let your freak flag fly. don't miss the grooviest trip at sea. ♪ mark: this is going to be the kathleen turner episode. first, we have new numbers from our latest bloomberg politics national poll. our big findings, the key candidates who have seen the most news in the survey are the two candidates least likely at this point to become their party's nominees. that is bernie sanders and john kasich.

on the democratic side, despite his deficit, sanders has close the polling gap with clinton. they are in a statistical tie nationally. clinton beat donald trump and ted cruz, but she loses to john kasich. sanders, like clinton, beats trump and ted cruz in a hypothetical contest, but unlike .linton, he beats john kasich and yet, both sanders and kasich are getting pressured to leave the race. white isn't that breaking through? this is going to be a dream for you, i'm going to speak as little as possible because my voice is gone. but i will say, electability is an argument that does not resonate much with voters. they all say they will elect a nominee, but what they care more about is can people get things done, what are their ideologies,

their passions about issues they clear about? not about the abstract question about who will win in the fall. where the nominee is is likely to be electable. questiondoes beg the of why clinton is doing worse than sanders. i also wonder white kasich is doing -- why kasich is doing so well. is it simply because he is simply not cruz or trunk. same with sanders. it is a strange thing. electability, it does not matter much to voters. but as we get down to it, and particularly on the republican side, if kasich can fight, electability at the convention might matter. they have not improved their standing, and kasich can get himself to the convention in a position to be the nominee, electability will manner -- matter to those voters.

john: referring to polls like that will be important. if sanders closes the gap against hillary clinton, superdelegates in the democratic party will distinguish someone, who has the lead. if sanders can point the polls that say that he would be any republican, including doing better than hillary clinton, superdelegates might more be inclined to make a switch. pretty good achievement for those two guys to be ahead the way they are. but wait, there's more. ask thesame poll, we voters about a topic that has been a big part of the campaign, international trade. it turns out that both republicans and democrats, not big fans. when asked if the u.s. should have more or fewer restrictions on foreign goods, there was bipartisan agreement. 67% of republicans said there should be more restrictions, 57% of democrats said the same.

in any pollinge question to find democrats and republicans thinking the same way. general election implications of this bipartisan consensus on trade? john: the first, it is likely that whoever the republican nominee is, most likely donald whoever it is, they will be the first in a long time that is not a staunch free trader. on the other side, it means hillary clinton on the left on trade, will be forced to stick with those positions which a lot of people have doubts. a you will have basically more or less protectionist argument going on between both parties. never seen that before in our lifetime in politics. mark: but there are other republicans who are restrictionist entree. trump, -- kasich and cruz are both free traders.

cruz is somewhat inconsistent. athink we have never had general election between two people who are moving toward the protectionist site. we might, if it is trump versus clinton. we will have them question the current trade deals on the table. and these battles for white, working-class voters is where a lot of the action will be. especially where trump is the nominee. clinton will not be able to move from her newly hatched position. mark: on the assumption that many voters are hopeful that donald trump will moderate his view to more electable issues, i will be curious to see if trade is one of them. this shows that trump is white -- right with both parties entree. if you have been looking at twitter, you will have seen that arrows between trump and cruz. it has gotten personal, even more personal.

youhe very off-chance a have missed what is happening the last 24 hours, we will catch you up real quick. >> donald trump, ted cruz, here is what happened. a naked photo of trump's wife. he wrote back that the picture was not from him, you're more cowardly than i thought. >> trump counters, line ted cruz denies he has anything to do with the post. >> cruz went on tv and lifted a line from the president. ted cruz stole policy from emi's from michael douglas, just another dishonest politician. trump tweets make america great again. andcture of haidi cruz

milani a trump. cruz'sakes a video of endorsers, saying mean things about cruz. trump called him a sniveling coward. some of that was not from the last 24 hours that brings us up-to-date on this battle. who is winning? john: it would be hard to say that anyone is winning this ugly, pathetic, childish, unseemly back and forth between these candidates. but if one of them is moving -- losing more it is donald trump. he has a history of not treating women very well and plays into the stereotypes. mark: in the short term, trump is winning. any chance to make a substantive argument against them. he can't focus a -- if theyame on him

