♪ mark: welcome to another edition of the "best of with all due respect." it was a week of controversy, large and small, from a campaign manager being arrested for battery, to a campaign manager -- presidential candidate eating pizza with a fork. all playing out right here. and, if that wasn't enough, donald trump has sparked yet another comment storm for comments he made on abortion. chris matthews was at a town hall on wednesday. chris matthews: should the women be punished? for having an abortion? mr. trump: look -- chris matthews: this is not something you can dodge.

should it be punished? donald trump: people in certain parts of the republican party would say yes. chris matthews: but would you? donald trump: i would say it is a very serious problem. it is a problem we have to decide on. mr. matthews: you are for banning it. mr. trump: are we going to say put them in jail? chris matthews: no, i am asking you. you say you want to banning, what does that mean? mr. trump: i am pro-life. mr. matthews: how do you actually do it? donald trump: you go back to a position, like they had where people would perhaps go to illegal places, and you have to ban it. mr. matthews: they go to somebody who flunked out of medical school. donald trump: how do you feel about that catholic church position on abortion? mr. matthews: i concur with their moral position, but not legally. donald trump: but what do you say about your church?

chris matthews: churches make their morals. you are running for president, chief executive of the united states. do you believe in punishment for abortion, yes or no? donald trump: the answer is there has to be some form of punishment. chris matthews: for the woman? donald trump: yes. there has to be some form. mr. matthews: 10 years? what? you take positions on everything else. mr. trump: i do take positions on everything else. it is a very complicated position. mark: the political world has been reacting to that fascinating exchange. john kasich was in queens, new york, and he criticized donald trump's answer as inappropriate. hillary clinton was around in harlem. she singled out trump for being intolerant in her speech. she was then quick to respond via twitter, saying, "just when you thought it couldn't get worse. horrific and telling." trump tried to walk back his remarks, in not one but two statements he put out. one reads, " if congress were to

pass legislation making abortion illegal and the courts upheld this and any state was permitted to ban this under federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act on a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. the woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. ,my position has not changed. like ronald reagan, i am pro-life." john, this is swirling. it has replaced yesterday's trump controversy. how big a problem is this for trump now? john: it is a big problem on almost every level, mark. you think about what this means for donald trump in the general election. it is that kind of talk that, when we talk about marco rubio's position on abortion making it hard for him to win a general election, this is horrible. he is in a position where he is not only at odds with democrats, with independents -- he is at odds on this issue with a lot of conservative republicans, who

who think not that women should not be penalized but the doctors. his attempt to fix it is incredibly patronizing and condescending toward women about abortion, calling them victims. it is bad on every level, and plays into the woman narrative that has been building for weeks, or at least a week now for him. all bad, bad, bad, bad. mark: it is a big issue. there is no good answer. conservatives will often criticize me for asking the question, because it seems logical that if abortion is murder and a woman has one, she should be punished. it is politically untenable to say that. now trump has said, the woman , should face a penalty. now, they are victims, and old-fashioned view of women that will alienate a whole group of people. he can hope it goes away and try make it go away, but this shows that when he is pressed, as chris matthews did on tough issues, he is still learning as a first-time candidate. john: yes, the thing about that is the way chris matthews got

him on this, trying to get a little more depth with him on this issue. it is a complicated issue. it is a complicated moral issue. it presents a lot of conundrums. followed --mp was altering their on what his position should be. it shows a certain underlying weakness and him as a candidate. it is a position nobody will let him forget. certainly, clinton will not, especially if he is the nominee. mark: not necessarily in the short term for the nomination, we will see it hurt him in the general. i believe it could hurt him in the short-term. john: right, yes. so now, let's talk about the other trouble in trump land. a day after his campaign manager was charged with battery for grabbing a reporter, last night

he did not back down from his defense of corey lewandowski. during a cnn town hall, trump offered this as his version of the events in question. donald trump: she grabbed me on the arm. i am like this. am i supposed to press charges against her, because my arm is hurting? she had a pen in her hands. secret service does not know what it is. i was not interviewed by the police. this was a town where i have a big investment. i'm trying to figure out if these are democrats or republicans. it was so minor. people say, what is this all about? we have people in the middle east, chopping off heads and drowning people in cages, and he pushes her? what kind of country are we in, when they go to kasich, "i would fire him." ted cruz, "i would fire him." folks you need someone that is , going to be loyal to the country and to yourselves. john: beyond the story he is , also facing more damning headlines.

