♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin this evening with our continuing coverage of the u.s. presidential election. donald trump and hillary clinton squared authorized by in the first presidential debate. it was held at oxford university on long island. -- hofstra university on long island. the candidates sparred over the economy and other public criticisms. the general consensus was that clinton won. here as a look at some of the -- here is a look at some of the key moments. >> president obama and secretary clinton created a vacuum the way they got out of iraq. because they got out wrong. they should not have gone in,

but once they got in, the way they got out was a disaster. and isis was formed. ms. clinton: it is just a fact that if you are a young african-american man and you do the same thing as a young white man, you are more likely to be arrested, charged, convicted, and incarcerated. we have got to address systemic racism in our justice system. we cannot just say law and order. mr. trump: i don't believe hillary has the stamina. lester: let her respond. ms. clinton: as soon as he travels to 112 countries and negotiates a peace deal, a cease-fire, a release of dissidents, and an opening of new opportunities in nations around the world, or even spent 11 hours testifying in front of a congressional committee, he can talk to me about stamina. charlie: joining me now is bob costa.

and jerry, bureau chief of the wall street journal. i am pleased to have both of them with me. we begin with you. we have all talked about who won and lost. how did you see it unfold? what did you read from these results? >> i sort of hate the win and lose in a debate. it is the wrong way to look at a debate. but i thought there were two debates. the first half hour, i thought donald trump was very effective at doing what he does, which is to make a visceral connection with voters. he started off by saying, here is the problem, our jobs are being shipped overseas. everybody can identify with that. you can debate the veracity of what he said, but it is a point that he hits very well. he made that point, and he essentially said that hillary clinton has done this for 30

years, how come you haven't solved the problems? i thought he prevailed the first 30 minutes, but then in the last 60 minutes, he got away from him. the rest of that conversation was not on his terms. charlie: you hate to use words like this, but it's almost as if she seduced him more bated in -- seduced him or baited him into getting irrational. >> hillary clinton is a very tenacious person. she prepared heavily. you got the feeling that there was a set of marks that she wanted to hit. you got the feeling she didn't miss any of them, she hit every one. he, by contrast, by the end of the night, never talked about immigration, his signature issue. did not talk about building the wall. hillarytalk about clinton: some of his supporters "deplorables." a sign think, was just

that some of those things got away from him a little bit. charlie: top costa, what is the trump camp saying today? i the morning of the debate, was at trump tower and watched people go in and out. there were a lot of family members, it was low-key. there is no mock debate going on. isp advisors, what's going on? they said trump is just being trump. that is what we saw. he did not make an ideological argument for conservatism. but he hit his spots on trade, and partly on immigration, talking about the economy in a populist way. but also, a candidate used use the norms and does not -- a candidate who skews the norms and does not do the normal preparation. charlie: so today what is he saying? >> there is a lot of defensiveness right now. his advisers are pretty much just making excuses.

they are saying the moderator, lester holt of nbc news, should have asked more questions about the clinton foundation and benghazi. there was some disappointment privately. publicly, a lot of claims that trump did fine. his base is still with him. voters saw what -- saw someone who was passionate, if not irritable. privately, there is disappointment that he did not ask and his appeal. this was in front of 80 million viewers. he kept his base but did not make an overture. charlie: why didn't he? >> because it comes down to what happens before the debate. trump did not have a strategy, he did not have preparation. beddeds a candidate who he could be extraneous and a natural performer coming out of television. charlie: you think he underestimated her? >> i think he saw in her someone

who would position for change, and that would be enough to make a case against her. we saw that points still matter. especially in the age of fact checking. charlie: you saw the two of them on stage. on the monitor i was watching, you frequently did not see the moderator. you just saw them standing up together. in the beginning, you thought he was making these rational arguments. even though he came right out of his campaign speech, you could see parts of that, as it should be. there is a debate. he's been asked to articulate. it's the same thing he has been campaigning on in the primaries and through the general election. he looked presidential, he is on the stage with a woman who has been a senator for two terms and a secretary of state, a first lady. this is what he has to do. he has to be on the same stage with her.