are arguing about their wives, that will not get him to be a nominee. john: at this point, trump should be looking at the general election. every time he does this, he builds the case that democrats can make against him as a misogynist, which hillary clinton can use against him in the fall. mark: people say he is losing, hurting himself in the general. in the abstract that may be true, but we don't know that. people have predicted that he is hurting himself. john: a lot of women do not like this kind of stuff. mark: time for a merrick garland update. the pressure of republicans today for the nominee. joe biden gave his speech in washington at the georgetown university law center. calling on republican senators to give obama's pick a fair chance. to vote on there

nominee could risk a genuine constitutional crisis. the vice president also accused republicans of mischaracterizing the speech he gave in 1992 about supreme court nominations made in presidential elections. >> senator majority leader, and my friend mitch mcconnell, and other republicans today, have been quoting selectively from remarks that i made in an attempt to justify refusing chief judge garland a fair hearing and a vote on the florida senate. they completely ignore the fact that at the time, i was speaking of the dangers of nominating an extreme candidate without proper senate consultation. they completely neglected to quote my unequivocal bottom line. so let me set the record straight. president the

consults and cooperates with the , or moderates his nomineess, then his may enjoy my support, as did justice kennedy and others." mark: the vice president made a valiant effort, but didn't reach the debate over the -- about merrick garland. john: i think it is just a distraction. one argument republicans have made, but the ultimate delegate lists they are making has nothing to do with the biden rule or speech. there are places where you can see the pressure to give garland a hearing is making some headway. this is not one of those moments. mark: i continue to say it, and people might get bored. iowa, if hessley of

wants to hold a hearing, if he is feeling pressure to do it, i think he can force mitch mcconnell to do it. it is a one senator game, they need a hearing. political, a political imperative. john: i will also point out that although we love joe biden, the argument he made about what he said in the past was not compelling on its own. mark: as we say in delaware, nice try. coming up, what do wisconsin and new york have in common? the upcoming contests in both parties that we're watching very closely. we will take a look at the political calendar in our near future, coming up after this word from our sponsors. ♪

mark: april is nigh, time to flip through our calendar cards and review where we stand. first on the democratic side, there are three caucus states this saturday, alaska, hawaii, and washington state. next up, wisconsin on april 5, and two weeks after that on april 19 is new york, followed by a whole bunch in north, eastern, and mid-atlantic states. 20 five,n april connecticut, maryland, pennsylvania, and rhode island. john, what are you looking at in this democratic calendar? thing,he most important wisconsin,, hawaii, wyoming, new york, six contest in a row.

in some states bernie sanders can and should win. question is by how much and what it will do to pledge delegates. if he wins six in a row, heading holiday, he is going to pick up some delegates and have a huge wave of momentum at his back if he can go on that run. mark: and he proved it this weekend, or tuesday, even though he did lose arizona, he could win states, and win them big. so let's just look at this again. i think people assume he will sleep on saturday. then wisconsin, let's put a pin in that for a moment. he will win wyoming caucuses. winning wisconsin, which some people in clinton world thing could well happen. havingomes into new york won the next five, and beats her in her home state, which is not out of the question given the nature of the electorate, if he does that, five in a row, two primaries, and goes on to 26

with five northeastern states with cash on hand, big crowds, i am not saying he is the nominee, but if he does five in a row and then wins five more in a row on is not greathat for hillary clinton. it changes the race, resets the race. she still has a big pledge lead, but the superdelegates and all these states will have to answer. john: one thing both the clinton campaign and sanders campaign agree on is that new york is in play. time, 10en now a long years isn't hillary clinton ran for the senate in this state. her connection to the voters here is not as strong as you would think a former senator from new york would be. to wine has got wisconsin if he puts his back and momentum. let's look at the republican lineup. lots of either not wisconsin april 5 primary in a little less than two weeks. colorado has republican caucus

