mark: i am mark halperin. john: i am john heilemann. with all due respect to hillary clinton's list of favorite new york foods, what is this? chopped liver? ♪ happy tax/boston marathon/animal crackers day. ted cruz's campaign is writing a high of political wrangling in wyoming and georgia where his delegates swept up state conventions, narrowing donald trump's lead. cruz has never been closer to securing the republican

nomination, and yet, he remains miles and miles yonder. he would have to win more than 80% of the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination before the convention, and trump is expected to diminish those chances with a likely win in new york tomorrow. it is no surprise that on a "good morning america" townhall, cruz was asked by a voter if he would ever consider being trumps running mate. >> i have zero interest whatsoever. [applause] there are a lot of reasons, but perhaps the simplest is, if donald is the nominee, hillary wins by double digits, and i don't think there is anything we can do to change that. john: that's not the first time ted cruz has said that. he has said it before. he said that will say it again. do you taken seriously? mark: i believe there is a convention scenario, the third

most likely in my mind, after trump winning an outright majority, when talk happens or if talk happens of a third candidate, john kasich or someone else who is way behind in the delicate tally, those two guys combining is the simplest way to un-deadlock the convention. john: donald trump would say, he's a liar. mark: they would both say, it's just politics. john: here is the thing. there's never been anybody i know of who has been offered the vice president and when offered the opportunity to be on the ticket say no. there is sense for anyone running for president to accept in advance the notion of an understudy job, but when you are offered the chance to be the second most powerful person in the united states, the offer is too tempting. john: ted cruz says, trump will

lose. why would i want to be on a losing ticket? for a variety of reasons. as the vice presidential nominee, it would give me a leg up the next time. i don't think those guys would walk away and let a third person be the nominee. john it is fair to say there's : a lot of acrimony between the two of them, but they are both antiestablishment kind of candidates. they are more aligned than they are at odds. mark: i think it only happens to break a deadlock. earlybird donald trump was up, busy tweeting away about the texas senator, writing that he cannot appeal to the voters. hillary would destroy him or ka sich. later on "gma," the cruzes were asked about the tone of the republican race and how it is to

be on the wrong end of trump's personal attacks. here is what heidi kruse said. >> one of the qualities i have admired about ted is how incredibly unflappable he is. things don't bother ted that bother most people. a reason for that that i have seen over the past 16 years is that ted is in politics for the issues, to focus on the issues, to get things done, and he does depersonalize a lot of these attacks. mark: if that sounds familiar to you, that is because ted cruz said exactly the same thing in his interview with us on friday. >> this should not be personal. it's not about him. it's not about me. it's about the country. it's about, who has real solutions? millions of americans are hurting. wages have stagnated. what i'm focused on is, how do we bring manufacturing jobs to new york? how do we see wages wise? how do we see young people coming out of school to job offers?

what i focused on is lifting the burden of washington on small business, repealing obamacare, passing a flat tax, pulling back the regulators, stopping amnesty, and ending sanctuary cities. those are the solutions we need to the real problem, and it's why we are getting so much support. mark: do you believe ted cruz when he says he takes this stuff less personally? john: donald trump calls the man lyin' ted cruz. i'm joking. that was one of the most boilerplate kind of answers ted cruz gave us in the whole interview. i think it would be hard, if he is a human being, to not personalize the attacks, the nature of the attacks donald trump has launched against him and insultingly about his wife. i think it would be weird if he did not take it personally. i think he is more or less capable of it. i haven't seen any evidence of that. trump has gotten under his skin.

mark: we are deeply in disagreement. i believe the stuff on his wife did bother him, and i believe he's a lot like dick cheney. he cannot let personal attacks bother him. his attitude basically was, what do i care what someone else says? i think ted cruz has had an advantage in this race because he doesn't personalize this stuff. it doesn't get under his skin. he gets what politics is like. i think it's a big advantage for him, and he's better at letting it go off his back. john: i will agree with you that i think he may be a little better than the worst politicians, but it seems to me that throughout this race, there have been moments when he has been less discombobulated by donald trump's attacks than jeb was. mark: or marco rubio or john kasich. john: especially surrounding his wife, i think it cut pretty close to the bone. mark: it does not get to him. it affects his