he has to be believable as a president, believable as a major political leader. a challenge for him, to pass a plausibility test. he didn't have to beat hillary clinton. i think he had to pass a plausibility test. with some people, he probably did. i think he missed an opportunity to expand that pace. he did not do anything to shrink the base. those people are with him. they thought he did just fine. that's not the issue. did he do something to reach out to suburban white women? or to expand his appeal? i think in the end, when you step back from it, i'm not sure it will move the needle in a big way. clinton probably did herself some good with those suburban women, with the way she went after the birther issue.

african-americans were starting to show weakness for her. i don't think she necessarily did anything to win over millennials, which are a problem for her. bob: one of the key moments was exchange on his own tax returns. he has been able to really posture in this campaign as a working man's billionaire, as a brash political outsider. a disruption in a political scene people have become frustrated by. when he seemed to almost no federalhe paid income tax, it played into clinton's argument that is not an outsider, but he is coming out of the republican mainstream tax cuts, protect the wealthy. charlie: where does he go from here? will the next debate be a dramatically different debate from donald trump as far as you might notice early?

>> i think so. when i was in the spin room last night, i huddled for a bit with mayor giuliani. i said, what's the plan for st. louis? they said he wants to take the gloves off even more. his natural mode is to fight, fight, fight. he thought that even though he was speaking rapidly and combative, when it comes to president clinton, bill clinton, his personal infidelities in the past, his problems, trump wants to make this more deeply personal in the second showdown. charlie: will that draw new voters to donald trump? >> it is dangerous, i think. if our analysis is that all right, the first part of the debate when he was not that kind of donald trump was his most effective part. but, you know, he's often told people that he needs to be true to himself. i think he believes that is the donald trump that works best. the donald trump who got the

nomination. the donald trump he has -- he is the most comfortable with, and he has been successful. i do think that one of the dangers here is that they overreact to this debate and go too far in a different direction. maybe that is playing into her hands. what hillary clinton was trying to do sometimes last night was theait him, and he grabbed bait. there is potential game there, but also potential danger. you have to wonder which voters he is meeting to appeal to, and will that add to list? charlie: when will the first poll come out? >> i think thursday, friday. there are quick polls, which are useful, but not deeply meaningful. over the years, i conclude that you need to let three or four days pass before the dust settles. has it really changed anyone's mind? has it changed the way they view somebody enough to move?

i don't think that is findable in the first 24 hours. bob, do you believe the surge that took place before this debate, which brought a very close, was because of positive things donald trump was doing, or for some rough water for hillary clinton, from the deplorables to the collapse of 9/11? was a mix of the handling of the health episode and the deplorables remark, but it is also because trump found his groove in these crucial swing states on trade and on the economy. not so much on immigration, but on trade and economy for white, working-class voters. he said "i will be your voice." episode came back, he did not have a clear answer, and that we find ourselves here. charlie: how did he handle foreign policy?

>> he has a view on foreign policy that shakes up republican foreign policy thinkers. but it has residents. -- resonance. when he says the japanese should pay more, a lot of people are saying that's right. a lot of people believe that. i'm not sure why they think that. ifrlie: people get upset they have not paid up, that you won't defend them. the idea and i think that alliances matter, which was hillary clinton's comeback to that, has residents. i think the harder question for her is going to be the one she tried to do on him. donald trump has an answer on isis, i am a tough guy and i will take care of bad guys. it is not policy, but an attitude that has residents -- resonance. point i would make,

there is a message that he delivers that is radically different for a republican. on trade and on immigration. he has changed the republican party's position on two key issues, and those issues still around thence country and in swing states. i don't think that will diminish the fact that that has worked for him. bob: but the muddled answer for trump on public policy. he is so different on trade and immigration, but on foreign policy, he has non-interventionist instincts that have been able to win over some voters that have distanced themselves from the party ever since bush and the iraq war. trump out himself not making an anti-hawkish case against clinton, but rather zooming around on the iraq question, and that was such a missed opportunity for a swath of

voters that is looking for an non-interventionist republican. they see clinton as a little more hawkish as a democrat. charlie: regardless of how well people are reading into how well clinton did, and how there was a kind of -- over the course of an hour and a half, he seemed to get worse, not better. is there a sense he was not damaged by this, and that his constituency was certainly not affected by this and undecideds are still undecided? bob: one of trump's advisers told me that the only person not nervous right now is trump. they found it strange backstage that he was very relaxed. the reason for that, they say, is trump thinks the winds of change are behind him. he doesn't need to be perfect at all times. he actually is not interested in making a coherent case on every policy issue.

