this is "gps," the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria coming to you live today. we'll look back at the history of the debates. >> here you go again. >> and many thought russian relations could get no lower but they have. >> everyone's patience have warn out. also, we'll bring you a glimpse of the future and the

artificial intelligence that is becoming more and more powerful by the day. i will talk to ginny rometty, the head of ibm and will watson take our jobs or make our jobs better. but first, here's my take. donald trump has done america a great public service. no, really. by taking advantage of the country's tax laws in such a spectacular fashion, he has shun a spotlight on the corruption that is at the heart of american politics, the tax code. see, when most people discuss taxes they tend to talk about it in left-right terms. the right says the taxes are too high and the left worries that the rich don't pay their fair share but the facts don't support other position. the simplest way to judge a country's tax burden is to look at the tax revenues from all levels of government as a percentage of gdp and the u.s. has the fourth lowest burden in

the industrialized world, ranking 31st out of 34 countries. the u.s. percentage is lower today than in 2000, while the average has stayed about the same. nor is it true that the rich don't pay much in america. now obviously some people managed to arrange their affairs so they don't pay many, or in trump's case any taxes, but the federal government derived revenues from the income tax and 70% of federal income tax is paid by the top 10% of americans. it is a very progressive system. the problem with american taxes is something different. the complexity. the u.s. has the world's longest tax code. the scholars tabulated the word count which is 3,866,392 words. german and france have codes that are less than 10% as long

and size makes for burdens. in most international comparisons, the u.s. scores very poorly on this measure. for example, the world bank ranks the u.s. 53rd for its corporate tax system. the world economic forum competitiveness report polls executives on the five biggest burdens of doing business in a country, for the u.s. numbers one and two are tax rates and tax regulations. even though america is generally more competitive than other rich countries, it is taxation system is much more complicated an inefficient. why this anomaly? it is intentional. a feature, not a bug in the system. the complexity of the tax code exists by design because it allows for the distinctive feature of the american political system -- fundraising. america is unique among democracies in requiring at all levels of politics that vast

amounts of cash be raised from the private sector. in order to get this money, congressman and senators need something to offer in return. and what they sell are amendments to the tax code. when you pay $5,000 to have a stale breakfast with a congressman, you are not paying for his insights or personality. you and others like you are buying a line of the tax code, which is why it is thousands and thousands of pages long. it is the world's ultimate pay for play setup. there are only two ways to fix this problem. one would be to simply stop people from paying politicians. but the supreme court rules in buckley versus vallejo in 1976 that money is speech and constitutionally protected and this is a view shared by no other western democracy so that leaves one other path, take away what congress sells.

if the tax code were made short and simple with a handful of deductions, politicians would have little to offer people as a quid pro quo. you could still pay them for ideas and personality but i suspect the flow of money would slow to a trickle. it is the simple single exclusion to the cancer in american politics. for more go to my washington post column this week. and let's get started. ♪ let's get straight to the dos and don'ts of debating. what should donald trump and hillary clinton do in tonight's rematch? we're taking a historical perspective on this and joining me is jon meacham, author of the recent george h.w. bush

biography, kathleen hall jamieson from the university of pennsylvania and james fallow, the national correspondent for "the atlantic." jim, let me start with you. you were the chief speechwriter to jimmy carter and you describe that as being like fdr's tap dance instructor. so here we have another, shall we say, a difficult person to coach in donald trump. and i want to start with that because we can go back in history but trump has never been something quite like him. what have you observed, looking at the primary debates, looking at the first debate, what's the big takeaway for you about donald trump? >> i think the big takeaway is that his natural style, which seems to be the only style we're ever going to get out of him, was a much better match for the primary debates than it has been at least in this first election debate. he tends to play to a crowd and

big cheering audiences and in the primary debates there were ten people there or more and he could make little zingers about his opponents and putting them down and didn't have to address questions he didn't want to address. that's been different so far and he's had to fumble to get beyond his talking points and also in the general election debate, he's up against a woman. that's happened only once when he was there with carly fiorina. historically, donald trump is at his least aggressive and most abash when having a woman face-to-face. those are the three big things that his natural traits were good for him in the primaries but less good for him in the general. >> jon meacham, when you look at bush senior, there is a famous moment in '92 which i think about because it was a town hall and a woman asks bush about the national debt and bush gives a