performance, but it doesn't get to him. john: as donald trump's team positions himself for a big victory tomorrow, his supporters are expressing optimism about his chances to secure the republican nomination on the first ballot. while ted cruz continues to outmaneuver trump at the state and county convention, friends of the donald are going further, saying publicly that trump must win the nomination on a first ballot. is that smart? mark: i understand what they are doing. some of them are saying it because they think it's true. i don't think it's entirely true, although it's looking more and more that way. they're trying to say it to encourage people to get on board, but man, i think it's dumb to say, we can't win on a second ballot. that is a self-fulfilling prophecy. john: i think you want to say, let's take care of this on the first ballot. there are a lot of ways to exhort your potential supporters without talking about the doomsday scenario.

they are headed to a complicated scenario. i think it is true that if he doesn't win on the first ballot, he's very unlikely to win the nomination, but it seems to me to serve less purpose than you think it serves in terms of motivation. i think you should be like, let's go out there and win these primaries. mark: let's say he performs very well over the next few weeks. on the second ballot, he would have fewer votes, but i don't think ted cruz would have a majority. then trump says to him, be my running mate. let's end this now. john: this message has two audiences. one is the media, no upside in telling the media it's do or die. i don't think it motivates any potential voters. voters don't think that way. they think, rally around donald trump. mark: it might motivate some delegates who are unbound. john: maybe a few, but you've got to be like, let's win those primaries. mark: up next, if bernie sanders

meets the pope and nobody takes any pictures does it make a , sound? we will answer that metaphysical, confusing question right after this. john: i like that question. it's funny. [laughter] ♪

mark: it was objectively another banner bernie weekend in gotham city. bernie sanders held his biggest rally ever on sunday, drawing 28,000 people to prospect park in brooklyn. despite that love and sanders belated support for a bill that would allow victims of 9/11 victims to sue saudi arabia, the vermont senator has shown no concrete signs of closing the gap with hillary clinton in new york state.

in most empire state polls, sanders still trails the democratic front-runner by low double digits. with all his time on the ground and all the advertising that is running, why does bernie sanders not seem to have moved his numbers in new york? john: on the basis of the historical trend, i find it puzzling. in the end, what it speaks to more than anything is that hillary clinton's firewall is much more durable than some of us thought it would be, that it's very strong, and she has played her cards right, especially on the issue of guns, which matters in a lot of places where he has campaigned hard. mark: she has worked the state hard, and she has flaunted her expertise about how to run in new york. i think she has had maybe more good days than he has, that certainly as many, and she has done what she has done from the beginning when it was clear to her bernie sanders was the main opponent. she has tried to use the issue

of guns and gun control to blunt attacks on things like wall street. she has not paid any price for doing things like hugging him on the minimum wage, fracking, or on trade issues. i think he has failed to change the dynamic of the race by doing anything dramatic. he has campaigned hard, debated hard, but he hasn't done anything to change the dynamic. john: the gun issue has been a huge problem for bernie sanders throughout this fight, and maybe new york city, more than any other place in the country, it's a powerful argument for her. mark: you have seen her surrogate activity in new york which is very powerful. john: on friday, and in fact for much of last week, mark and i expressed skepticism about the wisdom of bernie sanders leaving new york in the middle of this primary campaign to speak at a vatican city conference on economic inequality.

here's a quick refresher. >> given where he stands right now in this new york race, it would've been better for him to fly to place called rome, new york. mark: i thought they might have some secret reason why this trip was good. john: the pope was going to show up. mark: bernie sanders wanted to go. you thought it was an honor to be included. he got some coverage, but man, it makes no more sense to me than it did before. i predicted it was going to be canceled. it might as well have been. john: it turns out bernie sanders did get to meet with the pope privately, though there were no selfies or pictures documenting the encounter. given everything we now know, including this papel are you having , second thoughts about your skepticism, your criticism of the trip to the vatican?