he would rather just be donald trump and hope to be a change agent and sweep into the white house. if it doesn't work, it doesn't work. made an you think he effective argument as a change agent? >> absolutely. change is his best argument this year. it is a necessary argument. it may not be a sufficient one, but it is powerful. i think he owns the change argument. charlie: because anyone running against the party in power, or running against hillary clinton, who has been in politics so long, owns the change. >> this is a populist environment and a change environment. whether he created or stumbled into it, that is the mill you in which he has prospered. i was struck, but the clinton people know this. both sides believe this is the environment we are in, but the clinton people said, ok, if we can't beat change, we have to

browse every constituency in the democratic party. clinton came on almost every front ready with what those groups wanted to hear. charlie: but here's the problem, change is a better argument in august and september than in october or november. now it's for real. i like change, but i'm a little scared about change. i think that is what hangs in the balance right now. in our latest "wall street journal"/nbc news poll, the share of people who wanted someone different versus someone who had governing authority, it had shifted a little bit. gotexperience argument better, and the change argument got a little bit worse. as you get closer to the real deal, walking in and voting for somebody, maybe that changes. charlie: where does he go from now? is he going to campaign in the thatbelt, those states

are in balance? bob: he was in florida immediately after the debate and went to miami. he is scheduled to have a rally later in the state. we talked to the campaign, and they say florida looks pretty good for them, but they are confident about two states they were not before, ohio and iowa. they are much more nervous about north carolina and virginia. they are both mid-atlantic states that are now leaning toward moderate, centerleft politics in the polls, and clinton did everything to rub them last night with her rhetoric. charlie: how about pennsylvania? bob: pennsylvania, you think of the famous saying, you have pittsburgh and philly on each side, and you have the tea, alabama in the center. pence will be in pennsylvania to try and get those steel towns out for him. the problem is is that philadelphia has 1.5 million

people in it, and she will come out of there was such an enormous advantage that it makes it very difficult for him to win pennsylvania. a republican has what -- has not won it since charlie: when is 1988. your next interview, bob? bob: hopefully soon. i spoke to him for a second in the green room. i spoke to his advisors. i think the more access, the better. i hope to get some more time. charlie: we'll be right back. stay with us. ♪

charlie: we continue our discussion about the debate. we continue with ed lewis and john meacham. i am pleased to have them on this program a day after the debate. we begin with ed lewis, who said the following. it was a tale of contrasting preparations. donald trump was gaming expectations when he said he had not spent much time working on the first presidential debate. telling the he was truth. mr. probst said his bar as low as possible, yet was still unable to clear it. it did not seem as if he even tried. consequences for donald trump? ed: that is the million-dollar question.

i and most of my colleagues have seen one debate performance many times in the past and drawn one conclusion, namely he is boorish, he is fact free. large segments of the electorate have seen a completely different debate, so the poll numbers have not gone the way we would expect. i would be astonished if he got a bounce out of last night's debate. i would be more astonished than on previous occasions. but it is quite possible. he failed to clear the bar i think he sets himself, which was very low. he has no answers to questions he must have known would come up, like the birther controversy, his net worth, or whether he would release his tax returns. he had no prepared answers on that. so to my eyes, his performance was disastrous.

missed trust my judgment of where the polls will go. charlie: what is your judgment, john? john: it was rather like a guy in a sports bar debating a woman at a brookings seminar. they were not in the same world. but a lot of america goes to sports bars. skepticismd's about our ability to prognosticate at this point. it seems to me that as the days tick by and we are down to 43 days, this is becoming more and more a referendum on secretary clinton moreso than a referendum on donald trump. she did a good bit of work at the debate proving that her conditionality is a virtue and not a vice. it does not always seem that way this year. i don't think she has closed the

deal, but i think a strong performance in the town hall permit -- in the town hall format, which is more difficult for donald trump to single her out for attack, i think we'll push this towards a result where i suspect she wins and gets below 50%. which presents its own series of issues going forward. but none of us should be surprised that donald trump decided to work from his gut, because that is what got him this far. charlie: there was a beginning , and then there was another debate that morphed into something with donald trump being off-message and interrupting, and being almost irritated in terms of what he wanted to do and say. john: essentially, this has been his performance style. i don't think any of us should