-- caucuses on april 9. that is when you're told, a non-winner take all on april 19. a week later, like with the democrats, they go to the polls and connecticut my maryland, delaware, and rhode island. in the republican three-way race, what do people look at in his calendar. we know there will be a donnybrook in wisconsin against all three candidates playing hard for three weeks. it is not a must win for john kasich, but it is in the vicinity. he must either win that race or show very strong or the rationale for his continuing -- mark: he has got to be a huge player in the state. john: and you go to new york, similar in that clinton-sanders race. it will make for a combustible atmosphere here. two contested primaries with hillary clinton on one side and donald trump on the other. is trumped loved in new york or hated in new york? he is both.

it is not 100% obvious trumped will win new york state. will bethink there pressure on kasich to get out, and cruised to get out. wisconsin and your, based on momentum and the demographics, i think he will sweep on april 26. the normal physics, if he won wisconsin and new york and say four out of five on the 26th, everyone would be turning his delegates over. the reality is, a lot of people already wanted to go to the last earn ajune to make trump majority. the question is not can he win those states, but if he does, does he force those guys out of the race. not mathematically, but like a normal nominee, he is declared the de facto nominee long before he actually has the majority. matterhis is why kasich

so much. if he can survive, two responses in new york. states, i think in a competitive three-way race, if he is really at par with the other two in terms of money and credibility, kasich can win a lot of those states. it is not inconceivable. but if he is out of the state, trump -- ted cruz can sweep those states. trump and kasich agree, cruz cannot compete in the northeast. wisconsin, the land of cheese and beer, after this. ♪

mark: there is a new emerson university poll out today, in the battle for first among wisconsin with goat -- voters. basically tied with trump at 35%. a john kasich trailed third at 19%. theye democratic side, prefer clinton over sanders. here to talk this through, a state that he knows well, is craig gilbert from the "milwaukee journal." greg, let's start with their democratic race. -- republican race. as does trump underperform, compared to how he has done in other states? greg: his negatives have been

low compared to other places. it may be cultural, he has not done great in the rest of the upper midwest. he is obviously a hard personality for some people to take. and there is also a unique part ofn, the reddest wisconsin, the most are public and counties outside of no walkie. conservative talk radio has lined up against donald trump in a way that you don't see nationally or in other parts of the country. it is very them potential -- it is very influential. him: what do they say about ? to be negative about him and positive about ted cruz? greg: everything about him, from his history, his background, his discourse. they argue he is not a real conservative. and, there is a lot of strategic and tactical arguments being

made to republican voters in wisconsin right now. kasich is making the argument he is electable. and there is also the argument that ted cruz is the guy you have to vote for in order to stop donald trump. that is what you hear on radio. is the kasich wise to play there? can he make this a pier 3 way? i think it is tough. he has a shot in some of the congressional districts like the democratic congressional district in milwaukee and the one in madison, where republicans are more moderate. i think it is difficult for him to win the state outright. this point, he needs some wins, but you don't see that? rule thatould not out. there is a lot of crazy stuff going on in the state. i think he is squeezed on both sides. world --s well with

rural and blue-collar voters. it is tricky for him, getting squeezed on both sides. mark: i will move to democrats quickly. clinton, this poll has her leading by a little bit. it seems that demographically, it is an open event and people can vote in either primary, it seems like it could be a good state for sanders. it ought to be, when you think of the states history of say,g, it is a white almost 80%-90% of the vote will be white on april 5. and the open primary is huge. sanders has been doing much better in other states and in wisconsin polling with independent voters with partisan democrats. do is competitive and will well in milwaukee. sanders will do well in madison. there will be a battle for the rest of the state. when you compare wisconsin to other states that have already

voted, it is a much bigger place for him than other states. mark: what is the economy like there? benefit onll sanders the democratic side from those were just -- distressed about the economy? there are those were distressed in certain parts of the state, but he will also benefit from political distress. potentially, democrats are very angry and frustrated. they have been out of power, powerless underscore scott walker now since 2011. a lot of bad things from their point of view have happened. in that climate, you can see messagenders' resonating. walkerou have scott suggesting he will be for ted cruz, tammy baldwin leading republican -- democrats for hillary clinton. does that matter in that state? on thei don't know if republican side it matters more than talk radio.