mark it takes a giant man : to admit he was wrong. even though there are no pictures of that meeting, bernie sanders feels really good about that trip. john: are you congratulating yourself for admitting you were wrong? mark: no. i don't think he would have won the new york primary had he stayed. i think he would have continued campaigning in a workmanlike way. this trip made him feel good. he felt spiritually good. he felt good about going. john: he's a happy man. mark: glad he met the pope, honored to participate in this conference. good thing he went. john: to the day i die, i will say there's not a seasoned political veteran, camping strategist or veteran, and i'm sure deep in their hearts, many people around bernie sanders himself -- mark: not that deep. john: they would have said, we would have rather spent this day in new york. the main thing that will be a saving grace is if he loses by 10 points or 12 points, he will at least be about to look back on this and say, it didn't cost me the primary. i continue to believe that if

he loses by a point or two points, people in his inner circle, they will think, i'm not sure that was worth it. mark: the thing i'm eager to discuss with tad devine -- they did this huge rally last night in brooklyn. they did a huge rally in washington square park. why didn't they frontload those? why not out of wisconsin? john: i don't know the answer. mark: fabled new york state dining critic hillary clinton published a list of her favorite empire state restaurants and foodstuffs on the website thrillist. it's quite a list. john and i read it earlier this morning. we went through the list, which includes everything from upstate pizzerias and barbecue joints to the midtown establishment hillstone and red rooster. review her review. how good is clinton's new york food list? john: i want to start by admitting the following. many of these restaurants are

utterly unfamiliar to me because many of them are outside the five boroughs. i would say it's a very political list. the truth is, i know the restaurants the clintons go to. they are great restaurants. i could name six or seven places that i know they love that are not on this list. they aren't on this list because they would've displaced places from geographically important spots around the state she is trying to take off the list so she has a restaurant in every county in new york. mark: you are psychotic. it's a fantastic list. everything on that list i am familiar with is good. she was a senator from new york. john: i'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. mark: it is -- i won't say that i am certain senator clinton did it all herself, but i am pretty confident she has eaten at every place, and it is a well curated -- she didn't say best. these are the places she likes.

i would say the clinton campaign has largely been a competent operation. the creation and execution of this list -- john: it's a political list. mark: political backed up by quality food. john: here's the one thing i can tell you, red rooster is very good. mark: nicely done. staff work, well done. john: really well done. those are not her favorite restaurants. up next, bernie sanders's senior advisor tad devine joins us on set. we will talk about tomorrow's primary and what comes next after these words from our sponsors. ♪

john: our first tonight maybe

feeling a little sunburn from yesterday's massive rally in prospect park in brooklyn. tad devine, the vermont senator's senior advisor, thanks for stopping by. i want to talk about the news. you guys are complaining, upset following some complaint against the clinton campaign for its coordinated fundraising in hollywood. explain what that is about. tad: there has been a lot of reporting in recent days about the way these joint fundraising committees are operating. the clinton campaign appears to be holding out to the public that they are doing this great service to the party, raising enormous amounts of money, spreading the wealth around. they are raising a lot of money. they are funneling it back into the campaign. they are paying overhead costs. they are spending millions of dollars for low dollar donors. there is one statistic that there was to raise $3.2 million. $4 millionwe think it should be looked into. there should be transparency. john: are you suggesting they are violating the fundraising

limits? tad: i think that is a question that needs to be investigated. there is a limit of $2700 for individual contributions. we need some more transparency. our campaign is not going to be involved in a system that is not in full accordance with the law, and also, bernie is concerned that many of the things, the reforms that president obama tried to implement them with party fundraising, we are moving away from that. he feels we should be moving in the opposite direction, towards the kind of system he has developed himself and implemented, which is to move away from super pacs and bundled contributions. mark: let's talk about the race at 30,000 feet. last time, jeff weaver was at that chair and he said he had a secret document showing the path to nomination for bernie sanders. assuming you all do not win 60% to 40% tomorrow, is there still a mathematical path? tad: there is. the skepticism amongst this