police are searching for two men, who allegedly assaulted a a 15 yearer sprayed old woman in wisconsin, tuesday night. here's video that has been making the internet rounds in the past 24 hours. considering all of this, how to you think his campaign is going? mark: if he wins wisconsin or new york, the danger for him is all the swirling controversy, up to the notion of women and treatment of women. if he loses wisconsin, and the exit polls show he has been bad with women, this is a narrative that will be tough to put down. john: these all connect up. if you start with the tweet of heidi cruise. that unflattering picture. you move on to corey lewandowski, allegedly attacking a female reporter.

he is now charged with that crime. the pepper spray. the atmosphere of violence. now this abortion thing. all toward women, but there is also an atmosphere of barely restrained and sometimes unrestrained violence around trump. it is disquieting, and it -- he may or may not have the the wisconsin primary. but, this is the first time it seems like trump is being battered right now. a little bit on the ropes. mark: a dirty little secret, even in presidential and vice presidential races, you have to have the press on your side. he has gotten good coverage, but these stories are turning them against him. it is a real danger for him. as long as he is winning, politically, he is ok in the short term. if he starts to suffer losses, these loyalties will compound. people are clearly troubled by his defense of corey lindau c.

ahead of tuesday's wisconsin primary, there is a new state poll of wisconsin voters. democrats and republicans say, ted cruz on the republican side is beating donald trump amongst likely gop voters in the badger state 30%-40%. john kasich is in third, 21%. the poll found that 81% approve of the job governor scott walker is doing. that poll was taken before walker supported ted cruz. 45% of walker fans support trump -- support ted cruz. the same number of walker fans support trump and john kasich combined. bernie sanders is beating hillary clinton, and, in a head to head general election matchup, sanders beats all three. clinton loses to kasich, ties with ted cruz, and would beat trump. let's go back to the republican numbers, and take apart this poll. what is significant about that skyhigh approval rating amongst

republicans now with less than a week before the primary? john: we said yesterday, that there was no doubt that the walker endorsement of ted cruz would help a little bit. he is very popular with republicans. conferring his blessing on ted cruz may have been a signal of the fact that walker is also a cagey political operator and could see the momentum rolling in cruz's direction anyway. if he is this much ahead, you cannot help but think he will get a couple more points, at least, in terms of that endorsement and steal the whole wisconsin primary on tuesday. mark: we don't want to make this a dump on trump day, but he has been successful and criticizing officeholders, even in their own states. criticizing walker as he had done in the republican primary, may be a mistake. he is very popular. with the walker on the trail with ted cruz, he has got a

chance to really drive a message. let's talk about democratic numbers, and the fact that, in the democratic survey, bernie sanders once again is doing better than hillary clinton against the republicans. is there significance, or does it have any meaning for the primary? john: i think it has some significance. it has significance in that even hillary clinton's top aides and strategist will admit that, when bernie sanders is working a state, he moves votes. right now he will be here in , wisconsin between now and tuesday. hillary clinton will not. he is ahead in the polls, if it is accurate. he is spending more days here than she is. it looks like he will win the primary. i think. run -- stopped trying to wrap my head around the mac. if there were a governor's race in ohio between john kasich and bernie sanders, bernie sanders would really win? that is really incredible. john: it is baffling. there is a lot to talk about

with bernie sanders. we are old enough to remember last month all three remaining republican candidates said they would vow to support whoever that turned out to be the -- turned out to be. last night, not a single one of the remaining three would repeat that pledge. donald trump said he made the promise under condition the gop establishment would treat him fairly, which he doesn't think has happened. both john kasich and ted cruz said they would not support him if he becomes the nominee. will ted cruz and john kasich really not support donald trump if he is the nominee? my head says they won't, my gut says they will. we have seen amazingly, despite delegate lead, almost the republicans back trump, and i think that things have gotten personal between trump and ted cruz, because kasich's view does not match up with trump. i think those guys will be huge litmus tests.