be surprised. it was more like a rally performance than a traditional debate. to him in i talked may about this. his basic view is, if the experts are so smart, why am i the nominee of the republican party? he is going to stick with this throughout. it is far too late for a pivot of any kind. it is what it is, at this point. we have the most prepared versus the least prepared major party nominee in american history. charlie: he was certainly not reagan. ronald reagan came into a debate with jimmy carter with a reputation, even though he had been governor for two terms in california, but to america not well-known, and to some

americans a bit scary. in one debate, he seemed to have cleared that up. donald trump did not do that. >> no, he did not. ronald reagan had one goal, and that was to make himself likable and believable in the role of president, and he achieved that. donald trump had one goal, which was to clear a very low bar of being a temperamentally trustworthy individual. it wasn't very hard for hillary to knock him off course. she just needed to needle him on the things that most matter to himself -- his net worth, his prowess as a business deal maker. if that's all it takes, it shouldn't be that hard for her to keep doing this. charlie: also, he's clearly -- unnervedquestion by questioning about his

inheritance, that he is not a self-made person. ed: the $14 million number comes from the debt owed in a filing in the mid-1980's for his father, as opposed to the one million that he says was a small loan that was given. that clearly riled him up. >> those who have estimated how inherited showly that if it were invested in a passive index in the 1970's, it would now be greater than his alleged netsed to worth. that is the kind of thing that his selfhe core of image as this globally envied dealmaker. hillary used a small fraction of that kind of material last night. there's a lot more where that came from.

charlie: the other thing is that her campaign has lacked enthusiasm. enthusiasm for her and certain blocks that she is dependent on. did she, and that debate last night, in the sense that she took on the birther issue in a racial way, inspire her base as well as the sanders base? i honestly think no. i think she made some progress there. my reaction is that she was , and this is always so easy to do from the comfort of where i am sitting, but i thought she was perhaps overly passive in that moment. which i totally understand. she got in stage with an angry bear. so you need to figure out what the parameters are before you can really go in and go for the kill, so to speak.

i suspect she will now -- and i saw this this morning when she was talking to reporters -- higher level of confidence, so i think she will begin to close that and inspire some of those undecideds. but let's be clear, the one big idea that has particularly younger voters excited came from bernie sanders, the college -- the free college debt plan. it goess something, and back to my referendum point. she is pretty much the establishment. there is no more establishment figure than a clinton in 2016. the new ideas she got were from her challenger. that is part of the reason you still have a significant number of people who are not ready to sign on. charlie: and he will try to make the argument, look, you have been in this for 30 years and you haven't come up with any solutions.

why should we believe he will do anything different? >> classic populist argument. it's what got him this far. charlie: indeed. experienced has going into this, we assume it will be with less momentum? with less momentum, less velocity? ed: yes, but with giant health warnings attached to them. there are pretty hardened, 40% todented blocks here 45% for each and the will not be shifted. we need to see if the turnout will be lifted in both sides. hillary clinton is probably going to get higher african-american turnout. donald trump is going to have done nothing to get the college

educated republican women in the suburbs who are important in states like pennsylvania and philadelphia. it is also a turnout game. i think hillary will have to have one point last night. charlie: it will be mostly about turnout and enthusiasm. people who support him will not be impacted by what happened last night. they will still support him. what you have to see here is whether they can build and bring out their voters with great in -- enthusiasm. ed: many have been writing that

hilary is lacking a big theme. he is lacking some big and says why you should be voting for her. i don't think in six weeks she is going to come up with it. it has been missing for a year or two. the way she is going to win is through donald trump self emulating and people fearing a trump president more than they despise hillary one. charlie: can she become more likable? and did she make some progress on that? john: she did. she is the grown-up in the room area she has to run out a turnout campaign. it was about change and she is not a plausible change agent. the clintons entered history as

agents of change. she now has to make the case but she is an agent of stability. charlie: change is not a pathway to the white house. john: that is application has to make. when she says he doesn't have the temperament, she is thing i can be trusted with the codes and can get off the helicopter and handle a crisis. i am stability and he is not worth the risk. charlie: what did you think about the gambit that he will make his tax returns available when she gives up her e-mails? ed: i think that was a clever way of getting her to feel comfortable on e-mails. on whether or not she came

across as more likable, i did watch her body language. i never comment on her fashion or body language but she did smile quite a lot and she didn't screech or shout. as some of her critics have alleged. there were a couple of critics of the red pantsuit that she came across as warm and humid because trump helped her to do so. he was really rude and "wrong"ting and saying over her answers. i think she did make progress. charlie: there is reagan in doing that.