-- john: the people who do math. tad: i've spent a lot of time counting delegates through the years. in the last couple weeks, we have made up ground. we picked up a few delegates over the weekend in colorado. a lot of our people showed up even though there was a blizzard. i believe we can get there by the end, and by get there, i mean, i believe we can have more pledged delegates than hillary clinton by the voting ends in june. mark: give us an example of states where you will make up big amounts of ground. john: to be clear, you are 195 behind. tad: we were 326 behind in the middle of march. there are 1675 pledged delegates left to be selected. we have to make up less than 200. here is where. in places like oregon, i think we are going to have a very strong victory. there are 807 pledged delegates

on the seventh of june, including a huge hall in california. by the time we get to california, i believe we can be in a position to win across e board in california, every demographic group, and win a sizable and substantial victory. the caucus process is a living delegate calendar, and it is as backloaded as the delegate allocation calendar is frontloaded in the primary process. we are going to continue to win delegates and delegates and pick up three or four here, four or five there. you win four delegates in a state convention, and you take those delegates away from your opponent, you get eight net. that is how we are going to do it. john: answer the question that mark and i debated earlier in the show. every state i have seen so far when bernie sanders has had time on the ground, time on the air, he has closed the gap and often won those states. he has not moved the needle in new york.

yes that's a lot of time and money. why is the needle not moving more? tad: we will see how far the needle moves tomorrow. the real clear politics average of michigan was down 21% the day we won it. let's give him one more day. i agree with you. we haven't seen the kind of public poll movement that we have seen elsewhere. one of our strongest groups, independents, cannot vote in new york. the restrictions on getting people into the process, like when you can change party affiliation, was before we began to grow. three, this is hillary clinton's home state. she is well known and well-liked here. she has real standing with voters here. i think there are a lot of places where she has an advantage, but having said that, i will tell you -- if you were out there yesterday with 30,000 people, and hopefully tonight, if you were in washington square last weekend, you can feel it. bernie really does get things going. we want to win a lot of delegates, and next week, we've

got five contests. we want to win all across those states as well. mark: you are not predicting you will win tomorrow, are you? tad: i'm not. i think you have caught me predicting. i felt we could win in wisconsin. i thought that we could win. even the clinton polling said we were 25% down in nevada a month out and we lost by 5%. after nevada, we decided we were going to take a long path to the nomination. we are beginning to see -- i saw senator bennett at the colorado convention. senator leahy has said the same thing. senators who are endorsing hillary clinton are saying, we are going to look at who has the most pledged delegates. the more people start saying that, i think it's going to become apparent that there is a road for us. mark: there is back and forth in the role of superdelegates. are you fine with having superdelegates put you over the top? tad: i think both candidates

need superdelegates. mark: if she has more elected pledged delegates, you think it is fine to reverse the lead by winning more superdelegates? tad: i do. i think superdelegates have an obligation to do what is right for the party. john: don't go anywhere. you are going to stay here. we will be back with more on the highs and lows of this democratic race, especially the sanders campaign. ♪

mark: we are here with bernie sanders' senior advisor tad devine. you were in brooklyn last night

at this huge rally with your daughters. are they bernie supporters? tad: absolutely. they are under 30. mark: most americans have never been to these events. tell people what they are like. tad: over one million have, and i think that itself is a credit to the system. it's a good atmosphere. there is some entertainment provided, and then bernie comes in for an hour to an hour and 15 minutes, and he talks about his agenda. people really get excited. you can see it in their faces. mark: he has been an extraordinary candidate in terms of crowd size, pretty close to unprecedented for a candidate not in the general election. does that matter? does that have meaning, or do you collect e-mail addresses and have voter contact? tad: we did in iowa and new hampshire. we did a lot of organizing around events. yes, it matters and helps with the organizing, but i think the thing it does -- we are going to play this out on a big stage in

california -- he can go into these places, and by barnstorming, we are going to try to do it by plane in california. he can get this tremdous energy unleashed in communities with his presence. mark: let me second guess one decision i don't understand. the two rallies, the one last night and in washington square park, why not do those at the front end of the primary to send a message to folks that he could have draw here and keep the momentum going? tad: we wanted to get in on the ground. we wanted to build. we felt it was good to have more momentum at the end. 95% of the people who vote in the new york primary are going to vote tomorrow. if it had been early vote, we would have done earlier rallies. john: you pointed out we've got a long way to go. i'm going to ask you a question that is not a ballot victory question. it is a halftime question. this is a unique campaign. talk about the high points of the campaign, one or two things