on the democratic side, they don't really have the endorsements. but i don't know if that matters to his voters. the republican establishment is interesting because it is the state of scott walker, rice previous -- mark: thank you very much. when we come back, the great andrea mitchell joins us. and we will talk about the big week in foreign policy after this. ♪

. . .

willing tould be stand on a crowded rope line in the snow for hours.

just ask one question to our guest, instead, she came in to talk about foreign policy and politics, she is nbc's foreign policy analyst and host, the great andrea mitchell. give up my time any day to have that kind of introduction. hillary looks like clinton and donald trump are going to be the nominees of their respective parties. tell us a preview of a general election between those two could be like. if it is ted cruz, it is similar. tedhave donald trump and cruz seething on the national campaign trail talking about a muslim ban, trump talking about

pulling back from nato and pulling back from alliances, at the same time where you have hillary clinton at stanford giving a very centrist discussion. saying how europe has to do more for itself and giving specific examples of how we give flight manifests now to europe and we betternce paris, we give flight manifests, in regards to isis and the immigration crisis. the european countries, the european union's 28 countries intelligenceshare and flight manifest better. of course, she is now going after both ted cruz at donald trump, but in particular, donald trump. up to 30,000go feet and you look at hillary clinton as a presidential candidate, are there elements of

hillary clinton's for a would be different than the current president? sure, if she had had the moment in 2013, if she had been secretary with the red line, she would have been pushing as hard as john kerry would have been pushing. mark: but that is a specific case. but can you take from that specific instance a doctrine. in other words, which he be more interventionist in that specific case or in general? andrea: let's take a look at libya. that is a policy that has her fingerprints on it. i am not talking about benghazi and all of the stuff that happened, but i am talking about the decision to go into libya and to say that it was in our national interest to do that with our allies. at the time, we are hearing cries that we are leading from the high because there were french and british planes up there and we were not the only one in the engagement.

john: we talked about donald trump on tuesday -- let's talk about donald trump because we interview donald trump on tuesday. he talked about sending him patrols to all of the muslim neighborhoods in america, he talked about nato being obsolete, and he would not take nuclear weapons off of the table. -- off of the table against isis. not know what he is going to do next and he thinks that is good, according to donald trump. his image as a strong man, can it do good for him in the general election? andrea: here is the deal. according to all of the polling, all of the election polling, amongma is important republican leaders and if, i think it is, to-one among democratic voters, economy and

jobs, amongst democratic voters. point inthe high december with "the wall street lling.l" pulling -- po a really huge issue. i really think that if something happens at home like paris or like brussels in the weeks leading up to the election, it really plays to the strongman image that donald trump projects . i think it hurts hillary clinton. i think she has some weaknesses on foreign policy. as much as she has connections and has all of the language and really a deep knowledge of it, libyan be criticized for now, for the middle east for not doing enough in the middle east, for only going once to iraq. she was really hands off. one saturday she went to iraq

for half a day really. that was the only time she was in iraq. the only failings she has with iraq or afghanistan can be laid at her feet in certain ways, i am not saying it is fair, but that is what the public could see it. mark: among the many things you do is cover hillary clinton, and au hear her a lot, but centerpiece of her campaign, if it is trump versus clinton, do you think that this could change? chief diplomat of america, and i am doing better than this businessman's reality tv show star? andrea: that's what she talked about in miami when we were all there last week when she was celebrating her victory in florida. she talked about donald trump as talking tough and saying it is not smart, going after muslims is not smart, if this doesn't show strength, it shows that you are inexperienced, and also, ted

cruz, she was really going after them on all those issues. mark: so you're saying that in the last week or so, she will tell it -- will elevate her resume? andrea: absolutely, and she will try to show the contrast, i am the grown up in the room, i am experience, you cannot trust him because he is so erratic. it plays to her strength. she is not the best retail candidate. she would be the first to say it. she would say, unlike i husband and unlike brock obama, this is not what i do well, but i am a serious, studious person who knows how to do her stuff. presidentthing that obama was criticized along with this week is how he behaved in cuba, how he looked at the baseball game and how he works eyeglasses and even the hand wave thing. argentinae went to