if trump can bring them on board early, other people come on board. it becomes more than symbolic, they become leaders of the stop trump movement. even as he becomes the nominee. john: if they are politically consistent, they will not end up supporting him as the nominee. if you listen to john kasich and ted cruz about what they have said on trump's infirmities, there is no way they can support him. if i take them at their word, on the merit, if they are consistent, they will not end up in his camp. i don't think it is possible. mark: we hear things all the time in nomination bites, that person is horrible, a horrible nominee. we can conclude that for ted cruz, it is personal. john: up next the law school , poll on the demographic data in the primary. ♪

♪

john: you know there is a hot race in wisconsin, when charles franklin is on your show twice in one week. he is the director of the marquette university of law school poll, and he is here to tell us more about what it means. let's start with public and -- republican numbers and geography. which areas of the state is ted cruz doing well, leading in the polls? charles: ted cruz is doing really well in the southeast. that is where establishment republicans usually do well. until recently, you may not have thought of him as a establishment republican. by comparison with trump, i guess he is. trump had been doing well in the northwest. that is an area rick santorum won in 2012. one of the surprising things is ted cruz is now just one point behind donald trump in that area. that is part of the cruz surge. john: so your poll was in the

field before the walker endorsement, and yet, cruz is up even without that endorsement. my question for you, with walker now behind cruz how much will that help him going forward? charles: you would think it would help. our poll ended monday night, before walker endorsed the next morning. one of the striking things in the poll is that among republican primary voters, walker's job approval is 80%. that is very strong. and ted cruz gets 45% of that, donald trump only 27%. conversely, among the 17% to the -- that do not approve of walker, trump is getting 44%. you can see a sharp dividing line there. how much more vote walker can bring to cruz, but maybe that remains to be seen, but maybe there is some there. john: the republican side, why

is it that john kasich is not doing better in a state that isn't exactly like ohio but it is not far from being like ohio? why is he doing so poorly here? charles: in a lot of ways, you would think he would do well. this is a campaign that has had a hard time igniting. the comparisons of kasich to walker a reasonably strong, not -- are reasonably strong, not perfect, but somewhat strong. with kasich, he is in the middle on a whole lot of things. there are groups trump does well in, other groups that cruz does well in. kasich does sort of ok, not enough to break out. john: so, i would to switch over to the democratic side. let's look at the numbers. you have sanders with a narrow lead. one of the questions people have asked is whether wisconsin would behave more like michigan, where sanders won, or more like ohio, where clinton one handedly --

won handedly? tell us about that equation. charles: it is a pretty call. he is up by 4%, not a lot. when you look at the gaps, the gender gap, the gap between white and nonwhite voters, you see that in wisconsin, we have some gaps there, but they are not real big gaps. they are not the kind of large gaps that propelled clinton in ohio, and then at least helped sanders some in michigan. instead, what we are seeing is, on both the gender gap, we had white and nonwhite, it was relatively small differences in the other two states, and the result is, from sanders to clinton, we are moving to the middle of a close race here. john: if you think about geographically around the state, what in the seven days before the primary next week, where

does hillary clinton have to do better geographically if she is going to pull this thing out somehow? charles: geographically, she really needs to do better in the milwaukee area. that was an area we expected to be a strong area for her, but among likely voters, she is slightly behind. it is very interesting. in the city of milwaukee, and -- which is an area tailor-made for her, she is up by nine points among registered voters, but down by two points among likely voters in the city. she needs a really big turn out to make the electorate look more like registered voters, a little less like likely voters. john: and what is it you think, what accounts for that? i am surprised by her weakness in milwaukee. what is it that you think -- it is probably not in the numbers, but what do you think would explain that? charles: we are seeing sanders do pretty well among constituencies, but he does not do so well elsewhere.