you know you will remember for the rest of your life. tad: the fact that we could go from that announcement we made on april 30 and in less than a month put together a 5000-person event in burlington and a campaign presence in iowa and new hampshire, that's a gigantic moment. the early rallies that happened spontaneously in minnesota and wisconsin, and the west coast trip, that was indicative this was something special and unique. in the debates, the progress he has made from the first debate where he walked on that national stage for the first time, and the last one where he showed he was able to engage in a serious way -- there have been a lot of moments. to win michigan the way he did, even iowa -- we were 15 points down in iowa a month out. mark: have known him for a long time, and i know he's a constant guy, but what is something he has done that has surprised you? tad: to see him move so far so fast as a candidate for president, to be able to walk on that big stage and command it

the way he does, particularly in these large-scale events, for someone i've known in a smaller setting, to see him go on that large stage and take it over has been impressive. john: on this show, we have given a fair amount attention to jane sanders. from the beginning, she was an influential part of your campaign. she would make arguments that he needed to show more of his human side. can you think of an example where she has weighed in on a policy matter or strategic matter and has had a positive effect? tad: she is with him all the time and talks to him constantly about issues and policy. that's just a routine thing. i can't think of anything in particular. jane is a big part of the campaign in a serious and substantive way. she has helped me with the advertising. she approves the ads. the "america" ad, she had a change in it. i had originally had bernie speaking at the end and she was

right, it became better. john: let's say for the record she is way more influential than jeff weaver. tad: we all know that, but i can say that the job jeff has done in this campaign is incredible. i can't tell you how much respect and affection i have for him. it's been to build this campaign from where we started. it is a phenomenal management. he deserves a lot of credit. mark: you have done tons of campaigns. this one is unique and special in a lot of ways. what are two things you have learned from this campaign you would teach in campaign management school? tad: the age of campaigning right now is affected so much by technology. the smartphone is the most powerful weapon in politics. i used to talk about that with my students at nyu. to be able to take that phone out and push a button and for millions of dollars to come in, to organize the way we have, 45 million volunteer phone calls -- i think that is lesson number one. lesson number two is an old lesson.

if you have the right message and a messenger who is credible, you can overcome insurmountable odds. message still matters. technology and message are the takeaways. john: is there anything you have come to appreciate about hillary clinton that you didn't appreciate before? tad: she is just so formidable and disciplined as a candidate. president obama has that skill, as well. i think we see it every day in his presidency. mark: in this race, a lot has been made of some slipups or perceived slipups he has had. i want to ask you about two of them. one, "the new york daily news." was that a bum rap? tad: jeff said to me, you should read the transcript. i had three hours to myself. i think i counted him being interrupted 23 times. i think he went in and it was very adversarial. people had their takeaways that were fundamentally unfair.

mark: what about his not knowing that we don't use subway tokens? tad: they both have subway incidents. we can live with that one. mark: thanks very much. best of luck to you tomorrow. next up, the ying and yang of political soothsaying. you can guess who is going to join us in the next few minutes as we go to commercial break. ♪

john: welcome back. we are joined by two people at opposite ends of the set and opposite ends of the political spectrum, although they agree on everything. former chief of staff to al gore, mike feldman, and communications director to

george w. bush, nicole wallace. they are both swell people, despite their differences and similarities. nicole what could happen , tomorrow that is within the realm of the plausible that would surprise you? nicole: nothing. trump, i think, is going to win big. the notion that wisconsin was anything other than an opportunity for the people who were arguing for him to do some things differently was never the case. i think it strengthened the hand of people who wanted him to hate-tweet a little less and wanted him to pull back from this media exposure. he strengthen those people by losing in wisconsin. he has made some necessary adjustments, and i think he is in a great position. the democratic race might be closer than people thought it would be. i thought hillary would be dominant. on the republican side, it will be, as everyone predicted, a huge night for trump. john: tad devine was sitting

here saying, give me another day. we will see how it closes. what do you expect and what would surprise you on the democratic side? mike: i suppose bernie sanders could do better than the polls are showing, and we would be having a conversation about his momentum, but i don't think anything is going to fundamentally change the outcome. i don't think there is anything that could happen tomorrow that makes it him more likely to get the nomination. on the republican side, i agree with nicole. i think it is likely that donald trump will be closer to that magic number tomorrow or wednesday, and then the question is, what is the opening? how close can he get to that magic number? is he close enough that momentum takes them on the first ballot, or does the stop-trump movement actually have any gas left? mark: here is what has surprised me the most.