and so the optics here are really terrible. my question is, is that the kind of thing that either now or soon or eventually that hillary clinton will find herself ma for orng oba from? andrea: i don't think she will criticize something that is on optics, the photo op. i think she will and she already has on the trade deal. she has separated herself completely on the trade deal even though she supported them. and there are other economic votersthat white, male care about because now she really has to worry about possible crossover votes. if you are worried about donald trump, his appeal could be in ohio, or michigan, or pennsylvania area that is where she would be vulnerable against donald trump. you know, knowing i was coming over here, i checked with the

white house in argentina and again, they said that there was no one in that white house, and certainly not the president, who is second-guessing this. there are a lot of us even watching us the baseball game, look, it was a huge hit there. raul castro went with them to the airport, saw them off, it derek jeter and joe torre was there,robinson jack you robinson played there, i am not a big baseball thank but i loved it. i know there was the sunglasses in the chewing gum and the slapping of everybody on the back, but the crowd just ate it similarly, they said, this is a new argentinian leader, we are planting our flag in latin america, we have ignored it for too long, we are declassifying the cia's bad deeds during the dirty war on

the 40th anniversary of the coup, and we are really making friends in an important continent -- mark: the tango. andrea: the tango. i really want to know if he practiced at that and if you knew it was coming. because he acted a if he knew it was. andrea, thank you very much. we will hear from one man's experience more than 10 years ago next. you can listen to us as well on the radio on radio bloomberg. ♪

mark: back in 2003 after two years of very partisan

mr.dlocked, erik estrada -- estrada withdrew himself from president bush's supreme court nomination. he spoke yesterday regarding this. estrada: everybody is bytty much unanimous that temperament, experience, and background, he is a very suitable person for the supreme court. the argument about the vacancy isn't entirely political. it is whether the republicans in the senate are willing to accept somebody who may be a centrist of spinning the wheel of the election in hopes of getting someone who is qualified to be sure, but more on the right of center side.

al: let me ask you this, you also supported elena kagan, so is ideology ever a factor that should be considered? i mean, what else? rada: i think it is one of these aspects, but one of the disparaging things that we have every couple of years is that service tos give lip the subprime of merit and qualifications but neither party is willing to accept the qualified people from the other party. we saw this when judge alito was up in 2005. aswas just as qualified judge garland is today. he was one of the leading judges ,n the country by temperament etc., but there were 25 democrats who would not give him the vote. fightrtain here that the

here is political and everyone is appealing to the base of their perspective parties -- their respective parties. there are a lot of people in this country who go to work every day who tell their children that merit really matters in this country. we really strive to recognize people who have merit. he were confirmed, would that move the court to the center or centerleft kumal and with that replace your old boss, justice kennedy, as the swing vote? trada: perhaps, but it is very difficult to say things in a very general way, because even justice scalia was someone who was viewed as on the right of leadingt is one of the right of the constitution and law who gave us a lot of criminal constitutional law

favorable to criminal defendants. a lot of people don't focus on that, a lot of people don't know it. he was involved in a lot of due process cases and fourth amendment cases and also on the first amendment. and so he was somebody who was distinctly liberal in his votes on a number of things. i think one of the things that people miss upper hand about the court is that while people come with different philosophies, they come while trying to judge on the merit. al: so what you think about that, on issues of affirmative action and voting rights and executive authority, certainly the court would be more likely to be favorable to a "liberal merrick view" with garland as compared to justice scalia? think he is such

a unique figure in the history of the court, and there are many that i could name, i won't, i byld, who if appointed president obama, also could be said to move the court to the left. each and notake ask, how are my issues going to turn out on the basis of this appointment? a forthrightis person who will bring intellect and printable to each case. i think he is a very moderate person and an incrementalist. i would not expect merrick garland to get on the court of the united states and take a hatchet to relatively recent winding case law. this again can be explored at a hearing but, you know, these are things we should ask our nominees. we want them to be faithful to case law and precedent, that we i that theyme a prior will come in with a wrecking