he is not doing as well as she is among nonwhite voters, for example, but he is not losing the vote there by the very large amount he has lost by in some other states. on the gender gap, there is a gap, more men voted for him, but it is about even among women. if he can be only losing women by two or three points, that is a real win for him. he has lost it by a lot in earlier states. mark: still ahead talking to , brian fallon on the possible empire state debate with bernie sanders and the managing expectations for the wisconsin primary. ♪

♪ john: as we are campaigning in wisconsin, we are joined by mr. brian fallon. he is hillary clinton's press secretary. thank you for coming back on the show. the sanders campaign is agitating over the question of a debate with your boss in this state, new york state.

why will you not accept that right off the top? it should be home field advantage for you. brian: this is a little bit of a tempest in a teapot, that has played out in the last 24 hours. we've said we were willing to do more debates. that was back in february. what threw the process for a loop was the fact that sanders' campaign issued a letter publicly. it is usually a process where we would work together, privately through the dnc, and come up with a debate schedule. we have always intended to go through that process. we are going through that process now. there is back channel conversation throughout the day today. our campaign indicated, the sanders campaign indicated, through the dnc, we can debate in april. we have provided options, including here in new york. john: so new york is on the table? not a forum, but an actual debate? mark: given how anxious they are to do it in new york and here,

are you willing to bend to that here? i know there are other options, but if you have to do new york, you will also do that? or is that still a subject to debate? brian: i think we will have to work together to find out dates and locations. we are willing to do new york, among other options. there are other states, including pennsylvania, which is a big, delegate-rich state, where the sanders campaign will have to do well, if they are going to seriously vie for the nomination. she is perfectly willing to debate in new york, and if they can find some agreeable dates, it can happen. mark: is there any downside to debating in new york? brian: i don't think so. john: i would like to offer right here. this would be a good spot. we have four chairs here. brian: you need to figure it out with jeff weaver, debbie wasserman schultz, and charlie baker. mark: we are calling them now. john: for the campaign manager being charged with battery and whether donald trump is standing

by his campaign manager, you think both as a matter of policy and morality is the right thing to do? brian: i will not comment on the specific charge, because there is a legal process, and he will get his say and his opportunity. but there is due process. it is a very serious charge and the fact that it has been charged suggests there is evidence to back it up. the most i will say is, to make an observation about the campaign generally, mr. trump has clearly created a culture that not just condones violence but actually goads it on. that is true of his supporters at rallies where he offers to , pay legal fees, and also that he condoned it to a certain degree with his staff. mark: the fact that the campaign manager is a male and the alleged victim is a female, does that say anything about the culture of the campaign? brian: i don't want to comment on the particular incident, but obviously there is a troubling trend on the part of the trump campaign.

this is not a one-off. this is not the most recent allegation with respect to conduct at their events. that says it all by itself. this is a recurring problem. john: everybody has watched the video. we have all watched the video. we had a trump critic, a defense attorney, who said he made act.minimus content -- cont is that troubling to you, that this is cause for criminal prosecution? brian: it is. and the fact that it made its way to charges is troubling. but if he defends himself, i don't want to prejudge that. it is not my place. it is something that the campaign will have to answer for in the specific and general sense. john: mark said earlier that campaign managers charged in that way should take a leave of absence. as a matter of form, should the campaign manager step aside for a little while?