hillary clinton used that kind of thing. i thought there was a sense of looking at him on design and with the amusement. i can't believe your continuing to do this. >> i wasn't here in the states in 1980. it was at the end of a pretty bad decade. americans were feeling a malais, as carter put it. on this potentially misreading, there is a split screen there that is symbolic of perceptions in this country. in terms of defeating that, there are a lot of people who hate hillary and are extremely

frustrated, who hear about america doing relatively well against europe and others but agree with trump. basically we're third world. his dystopian vision of america is not just half of america. the rest of the world is incredulous. hillary did not really challenge him on that. hispanics and blacks live in hell? his vision of america on the collapse was quite an extraordinary vision but a lot of americans feel this. i don't know whether his anger was entirely misplaced? it is just a question all caps what proportion do they make up and is hatred of hillary really there over writing political moment in life? charlie: it is certainly against the establishment. the future does not look as

bright in their generation. in fact after the debate he said the first thing she has to do is go to working-class areas of america and say i know how you feel and they understand the issues you are facing in your personal life and i want to tell you that even if you don't vote for me, i'm going to come back here and listen to you. you have my word that even if you don't vote for me, i will come back here to you might be something that is on a pathway for her not to gain votes but to gain a sense of who she is. john: that is an interesting idea but i was struck by the description of her father's work.

she doesn't talk about her father very much because her mother was principal factor in her life. to me, that was striking in that she was trying to present herself as what she is. a middle class that is under the severest of strains and most people don't believe it can be perpetuated. there are two numbers i always think about. to ry -- in trying describe why trump has happened. one is 19%. 19% of americans do not trust the government to do the right thing. fewer than one in five americans believe the federal government will do the right thing. the second number is 135,000. that is the number that joe biden's income necessary to

facilitate a middle-class life. as we know, the household income around $57,000. if you're looking for an explanation, it is the fall from 77 to 19. that is missing almost $80,000 of income that people have come to think of that they could enjoy that kind of life. that is why donald trump happened. charlie: thank you. we'll be right back. stay with us. ♪

charlie: edward albee died later this month. the new york times called him the foremost american playwright whose psychologically astute. in the roiling desperation and facade of daily life. three of his works one the pulitzer prize. he appeared on this program many

times to talk about his life and his world in the sierra. -- the theater. charlie: i think he is one of the forefront playwrights. he will be at some of the most access to essential questions. he confronts sex. he confronts death with eyes that are very wide open. edward albee no other way to do it. i think that any play that doesn't ask a lot of questions. there are no questions asked. if you're going to spend $100 or more, something should happen to you. someone should ask you some questions about your values and the way you think about things. maybe you should come out of the theater with something having happen to you. you should be changing of thinking about changing. if all yiou worry abou tis

worry -- if all you about is wehre you left the $100.ou just wasted charlie: you just answer the question i was about to ask you. what should you get out of the theater? something that confronts you with the life you were living. edward: exactly. it should hold a mirror up to people. this is the way you behave. this is what you accept. you don't like what you see here on stage, it should change.

many have much more questions than answers. the job is to ask interesting questions. i don't have any answers. charlie: you are where i am. a lot of questions with no answers. that is my purpose. [laughter] edward: we are functioning together. charlie: you are an artist. when he set out to write a play, how do you go about it? edward: i discovered that i have been thinking about a play. charlie: a play or an idea? edward: i started out as a rotten poet. i was a writer so i eventually try place. that work to someone better and they quit my job delivering telegrams and i got thrown out of my family's home. i had a wonderful time. charlie: why do they throw you out of the home? edward: i was in what they wanted.

they wanted someone to be a corporate drone of some kind. perhaps a doctor or lawyer or something respectable. they did not want a writer. charlie: one that wins close surprises. edward: that happened after they threw me out. [laughter] i discovered that it is formulating in my head. things are happening to them. i listened for a long time. sometimes these characters do scenes with me. i remember i am writing the play

without being conscious of it. i will test my characters out and put my characters in a situation that can't be in the play. if they can handle themselves in an if have i seen. charlie: they can handle themselves in a way that rings authentic. so what they do or say is natural to them. therefore you demand what of the artist? edward: i want people to come in and see the first play they have ever seen. they don't come in with any preconditions of what a play should be. the first play they've ever seen.