out of wisconsin, you had two national front runners hurt, coming to their home base, the media capital of the world. if you look at what crews, kasich, and sanders have done, they have basically done traditional campaigning. john kasich gave one big speech, but otherwise, they have done traditional things, nothing would change -- that would change the dynamic. do you agree with that? nicole: i think the kasich campaign was disheartened/disoriented by the fact that the establishment started to move towards cruz. i think the rubio case against cruz was his record on national security. i think after wisconsin, there was an opening and taking a breath. cruz has managed to mystify some wings of the establishment by consolidating people who strongly disagree with him. bill kristol and others have made the case against his worldview.

mark: not enough to be a challenger in new york. mike: the other thing he has been doing is a methodical, intentional search for delegates. by the way, not all of those have gone -- have been in new york. this will matter to him if it becomes a fight at the convention. nicole: i think this is where he loses by winning. yes, he's winning. yes, he may end up on the second ballot having more delegates than trump, but i think what trump has done, he has set up this narrative over a rigged system where you don't have to be a republican or a trump supporter to walk around and say, yeah, it's rigged. that has sunk in, and people believe that. john: explain to me how this works. i'm on the record saying i think trump has played this brilliantly and the argument he is making sits his brand and the energy behind him. he's doing this as a two-track thing. he has hired paul manafort. he's hired rick wiley.

he is doing this stuff to say rigged.em is how does that contradiction not catch up with him other through the press corps or, more broadly, his opponents making a point? mike: he knows and smart people have been telling him at the end, that will take you so far. if you don't get the nomination on the first ballot, if you don't have the magic number, this becomes an inside game. this becomes direct indication to people who matter. who pushes their levers? how do we get enough delegate votes to win? he's got no choice. he is behind in that front or that is something the crew campaign has been excelling at. nicole: trump is interesting in that he has not made any adjustments to what is really a non-campaign campaign. he's running against the guy with the best campaign organization on either side.

he is running a bush 2004-like campaign. ted cruz is running a superb campaign. it's technically perfect. it uses technology. they are finding their voters. trump hasn't -- he has done the things you have mentioned, but he isn't playing that game. he is using the bully pulpit. it's a gamble, but it seems very trump-like. mark: we've got new york and some other northeastern states. donald trump looks poised to do well. he is in a fight with the republican national committee, and the republican national committee is fighting back. they are saying, we don't care who the nominee is. reince previous can stay as chairman. if you were advising reince previous, would you tell him to keep fighting with donald trump or put his head down? nicolle: he's in an untenable situation, and i think he's winning the temperament game. he's not blustery, and i don't think you can fight trump with bluster. he's letting trump on the bluster game. saying on the sunday shows, i'm

not going to take this personally. trump is making this very personal. in the fight with megyn kelly, when someone attacks you are professionalism, you have to stand up, cleave that off. the rnc is an institution that has integrity, had integrity, and on my watch, will always have the integrity the party deserves. i would advise him to always defend the honor and integrity and ethics of the rnc. i think he is taking a big bite out of that. mark: think if trump is the nominee, reince gets to stay as chairman? mike: i doubt it. i'm not sure he wants to. he can't win a public fight with donald trump, and he's not going to be able to collaborate with him. this is a conversation he is having with other leaders in the republican party who are like, stand up straight, make sure we don't come out the wrong end, and if the worst happens, how do we protect the senate?