brian: that is a wild hypothetical, which is something that would never happen in our campaign. i mentioned a couple weeks ago, when the incident first happened, our campaign manager -- when he likes to do when he is not back crunching campaign manager, his idea of what he likes to do when he is not back crunching numbers in the office is he goes door-to-door knocking to convince people to persuasion of voters. he is not sounding as a bouncer enforcing crowd control. mark: the wisconsin primary is really important. hillary clinton has no plans, bill clinton, chelsea clinton. why are your principles not campaigning more? brian: wisconsin is important, but all of the states coming up are imported. the new york primary the 19th, she will take that off with an event tomorrow. he was where i think the new

york primary looms large. wisconsin, there are a lot of reasons he will be quite competitive. unbalanced no matter who wins, delegate wise, it will be a wash, but it will not significantly adjust the race. on new york on the 19th, that is one of the big delegate-rich states where he is not winning and winning big, we can effectively save the waves is over. mark: so will clinton set foot in wisconsin? brian: i'm not sure. i think it is possible to the family members or hillary clinton herself could go. but we will be here in new york and balancing our priorities in order to win the nomination. that means not just looking ahead to the next state but also across the chessboard. mark: and if there is likely to be a debate? brian: it is less travel. mark: bernie sanders used to win big important states. john: what would it be a margin that bernie sanders would win by a wisconsin that would cause you concern? but with that number have to be? don't just a big. give me a number that would freak you out.

brian: here is a point. if bernie sanders can win big in the delegate-rich estate, wisconsin, it will not -- if he wins by eight points. if he wins wisconsin even significantly, it is not necessarily anything -- mark: we are going to a break, hold your hand up like this. john: brian fallon, he is fine. 50 points for sanders is utterly meaningless. the president of the pro-cruz super pac keep the promise next. ♪

♪ mark: we are back, and joining us from the new york studio is the president of the ted cruz super pac keep the promise, and also the strategist of a full congregation of super pac's. thank you for joining us. kellyanne: my pleasure. mark: how would you appraise a ted cruz's current chances to become the republican nominee? kelly ann: they are great. we started out with 17, we are down to three. he can win outright with 1237 delegates, there is a chance of him doing that. and the big plus is to go into an open contested convention having a respectably high number of delegates across a swath of states, head into the convention as the outgoing favorite. given the fact that mr. trump has a whole bunch of people who would like to stop him from being the republican nominee. mark: how do you super pac's plan to spend the resources over the next month to help him become the nominee?

tv ads, other things? kellyanne: really, we are looking at wisconsin. it is important, a great test for whether or how hard people can follow some of the incentives forced upon them recently, particularly by one messenger. also in wisconsin, it is a relative test for retail politics. you have contests coming so fast and furiously, we really have missed, those of us in politics have missed sort of the bigger retail policies we saw all across iowa, south carolina, and new hampshire. wisconsin safe to be a similar test for that. so our super pac put down $800,000 for wisconsin, tv, radio, digital, phone program, get out the vote program, so we are all in wisconsin.

and it cruise spending a lot of time there. we are trying to spend a lot of time in the other states coming up. and third, mark, we have started with the retail rigor looking at the convention. we have convinced experts, legal and delegate experts at our disposal. many on a volunteer basis coming to come and give us the plan b for july, which seems like a short time from now. al: i hate to bring this up, but is this personal exchange, this bitter personal exchange, for your candidate, it distracts on the issues he wanted to run against donald trump on, and that is a distraction for ted cruz? kellyanne: it is a distraction for the voters, and it would be if he continues to be in the cesspool. he dabbled in there to spend his life and has gotten out.

he should stay out of it. the same thing i would have told senator rubio. the plan summary else's turf and don't allow voters to hear something that needs to be on issues, you are already losing. that is why i am happy senator cruz is talking about the issue today. he is very clear someone who runs the largest pro-cruz super pac, we had nothing to do with the anti-trump pac. those who say cruz knew about it, you are alleging he lied and violated federal law. a, ted cruz had to defend his own honor, and b, he had to defend his wife. he did it quite well. go ahead. al: if you get on the issues, what issues do you think are good for -- what one or two issues do you think you can really sort issues against donald trump on that have -- a lot of them have not worked so far. kellyanne: the fact that ted

cruz does not have the free $2 billion coverage that trump has had -- he said you are not electable, too far right, wait your turn. it is quite remarkable that so many other people were supposed to win but were not. people do know him from the fight against obamacare. you have all republican senators in washington who want to repeal this, but only one man, ted cruz, stood on his feet for 21 hours on the floor of the united states senate. so i agree that i would like to hear more about these plans to replace obamacare. ted cruz is talking about the tax plan, destroying isis, not being neutral on israel. so those voters that want to cure about policy, and i believe there are many, they will listen if they hear from senator cruz.