if they're willing to do that, then anything is halfway decent. charlie: they will consider that idea. i realize these are not easy standards. there are actors better than other actors. edward: of course you try to get the best actors and directors you can. charlie: have you seen plays that were better because the actors interpreted more inside your head? edward: of course. there are some actors that seem to understand getting inside my characters heads more than others. i tried to work with those actors. charlie: how long does it take you to write a good play? edward:damned if i know. not that it should take as long as it takes.

ask that other question, how long is the play? as long as it should be. charlie: for everything else. why haven't you been able to transfer this skill? edward: because i'm a playwright. i don't think like a poet or i -- or a novelist. charlie: you have a command of language. edward: i've done a lot of poetry. they were very skillful. they were imitations. mywasn't until i wrontte first play that i felt i was and i canthing well

onet in a way that no else can. thing wasn't until i was doing something that i could do well. they said yes you are a playwright and this is what you should do. they felt right for the first time and it felt like i was writing like me. i think i go around behaving like a writer. i never keep notebooks. i think i should probably start writing things down. i operate on the theory that if there is someone who wants to be in a play, it should be there at all. charlie: that idea has to be powerful enough. you are a literary person. that might compel you to write things down.

edward: as a playwright, you write your characters in this is stuff. this is stuff your characters will want to say. toy say what you want them say and you trick yourself that say.what they would charlie: once you get them going, they go. at some point they have a life of their own. what point is that? edward: before i trust them to be in the play. i will think about who they are and take them on long walks with me and i will improvise. i'll see how they behave int hat play.

if i know them well enough, i can trust them to be in the play. the difficulty comes when people don't want to relate to what you've written. you wonder if you've done your job properly. maybe you've done it too well. the difficulty comes. charlie: someone is out there producing the delicate balance. youit's destructive of what wanted the delicate balance to be. edward: that can happen from time to time. i have a few of those. charlie: you have a healthy dose of paranoia? edward: healthy, yes. [laughter]

charlie: you have a dose? how about insecurity? edward: no, i have never been insecure. of anything? i don't approve of death. i think it is a great waste of time. charlie: you would rage against it? edward: i like to think so. i don't think i would like to start a play. and not finish it. i think that would make me unhappy. charlie: when you teach playwriting at the university. edward: it's a workshop. it is not like a lecture hall. i could do that stuff, but it bores me.

charlie: what do you hope to impart to those future playwrights? edward: i tell them all don't be a playwright unless it's something that you would be an incomplete person without doing. it is a fairly ugly racket. if it is something that you need then you have got to be your own man and don't be owned by anybody. read as well as you possibly can. possiblywell as you can. you want. anyone involved in the production of the play is there because of you. tell them that. life is too short to compromise too much and sell out. learn your craft but don't be owned by anyone. charlie: the most important lesson i have learned from you as part of your own philosophy , which is to make sure that death follows life and it is inevitable and don't just glide through life. don't waste your life. seize control.

edward: what could be worse that you come to the end of your life and you are filled with regret over what you have not done and are never going to have time to do? charlie: to have said no more often to risk and experimentation. edward: always be able to see the precipice wherever you are walking. charlie: most of your stuff is about life and death. love is not the only thing. because of three pulitzer prizes achieved some exhal -- exalted place. the interesting thing is that you did not win for virginia woolf. you were awarded by the jury and then someone overruled it for reasons i have never quite understood. maybe the play was considered to violent.

edward: i can't make any judgments. some of the plays have been crucified. i think they are just as good ones. popular charlie: how about this notion? [laughter] there is the thing about tennessee williams and who else? williams and the notion that they have had great plays and lost it. edward: this happens to some playwrights. ares charlie: dud you ever fear that after all of this early success, in the 160's. 20 years ago. edward: every worthwhile writer

has an accurate take on how they should be doing and the popularity and critical acceptance but don't necessarily have much to do with excellence. you go about your business because you can't be affected by it. you are either right or you are wrong. charlie: edward albee dead at 88. ♪