how do we keep the house? reince priebus has one eye on those audiences. hardublic fights really for him. john: you were talking about rigged systems on the republican side and some of the craziness on the republican side. on the democratic side, it is institutionalized. it is openly rigged with the superdelegates, and there is a reason why that is. given the controversy, first in 2008, then in 2016, is that a tenable system for a millennial democratic party to have a lot of establishment grantees? mike: it's tenable. i think this race on both sides has opened up a conversation about the process, people's dissatisfaction with the process. whether donald trump is the nominee or not, whether bernie sanders has a chance or not, those two races have made an impact on both parties. the energy and anger about the way the political process is run, this isn't the last cycle we are going to be talking about

this. nicole: i agree with that. trump and sanders have yanked the curtains down on what used to be an opaque process, not because it's a secret but it is opaque. now that it seems threatened, in peril by these establishment figures. i think sanders on the democratic side and trump have yanked the curtains down. on the republican side, they t them on fire. i think there will be a cycle-long conversation about election reform. i don't think anything happens, but i think it becomes a conversation. john: i feel like in the age of transparency and small "d" democratic politics on both sides the , democratic system has become more democratic and more transparent. i think the superdelegates will have to go at some point soon. not this cycle. nicolle: we will take them. [laughter] mike: both parties need them. people who feel disconnected

from the political process. mark: if hillary clinton wins, she is not going to want to get rid of the superdelegates. there will be a huge backup for her. mike: she will have to contend with that, and she will have to contend with keeping those voters engaged. mark: what are the odds that donald trump, if he is the nominee, unifies the party? coming out of cleveland? nicolle: 50/50. john: that's all we have time for. you don't get to speak. when we come back, the moment you have all been waiting for. cruzball, cruzing for a foozin'. mark: good thing we saved time for that. ♪

mark: are you ready for some foosball? on friday, john and i sat down with ted cruz near the syracuse sports hall of fame for an in-depth interview about politics and policy. we showed you that interview on what we didn't show you is what friday. happened after the interview, a tense, adrenaline-fueled, once-in-a-lifetime game of foosball. it was the two of us versus senator cruz and one of his aides. let's go to the videotape. ♪ mark: it was the game that champions played out in their dreams. john: we knew senator cruz had prepared his whole life for this moment. what he didn't know was, so did we. mark: from the kickoff, it was a bloodbath.

dyin' ted. >> we shall see. john: we heard rumors he had the quickest wrists in the u.s. and in canada. mark: i knew the only way to beat him was to get under his skin, which meant non-relenting amount of trash talk. this is the quietest ted cruz has been in years. what kind of job security do you have? john: mistakes were made. mark: in game one, we played our hearts out, and we were all tied up. then, victory. john: game one was ours, but that was just the beginning. >> he's got some halfway decent smack talk. john: this time, cruz was ready. mark: we called him the princeton sledgehammer. john: he just kept scoring. 2-1, 3-1, 4-1. we cannot get a shot. mr. cruz: i don't like to lose.

it was a massacre. john: everything was on the line, and tensions were running high. mark: then something amazing happened. cruz had the ball, and he made a crucial error. he was clearly getting nervous. john: he scored on us, and then we scored right back. mark: we could tell he was trying to distract us with weird jokes. >> my intent is that like human sacrifice -- the aztecs, the mayans. mark: it did not work. john: we got too cocky. >> do you need to take some personal time? mark: it was down to just one goal, and there was no room for any mistakes. john: i had the ball, and i -- i -- [sighs] the rest is history. mark: the moral of the story is,

ted cruz falls behind early. >> this was cleveland right here. mark: life is full of moments. some of them fly by and you forget in an instant. others live on with you forever. ♪ our thanks to current champions ted cruz and his aide bruce redden. you can listen to us on the radio at bloomberg 99.1 fm in the washington, d.c. area. we will be right back. ♪

john: it's time for everyone's favorite game. >> engage in hypotheticals. john: if you were "the new york

post" headline writer and if hillary clinton loses the democratic primary, your headline would be what? mark: "new york state of whaaa?" john: if it were me, it would be "blew york." mark: all right. we have a lot more 26 coverage -- 2016 coverage all the time on bloombergpolitics.com. coming up on "bloomberg west," hippo.hang talks to eric until tomorrow, sayonara. ♪

>> it is april 19 and this is "trending business." we will be taking you to sydney in the next couple of minutes. timelimbing for the first in five days. up after on the announcing robust results. first quarter production results are in line with estimates.