mark: quickly, less than 20 seconds, tell me the single biggest mistake donald trump has made in the last two weeks. that has been like a phase. kellyanne: no ground game, no polling. the ability to have your own data and ground game where it counts. late breaking voters do not go to him. they go to ted cruz. mark: the conversation with scott walker next. ♪ ♪ mark: thank you for joining us. scott walker: good to be here. mark: you are a candidate and now you are hosting primaries. we want to talk about that, but let us start with when you got out of the race. you said clearly you thought other folks should get out, the person you deem to the front runner, and listen. scott walker: i thought the plurality on the majority dispersed among many. i hoped others would follow at least sooner.

they eventually did, but more time, more money, primary and caucuses. i'm excited wisconsin is no relevant in a small way. you can argue it is a big way. i talked about way back symptom or 21. mark: let's talk about you and donald trump. that before he was the presidential candidate, he was a big supporter of yours. you had some warm conversations. he said nice things, publicly and privately. he was in your state, and he says, you do not look like a motorcycle guy. those of the biggest fighting words. i am elected almost to repeat them to you. how about your history? did you misjudge his character, the kind of person he is? scott walker: no, i had 320,000 supporters, and i am glad mr. trump was one of them. the vast majority, over 90% of

the donors give us $50 or less, so i'm glad people like him give to what we were doing. i am a midwestern guy. we have warm summer stations with a lot of people. mark: is what you thought of him then different from what you think about him now, and if so, what changed? scott walker: i did not endorse him for anything. i thanked him for support like i think other people for support. i don't know a thing changed. the fact of the matter is, i looked at each of the candidates, the three remaining up there, and said there is to that have a shot up to the 1237 delegates.

♪ mark: thank you for joining us. scott walker: good to be here. mark: you are a candidate and now you are hosting primaries. we want to talk about that, but let us start with when you got out of the race. you said clearly you thought other folks should get out, the person you deem to the front runner, and listen. scott walker: i thought the plurality on the majority dispersed among many. i hoped others would follow at least sooner. they eventually did, but more time, more money, primary and caucuses. i'm excited wisconsin is no relevant in a small way. you can argue it is a big way. i talked about way back symptom or 21. mark: let's talk about you and donald trump. that before he was the presidential candidate, he was a

big supporter of yours. you had some warm conversations. he said nice things, publicly and privately. he was in your state, and he says, you do not look like a motorcycle guy. those of the biggest fighting words. i am elected almost to repeat them to you. how about your history? did you misjudge his character, the kind of person he is? scott walker: no, i had 320,000 supporters, and i am glad mr. trump was one of them. the vast majority, over 90% of the donors give us $50 or less, so i'm glad people like him give to what we were doing. i am a midwestern guy. we have warm summer stations with a lot of people. mark: is what you thought of him then different from what you think about him now, and if so, what changed? scott walker: i did not endorse

him for anything. i thanked him for support like i think other people for support. i don't know a thing changed. the fact of the matter is, i looked at each of the candidates, the three remaining up there, and said there is to that have a shot up to the 1237 delegates. i look at the same time and said there are two of the three by the polling at least have a real shot at beating hillary clinton in the fall. my looked at those two groups and said there is only one guy that fits in both of those categories. it is ted cruz. on top of the fact, and i looked at the issues. you heard me tonight, you heard

me in the comments i made this week. i have never gone after donald trump or any other candidate. it is all about forecast. this is the default endorsement for me. some of the other former candidates, they are getting behind a particular candidate to block donald trump. i am not doing this to block donald trump. mark: so what about him saying you are not a motorcycle guy? scott walker: in wisconsin, we don't debate. you can say whatever you want. you can come out, i will show you my 21,000 miles on my harley davidson. voters are gravitating to ted cruz because they say, what does this have to do with the president of united states? we don't need someone good at giving insults to others. we need someone who is going to lead. john: because of this controversy over abortion, you have been a leader in the pro-life movement both in the state and nationally.

