees -- wants to seize the oil fields in the middle east causes me a lot of heartburn. mark: thank you very much. up next an education about the education issue in this 2016 presidential election right after this. ♪ 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. ♪ john: the last republican to

live in the white house, george w. bush, made education a serious issue. how important will it be in 2016? our interviews with candidates both candidates as they talked about tackling the education issue. >> defined the problem around public education today. >> there are several. it is not adequately preparing our children to succeed at the next level. we have some of the finest higher education institutions in the world evidenced by the fact that the wealthiest and most powerful people on the planet send their kids to school here , but you have too many young people who enter it not prepared to learn. part of it is that parents have few choices to choose where their kids go to school at. this is particularly true for low income parents who are trapped, sending their kids to a failing school. part of it is a mismatch between skills and knowledge required to succeed in the 21st century and what our schools are teaching.

there are several issues going on in the k-12 system that should be concerning. >> it depends on your zip code whether it is failing or not. unfortunate, we consign a large number of students who live in the wrong zip codes to failing schools. a lot of them come from homes who go to schools with no library in a move into a high school where things are not -- with no library and then move into a high school where things and dropout.ning, he see these enormous dropout rates in some major cities. this is a real scorch on our society because we need to recognize that for every one of those kids, that is one more person he have to protect your family from. >> do you want to be the education president? >> i do, but one of the best things a president can do is not to involve the government in the

k-12 details. allow that to reside at the local level. at the local level, you will see the innovation necessary to improve. for students who want to go into vocational training. i think we need more for 15-17-year-olds who decided they wanted to become a machinist or a welder. open up the pell program so they can use it to go to high school in the morning and trade school in the afternoon. >> federal government can play an important role. right now we are behind in stem , education, particularly from other developed countries. it is a national problem. there are ways that we can have a national focus on getting our people caught up. there is no question about that. >> are you using the pulpit to make that message heard? >> absolutely. >> you are still relying on states to get this done. >> i would use it, and i would

also look at the states that are doing well. it was intended that we would have all of these laboratories in each state, and we could learn from them and we could see , who is extremely successful in then we canl, and make that available in other places. >> common core has been controversial for republicans. your mentor, jeb bush, who has been a real leader on education, has stayed with common core as a way to get all states to raise standards. where are you? >> common core is about curriculum reform. i am a supporter of curriculum reform. >> common core is about trying to set a benchmark that everybody can aim for. >> the benchmarks drive the curriculum. in essence, the curriculum would respond. my problem is that every time -- if you create a national standard, the federal government will use it as a mandate mechanism. >> i think the less federal interference, the better.

able to setd be their own standards, work with districts --tubble school districts, parents and , ptas. so far, that has created nothing but chaos. john: the question before us is these two guys talking about education. in a republican nomination fight, silly? it matters? no? mark: the republican party has been in retreat during the obama years. president obama has been by some measures a conservative education reformer and thought -- and has been fighting his party. there is still the issue over common core. there is still the impression that a lot of our kids are not

given an equal chance. george bush convinced americans that he cared about education, would be great on education. there is a huge opening here, particularly if hillary clinton takes some small steps towards the left to deal with the teachers unions. john: in a general election, this is an issue where there is a lot of opportunity for republicans to make arguments. people really don't like teachers unions, even though they like teachers. i am most interested in the fact that because bush and john -- john kasich have not done better so far, common core has not been essential issue because they had too many other problems. mark: when i asked paul ryan about vouchers and the vouchers movement he basically said , vouchers are great but it is , not a federal issue or you can see that with these guys. you are running for president, but you basically want education reform not mandated by washington but at the state level.

it makes it harder to argue that you are going to be good on education as opposed to using the bully pulpit. if hillary clinton is the nominee, the right republicans still without violating federal principles can make a strong case on education. john: easier to contrast against her than obama. he was not a creature of the teachers unions. -- preacher of the teachers unions. clinton looks a lot like a preacher for the teacher's union. mark: it is still a big issue for a lot of americans. john: when we come back, bush 41 biographer and jon meacham after this from our sponsors. ♪