very wonky answer and then the same question is put to clinton and clinton moves in to her, understands that she really is not actually asking about the national debt, is just expressing some kind of economic anxiety and relates to her. talk about how the town hall dynamic is different from a debate dynamic. >> oh, i think in some ways the 20th century ended that night in richmond. bush had looked at his watch, he had gotten up and attempted to be sort of a phil donahue sort of figure. he misunderstood the question. and actually, actually said the words i guess i don't get it. and the clinton aides were high-fiving each other because that captured the entire dynamic. and clinton was a creature of town halls, a creature of cable television in the same way donald trump is a creature of social media and reality

television. so mastering the means of communication of your era is critical to political success in a democracy like this. george h.w. bush, for all his many, many virtues, simply was not in his -- by 1992. and so i think the town hall for trump is going to be a very interesting question. he tends, like most salesmen, to try to take on the coloration of the audience to which he's speaking, as jim just said. will he attempt to win that person over, that questioner over and that leads him, as we've seen before in different interviews, he'll assert different policy points. that's a strong term for what he asserts. i apologize. he'll assert certain positions because he thinks that's what that person wants to hear. this may be a very long monday of cleaning up various things that he says to that person in

that moment. >> kathleen, what strikes you about this debate that's new or has historical references. >> this is a complex year in which the number of issues in the national stage that the public isn't really deeply knowledgeable about is actually very high. one of the questions about a town hall format is what will the ordinary voters who stand in for us put on the agenda as being important to them and how will the candidates define their significant differences and similarities in relationship to those concerns. it's historically true that debates forecast governance and, importantly, they can forecast where the candidates agree as well as disagree because town hall debates tend to be more civil. the audience, town halls, the people sitting there asking questions seem to demand it. >> you know, i think, kathleen, about that survey you did in 2013, i think it was, that 30%

of americans can't name a single branch of government. it will be interesting. audience, stay right there. we'll be back with more, some of the biggest historical bloopers, when we come back. to keep their global campus connected. and why a pro football team chose us to deliver fiber-enabled broadband to more than 65,000 fans. and why a leading car brand counts on us to keep their dealer network streamlined and nimble. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink.

the spare, no, i don't want to put anybody out. nonsense! we lend it to everybody. some people we hardly know.

i've never been #1 in anything until i put these babies on. now we're on a winning streak and i'm never taking them off. do i know where i'm going? absolutely. we're going to the playoff. allstate guarantees your rates won't go up just because of an accident. starting the day you sign up.

so get accident forgiveness from allstate. and be better protected from mayhem, like me. hey, jesse. who are you? i'm vern, the orange money retirement rabbit from voya. vern from voya? yep, vern from voya. why are you orange? that's a little weird. really? that's the weird part in this scenario? look, orange money represents the money you put away for retirement. save a little here and there, and over time, your money could multiply. see?

ah, ok. so, why are you orange? funny. see how voya can help you get organized at voya.com. so relax you wear many hats, at our 1000 americas and canadas best value inns. enjoy free internet and instant rewards at most locations. and we are back with jon meacham talking about the history of debates and tonight's debate. jim, i want to ask you about one debate that you were probably watching very closely. you were chief speechwriter to jimmy carter. in the carter/reagan debates, reagan looks at carter and says, there you go again. and the idea was, you know, there's carter sort of

aggressive attacking and reagan is pristine and presidential. when you look at the history of what carter was doing, pointing out entirely accurately that reagan had a history of being against social security. that fact was completely forgotten and all people remember is the magic of reagan's demeanor. >> it's true. and if we had another political scientist, apart from you, fareed, it would be that we can't really prove that the 1980 debates changed on that but certainly there's a larger subjective feel that the campaigns can pick up, that the electorate picks up, that the media picks up, too. that it did have that mark in 1980 one week before the election. and these moments usually count when there's some kind of involuntary physical reaction on the part of the debaters that has captured the screen and that

fits some preceding idea about that person. we saw it with lloyd benson and dan quayle in 1988 when he was dancing down dan quayle as no jack kennedy and in the 1980 campaign, the sense about carter was that he was too sense, beset, a man being overwhelmed by the really difficult problems of that era. and reagan who had spent eight years as governor of california, the question was, was he a comfortable enough figure in that job. and if you wanted to think that he was comfortable, this exchange, although largely incorrect, as you pointed out, did have that body language question. >> jon, what are the moments that stand out and what is it that can slip you up or make you win? is it a factual point or is it a question of demeanor? >> i think jim is right. i think style and substance, as

we often set up as dichotomies, i would actually argue that they are connected. to me, if you look at 1984, there was the question of the age issue. reagan had had a disastrous first debate in part because he was trying to correct not knowing enough facts. reagan was drilled with a number of facts and statics and reagan sort of lost his way in the first debate with walter mondale. everybody laughs, including mondale, and moves on without ever actually questioning the under lying fact of the fact that he was at that point 73, 74 years old. we talked about president bush in 1992. george w. bush and al gore in 2000, when gore seemed to be condescending to bush and bush seemed ameonable enough which is