he was asked if abortion should be outlawed, who would be punished. and he was staggering around and ended up on the woman that should be punished. do you believe he is generally pro-life? do you think voters should believe he is generally pro-life? scott walker: i don't try to interpret. for me, anytime there is a situation involving abortion, it is a horrible tragedy. it is a tragedy for the woman, the child, and our hearts should go out to anyone. any of us who are generally pro-life know it is not an looking at assigning blame but just feeling bad about the entire situation and trying to find ways to avoid that in the first place. those are things people have to look at. for a lot of people in this state, who care deeply about

that issue, what they will look at is not just with a particular candidate said. they will look at ted cruz and the other candidates for that matter and say, where have their beliefs of been in the past? ted cruz on planned parenthood, you cannot say he has been back and forth, but you can say that of other candidates. this is a guy who, in the state house and state office, member of the united states senate, now presidential candidate, has been consistent. john: we had pro-life leaders on our show today talking about donald trump, he seems cynical, he is not really pro-life. he seems craven. an act of political calculation. when you listen, do you think that person is a credible, a credible pro-life commitment?

scott walker: let me try to answer this. when i hear ted cruz like about this issue, i hear someone who understands the issue, someone who has been hard else, thought about this long been he ever got in public office either at state or national. that is the sort of thing that will resonate. the sincerity of knowing this is the core principle, the sort of thing that does well in the public and primaries. this is that will help ted cruz in the general election. if you look at -- if i recall any example -- i had 20% of the electorate voted for me and voted for barack obama. that is about absurd as you can think of politically. someone for me and obama at the same time. they were in midwest, battleground states like ohio, michigan, others. that is where ted cruz has the upper hand. you will never doubt where ted cruz comes from on these issues. mark: i am not trying to bait you, i know that will not work. the candidate you are supporting his outspoken. you are being reserved. if it is important to stop donald trump then shouldn't you say why? ted cruz is less likely to be

the republican nominee than donald trump. scott walker: in the end, and this may be different when you go to new york or somewhere else, people in wisconsin -- i know them well having gone through three campaigns since 2010. people do not want to hear who you are against and wide. they want to know who you are for. mark: so you think it will reflect that? scott walker: the only as a person but who i am as a person in wisconsinite. he would do well in midwestern states because what we want to know is what you stand for, what you believe. voters are pretty smart. they don't need someone to tell me what is wrong with someone else.

they can figure that out themselves. mark: would you support or donald trump as republican nominee? scott walker: i did not raise my hands. everybody else said as i did i would not run as third-party, support anybody else. i would support the nominee. i would hope the nominee after the win for ted cruz is ted cruz. it makes it easier. but i am a man of my word. i will work my dog gone hardest to make sure ted cruz not only wins here, but that is the turning point. we look back in time and say that was a key moment that turned this election around. mark: thank you. i appreciate it. john: more of the "best of with all due respect" ahead. ♪ ♪ john: a week full of controversies, most of them just trumpoversies.

♪ john: a week full of controversies, most of them just trumpoversies. we will bring you political news next week. mark: we have a new episode of "with all due respect next" monday. john: check out bloomberg.com for the latest on the politics. if you are in washington dc, you

can also hear us on the radio at 99.1 fm. ♪

emily: he was the most unlikely candidate for the job. limited investing experience. larry page tapped him to start a capital fund. one year later, google ventures was born. investment arm has become one of the most active firms in silicon valley with $2.4 billion to spend and investments in over 300 companies, including cooper, nest, and plaque. joining me