♪ john: jon meacham is the

author of the george herbert walker bush biography. destiny and power. he joins us from philadelphia. john so good to see you. , >> how are you? john: very well, sir. thank you. this is a question we always wish somebody would ask while promoting a book, but never get asked. here it is. what stories from this book that you consider important have you not had a chance to talk about yet? >> i appreciate that. one of the things i find fascinating is whoever was hiring the andover faculty in the 1930's was brilliant, because if you read bush's teacher reports, you find that the character of the man was entirely set from the time he was 14 until he was 18. he got overly intense about

everything. he worked hard, but didn't want anybody to know it. he worried a great deal and covered it up with a great amount of charm, and inability an ability to reach out to his classmates. he was a heroic figure at the school, famously helped a kid who was being picked on. the kid later said, who just saved me? and they said, that is poppy bush. he is the best kid in the whole school. the entire character of the men -- man was formed long born before he entered public life. mark: you did something unusual in a book like this, you want to -- went to some of the the non-main characters and told them what you had and got their reaction, reporting within the book itself. since the book has come out there have been additional , reactions from rumsfeld, cheney. talk about what things have occurred since the book came out, whether they surprised you are not?

they have advanced the story beyond what you put in between the hardcover pages. >> i did go to everybody. i think cheney has been a great sport. i think that he has been gentlemanly about it. i think he has embraced the iron-ass comment made about him. john: he is a proud iron-ass. [laughter] >> if you are dick cheney given what a lot of us have reported and followed, it puts him back into the center of the conversation in a way he had not been in the past couple of years. that might be part of what is going on. on rumsfeld, i think he proved the point. on the record, he declined to comment. we had two conversations about what president bush had said about him. to me, he did not want to comment on the record. his statement was that president bush is getting up in years. the problem is that bush's comments about his being

arrogant, iron-ass, were comments made first in 2008 and then repeated again over several years. in a way, i think rumsfeld is passive aggressive. maybe it is just aggressive. but his reaction puts a cap on what has been a great rivalry in modern american politics. mark: let's unpack this thing that got a lot of attention, which is that bush 41 says, from where i sat, cheney and rumsfeld had too much influence. they were too bellicose. bush 43 says, i love my dad, i don't want to challenge them, -- challenge my dad, but i called the shots. did bush 41 have enough data to make this judgment? is this an informed judgment? or was this just a father imposing his view? trying to get his son off the

hook a little bit? >> i don't think he had much more data than a lot of us. i think that of the factors that one hasn't gotten attention is i think that president bush 41 reads the new york times every day. honestly, he follows the news, and he follows the commentary when things were so bad in iraq in 2006-2007. i think that it was an informed observation given that he knew , everyone. to me, one of the interesting things is both 43 and 41 till me -- told me that they had never had this conversation. he had never said, i think that cheney is exacerbating -- >> why not? why wouldn't they have had that conversation? >> two things. one, 41 was incredibly

deferential to every president whoever held the office, starting with lyndon johnson. youaid, i will never attack personally. i don't know that lyndon johnson was that worried about being attacked personally. that is in barbara's diary. nixon, ford, even carter, because bush left the door opened to being cia director. and then famously, almost to the point as gary trudeau put it, almost putting his manhood in a blind trust by being so deferential to reagan. 41's default position is that you do not complicate the life of a president. then you go to 43. this i defyknow , anybody to spend several minutes around george w. bush and think that he wasn't totally

in charge of whatever situation he wanted to be in charge of. frankly, he believed he was getting the advice he needed to get. he asked his father about personnel, george tenet. if you read decision points it -- very carefully there are , cases where he asked for his father's council, including whether or not jim baker might might come in-- 2005 and replace rumsfeld, including the ultimate appointment of bob gates to that job in 2006. i said to president bush 43 that i had a theory that he protested too much about how little he asked his father for fear of appearing overly dependent. 43 said, that is not about observation, which i took as a resounding yes. i really believe that they did not have long, serious conversations about policy.