likable enough. there are these things -- i think jim is right. there's a narrative to any human activity, human endeavor, and debates tend to confirm, i think, for most people those points. you rarely see a significant break in the tracking polling. but it is -- these are moments that endure in part because we only see these people about whom the country obsesses together now three or four times in a given year. >> kathleen, this is sounding a little bit more style and substance. what is it that you think the debates bring to the table here? what should we be looking for? what will we be left with? >> the press tends to focus on style over substance and tends to ask irrelevant questions, such as who wins the debate or a knockout punch.

you can't win 90 minutes of discourse. you can win an argument. but what debates do for voters is increase their ability to understand what the eventual victor will do in governance and clarify distinguishes between the candidates. >> thank you all. we'll bring you back after the debate to see what you thought of it. >> thank you. the second of three debates is moderated by our own cnn anderson cooper at 6:00 p.m. pacific and 9:00 p.m. eastern. russia in the midst of a major spat, stopping discussions, withdrawing from gre agreements, what is going on? a conversation with david ignatius, coming up.

♪ what if we designed a paint that not only made your bathroom look like a spa but stood up to the humidity of a shower this steamy.

this steamy yep, even this one. if it's a matte finish paint, and can resist any amount of moisture, is it still paint? find aura bath & spa, only at your benjamin moore retailer.

when legalizing safe, responsible adult use of marijuana, the most important question is how? by voting yes on prop 64: adults 21 and over could only purchase marijuana at licensed marijuana businesses. and prop 64 bans advertising directed at kids... requires strict product labeling... child-proof packaging... and bans edibles that appeal to children. smart provisions to safeguard our families. learn more about the safeguards at yeson64.org.

i think everybody's patience with russia has run out. >> that was white house press secretary josh earnest on monday after the u.s. announced it was pulling out of its ongoing discussions with russia, talks that we're trying to find some kind of a political solution for syria. that same day, in response to what it called america's unfriendly actions, russia announced it was pulling out with an agreement with the united states to dispose of enough nuclear material to make thousands of bombs. this all comes as the united states accuses russia of committing ongoing atrocities in aleppo and the fears that russia is trying to influence the

presidential election. the new cold war continues to be turning positively frigid. to discuss, let me bring in the washington post columnist david ignatius and steven cohen. david, from what you have heard from administration officials and other sources, you have some of the best, what is their plan now with relations with russia really seeming at a deadlock? >> i think, fareed, they are struggling to figure out exactly what the plan is. the u.s. view has really been from the beginning of the syria crisis that american options are not good, that military options are risky. president obama has been allergic to military from the beginning and certainly in the final months of his presidency. there's a desire to do something to alleviate the enormous human suffering in aleppo. there's a discussion of whether that should take the form of air

lifts, supplies, some effort to get new supplies into aleppo on the ground. i think the only thing that administration officials tell themselves is that as difficult and painful as this is for the united states, it will be more so for russia in the absence of this deal, that it will be, for russia, a nightmare. >> steve, what is russia's game plan here? what does it gain from this really quite brutal tragedy in syria which supports the assad regime? it is making itself target number one for jihadis all over the sunni world. >> well, russia takes a somewhat broader view of what has happened and so do i. we are in a new and much more dangerous cold war with russia. more dangerous than the presiding cold war. we now have three cold war fronts that could easily become hot war with russia.

ukraine, the baltic region, where nato is building up on russia's borders and now, of course, syria. the importance of the deal -- and let's be clear, it was negotiated and a deal between obama and putin, for essentially a military alliance in syria would have been the first since world war ii. that would have been what we used to call a cooperation breakthrough. in the new cold war, it was killed. so one question we have to ask is who and why it was killed. but clearly, it's dead. >> what's the answer to that? >> i would simply say the russians did not end it because putin and the russian class wanted this arrangement with the united states very much. so the question is, where does that leave us? and i understand what mr. ignatius has just reported, these important discussions in the white house.