ball. i think there is a certain perception that our judges are politicians in robes and that is misguided. were is the perception that do little to enhance the legitimacy of our justice by doing everything in terms of left or right terms. al: how do you think it is going to play out? will judge garland be on the supreme court by the end of the year? mr. estrada: i think so. al: you do? mr. estrada: i do. this willese think happen because the republicans have gotten themselves out on a limb? thatstrada: yes, i believe there may be a candidate in november and you may see a change in the attitude in a number of republicans in the senate. if it is clear we are going to have a disputed convention and the assertion to consider a nominee could affect some of the races in the senate, it may be

the political chocolate a change . there may be some states of that may have to persuade their voters that not even giving a hearing to someone of this quality would be good policy. mark: thank you to mcgill estrada and to al hunt -- miguel hunt.a and atto al next, we talk about political floaters. ♪

mark: now it is time for our "by the numbers block." we are joined by our crackerjack pollster from iowa to give a review of some of the hot films from iowa.

e, we hear you have some numbers on donald trump. ptopia" tell us? anne: we look at people who had participated in the nominating contest or people who expect to in the future. what do we see when we divide that up? what do we see in the future? what we see for donald trump is that with the plurality, that number gets even take her with the number of expected voters in the future. trumpone expects donald to fade, our numbers of suggest that that is not good to happen anytime soon. you also saw the hit and whatadpoll,"

challenges does hillary clinton face if she faces john kasich in the general? know, we did general election matchups. these are people who are likely to vote in november with hillary clinton and donald trump, hillary clinton versus -- hillary clinton and donald trump, hillary wins, hillary clinton and ted cruz, hillary wins, and hillary clinton and john kasich, john kasich wins. he is the old candidate who has said that he will be to hillary clinton and these numbers bear that out. in some cases, he has a substantial majority with key groups. he beats her with married parents, he beats her with whites, among catholics, and among men. he put together a broad spectrum

of constituencies that you need if you are going to beat hillary clinton if she is the nominee on her side. , one moreright, ann blockbuster, it is called, "clinton has fallen." walk us through without any spoilers. this is about party sticking us. what we did is that we looked at the people with sanders and a kasich matchup. what would those people do if it turned out if it was hillary clinton versus john kasich? 19% of those sanders supporters effect to john kasich. for ted cruz, they voted bernie sanders, and 11% goes to ted cruz. and the smallest number goes to donald trump. they keep thinking that there is alike,, something between donald trump and bernie

sanders, but in fact, our data says there is something quite opposite. their guy does not turn out to be the nominee, they won't go for donald trump. left, manyconds people say that they would vote john kasich overkill hillary clinton, a big number, 1/5 -- john kasich over hillary clinton, a big number, 1/5? ann: yes, absolutely. mark: ann, thank you so much. ithwill be back with you -- w who won the day. ♪

mark: in the immortal words of john mclaughlin, "quickly, quickly, who won the day?" dog --esterday, and others. shandling, so i would say the person who took the day was the grim reaper. we want to honor gary shandling, he died today, he will be missed. thanks for watching. sayonara. ♪

>> i am mark crumpton, you are watching "bloomberg west." former bosnian serb leader has been convicted of genocide and nine other charges and sentenced

to 40 years in prison. of tribunal found him guilty orchestrating serb atrocities throughout bosnia's 1992-19 90's 1995 war, which left hundreds dead. seven hackers from the iranian found.ent were loretta lynch said they worked for iranian computer companies, doing work on behalf of iran's government. in moscow, the foreign minister is touting cooperation with the u.s. on the civil war in syria. he met with u.s. secretary of state john kerry on the agenda, talking about peace talks to end a five-year civil war. secretary kerry also met with russian president, vladimir putin. michigan lawmakers voted to extend emergency aid to keep detroit's ailing school