john: let me ask you about a moment in the book. we just talked to vin weber. you have a scene where vin weber and newt gingrich go to visit george h.w. bush in the white house. it is a small story, but it seems freighted with a lot of meaning. talk about that story. >> i thought it was absolutely critical. thank you for raising that. i should have mentioned that one before. you know the line about the wing of a butterfly starts a hurricane? let's take one step back here. john tower fails to be confirmed as secretary of defense. bush 41 reaches out to dick cheney, pulls and out of the house, he becomes secretary of defense, leaving the house

republican whip job open. the vin weber runs the campaign within the caucus for newt gingrich, gingrich is put into house leadership. a series of events that leads to 1994 and gingrich becoming speaker. interesting to think about what might have happened if cheney had stayed in the leadership. put that to one side. so bush calls gingrich when he is elected and invites gingrich and vin weber, and vin weber said to me, what other president would even think about inviting your campaign manager? they have a beer in the residence and they can tell that george bush wants to say something but cannot get it out. as they are leaving, vin weber says, mr. president, tell us what worries you most about us? bush said without hesitation i , worry that your idealism might sometimes get in the way of what i think of as sound governance.

vin weber said, he always credited bush for using the word idealism, not ideology, purity, nuttiness, inflexibility. there is a direct line from that conversation to the 1990 budget deal, when bush puts out the press release -- he doesn't announce it. he doesn't announce that he is breaking the one memorable phrase of his life, "read my "ips, no new taxes. they stick the press release on the bulletin board. for three long days, bush never comes out and explains why he put the tax increase is back on -- tax increases back on the table. and vin weber and gingrich find out about it from reporters. it instantly goes into vin weber's mind that this is what bush was talking about at that moment. that bush believed sound governance would bring more

taxes, bring democrats along to , get spending caps. in many ways, that moment is the of or or a critical chapter in the politics we have now. john: john meacham. that is one of the many amazing stories in your book. thank you for coming on the show. the book is called destiny and power. in then't keep it stores, we hear. we will be back to talk about some other stuff in 60 seconds. ♪

♪ mark: welcome back. it is shaping up to be another busy weekend in election land. let's go live to alexander

trowbridge. it looks like a busy weekend. >> that is not even debatable especially if you're in des , moines. we are expecting some november flurries around the country so , let's start by flying down to the sunshine state where a dozen 12an , candidates will be at the sunshine summit in orlando on friday and saturday. if you are in the area, get out that ppf 50, and lather up. let's move over to iowa where we have that powerful delta we has been telling you about, clinton, sanders, o'malley, the second democratic debate on saturday night. keep an eye on clinton, she is expected to hit a watch party. love the drake. that is it for me. like an umbrella, we have got you covered. mark: thank you.

so let's talk about florida. these candidates going to the state party thing. as much as we talk about the first four states, the fact is, neither rubio or bush may be in this thing come florida. john: who knows. mark: you can imagine a world where trump goes into florida with a head of steam, it could be incredible. john: obviously, it is a winner take all state. delegate rich. mark: retail politics is impossible. john: it is the first mega-state where being on air is what matters. you are going to iowa, are you going to see cornell west? i know you are going to the debate, but cornell? mark: there is a lot of stuff for me to see in iowa. the debate is a huge deal. we have gotten used to the republican debates but we have , only had one democratic debate. bernie sanders was not ready for that debate.

he will be more ready this time. will he be ready enough? and also, only three people on stage. john: that will benefit the debate normatively and give candidates a chance to do whatever they want to do. it will also help martin o'malley. he is unlikely to be the democratic nominee, but we you -- but he will have a lot more time to make his case. mark: same thing i said about hillary clinton, she is -- if she makes one mistake, it will be the story of the debate. as always, the pressure is big for her. we will be right back. ♪

♪

john: here is the thing we are , on the tube twice a day. on bloomberglive politics.com. mark: also we have a story about , how republican strategists are uneasy about the rubio-cruz immigration feud. both of those stories are very key. tomorrow, i will be in des moines, previewing the second democratic debate. jennifer jacobs will join us. until tomorrow, sayonara. ♪

♪ year around november or december, many journalists will get an assignment that makes them feel a little nervous. >> you are putting me on the spot. >> they will be asked to write a story about what will happen in the coming year. think anybody has made an accurate prediction once. >> predicting the future is a tough job, but you know what jobs,ay about tough someone has got to go out and do it. >> ug