but i would say that the first step forward is stop basing american national security policy on the villification of putin. russia has legitimate interest. what we used to do during the past cold war, talk about whether our national interests can be coordinated and turned into something that is cooperation. >> david, let me ask you about the specifics on syria. did the united states scuttle the deal and what do you think of russia's culpability here for what is going on in syria? >> i think steve cohen is sensible to say that in any cold war and detante in principle is a good deal. my facts are different than his. the evidence that i'm aware of is that even as the u.s. and russia had agree to a new

cease-fire plan on september 12th, the syrian regime was mobilizing for its preferred course. it did not want to see that new cease-fire take place. its preferred course was to finish the battle for aleppo, to take aleppo. key strategic target they have been going after for more than four years. and i'm told that the u.s. intelligence indicates that the russians were aware of syrian planning, syrian mobilization to do the opposite of what the cease-fire agreement promised. so early in the first days, this was supposed to produce a seven-day reduction of violence that would lead to significant new steps and, as steve says, joint u.s. american targeting of the terrorists. in that seven-day period, there were some hideous acts of violence, including a strike on a humanitarian aid convoy coming

into aleppo that showing that the u.s. moving towards a reduction of hostility, the syrian regime wanted to win. that's been the problem with these negotiations. the syrians along with their backers want to win this fight. i'm told that russia has had serious behind-the-scenes problems in dealing with its two allies. assad and syria and the military leadership in iran. further, i think there's been significant differences within the russian apparatus between the foreign ministry headed by sergey lavrov and the defense mi ministry that is on the ground and defense ministries want to win. they don't want to bargain if they are on the offensive. that would be my construction of this. i don't see evidence that the u.s. has scuttled it. the u.s. had trouble controlling its allies, that's true. but i don't see us breaking the

deal. >> all right. we're going to have to leave it at that. thank you for a very enlightening conversation. next on "gps," much bigger things like helping make sure that cancer patients get better and maybe helping you do your job better. is it a hopeful future or a frightening one? i'll ask the ceo of ibm when we come back. he was 18. we made the movie the book of life. we started doing animation. with the surface book, you can do all this stuff. you can actually draw on the screen. so crisp. i love it. it's almost like this super powerful computer and a tablet had the perfect baby. it's a typewriter for writing scripts... it's a sketchbook for sketches... ...it's a canvas for painting... you can't do that on a mac. there's a moment of truth. and now with victoza® a better moment of proof. victoza® lowers my a1c and blood sugar

better than the leading branded pill, which didn't get me to my goal. lowers my a1c better than the leading branded injectable. the one i used to take. (jim) victoza® lowers blood sugar in three ways. and while it isn't for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. non-insulin victoza® comes in a pen and is taken once a day. (announcer vo) victoza® is not recommended as the first medication to treat diabetes and is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or if you develop any allergic symptoms including itching, rash, or difficulty breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so, stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away

if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the most common side effects are headache, nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. now's the time for a better moment of proof. ask your doctor about victoza®. w...i was always searching for ways to manage my symptoms. i thought i had it covered. then i realized managing was all i was doing. when i finally told my doctor, he said humira was for people like me who have tried other medications,... but still experience the symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease. in clinical studies, the majority of patients on humira saw significant symptom relief... ...and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability to fight infections... ...including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers,... including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions,... ...and new or worsening heart failure.

before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb,... ...hepatitis b, are prone to infections, ...or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. if you're still just managing your symptoms, ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible.

in a moment, i'm going to introduce you to a multitalented brilliance. what if i told you there's someone who has used knowledge to diagnose medical mysteries. but also has collaborated as a fashion designer on a dress worn by a super model at the met gala, has helped produce the movie trailer for a major feature film, has a budding career as a weather forecaster

and at last part might have been the giveaway. i'm not talking about a person but a machine. meet watson which uses artificial intelligence and machine learning in extraordinary ways. that list of watson's accomplishments actually scares many who worry that computers are powerful enough to do almost any human job. i went to downtown manhattan to talk about with ibm's chairman and president and ceo who is also a multitalented brilliance. ibm is one of the world's largest companies with a market cap over $140 billion. welcome. >> thank you. nice to be here with you again. >> explain to us the road to watson. how did we get here and what is leading to the technology? >> this is a great question and speaks a lot to what i think

everyone is experiencing around the world. either personally or in a business. there have been three big technology trends i think shaping our lives. one, cloud, mobility and all of this explosion of data around us. you have this explosion of information. it is impossible to understand it. and this was the road to watson. we saw this long ago, that there would be all of this data but for it to really bring any value to business, you need a whole new way of computing of systems that could take that and make some sense out of it. you know, if you just think about -- go back 20 years and retail, if you were online buying something, you were a typical retailer, not typical, a big one, you might have had half a million things that you could look at. today, 20, 25 million. for you as a buyer, how do you discern what is the right thing to do? that is one small example. that is what led us to watson, this explosion of information

and that once you become digital and that led us to this world which was watson and basically think of it as the ability for systems to learn. >> how is watson different from your average computer? >> you know, this is -- it's very different and i want you to not think of it as a computer. think of watson in this new world of cognitive. think of it as in the cloud and think of it as being embedded in everything that you can do, so it impacts your daily life and your business. so when you think of it that way, as a service that can be embedded, it will touch billions of things, billions of people and billions of things that they do, basically to help you make a better decision, whether that's personally or whether that's professionally. >> so let's take medical. watson does a lot of medical work. >> yep. >> explain to us why watson is a better doctor than most doctors. >> i wouldn't say it that way.

what i really envision -- and this is an important point about cognitive. its goal is not to replace anyone. in fact, it's really been our goal, it's been about not artificial intelligence, it's about augmenting intelligence and helping people make better decisions. and that's, in fact, what we are doing. i mentioned we do work and i see this era doing work for both what you would call every day decisions as well as what i would call solving the insoleable and you mentioned health care. here's how it would go with a diagnosis. so cancer, oncology adviser is rolling out, been developed and watson has been taught by some of the best institutions in the world. the cancer center here in new york. we've done work with cleveland clinic, mayo clinic, m.d. anderson, systems abroad. what a doctor would do to assist, watson would have been able and has read all of the literature on cancer, all of the journals, the texts. your emr, your medical record,

which could be hundreds of pages long, your tests. and what it's going to do, when i said it can understand and reason, just like you and i, forms hypotheses, checks against the data, and then shows the doctor, these are the different kinds of ideas around what the diagnosis is and the appropriate treatment. >> the key difference is, correct me if i'm wrong, a doctor can hold maybe a couple hundred articles in his or her head. >> that's right. >> watson is looking at 2 million vehicles. >> well over millions and millions. >> presumably with access to millions of articles and that much data, watson must make better diagnoses than an average doctor. >> it's going to help an average doctor, absolutely. that's really the point because you won't necessarily be able to see a world-class oncologist but your oncologist or general doctor is going to have that access to help them do their job and then they actually can do

what we want our doctors to do. they spend time understanding you. an average doctor visit, as you know, can be a very small period of time. this is a world where it's going to augment what professionals do and what each of us do. >> now, in the movie business, the art of making the trailer is seen as a very soft scale, something that you have to do, appreciating what an audience will like, how it will evoke certain emotions and so a successful movie trailer has been seen as a very fine art skill that an editor puts together. and yet watson was able to do this thing that the human does and would take months apparently to cut a movie trailer and watson sort of did it in a day. explain how. >> actually, watson helped the film editor do this in a day, something it would have taken him weeks to do. this has been an element and one path we've worked on, which is creativity. in fact what watson is doing is watching different movies and watching then how people respond

and what is it they are responding to and then looking for, in this movie, what are the elements that would duplicate that. and then giving that input to the person putting together the trailer to have them then put together the most popular trailer that's going to get and illicit the right audience behavior from that. it's the idea that these systems can learn and they are learning from reaction, knowing how people's brains work, it puts that together. >> what is suggests is that all of these things we think of creativity -- >> can be assisted. >> but it can be broken down, digitized and coded so a computer can understand them? >> in many ways it can be. people think of things like smell and taste but actually -- or even the way you react when you smell something that you remember from your childhood, it brings back. these are all chemical -- can be broken down into chemical equations and in fact by doing that, then, you can come up with

better recommendations. with campbell soup, how to prepare the right recipe, remind you of when you were young and that kind of thing, they can be broken down and digitized. next on "gps" when elon musk and steven hawkings agree on something, i listen. artificial intelligence, they say, could have a downside, too. will it wipe us all out? i'll ask ginni romety when we come back. also, does she think women in high places face special challenges? whether it's connecting one of the world's most innovative campuses. or bringing wifi to 65,000 fans. businesses count on communication, and communication counts on centurylink.

i'm beowulf boritt and i'm broaa broadway set designer. when i started designing a bronx tale: the musical, i came up... ...with this idea of four towers that were fire escapes... ...essentially. i'll build a little model in photoshop and add these... ...details in with a pen. i could never do that with a mac. i feel like my job is... ...to put out there just enough detail to spur the audiences... ...imagination to fill in all the blanks. this windows pc is amazing, having all of my tools... ...right at my finger tips is incredible. to be taken care of. in good hands? like finding new ways home, car, life insurance obviously, ohhh... but with added touches you can't get everywhere else, like claim free rewards... or safe driving bonus checks. even a claim satisfaction guaranteeeeeeeeeee! in means protection plus unique extras only from an expert allstate agent.

it's good to be in, good hands. i'm terhe is.at golf. but i'd like to keep being terrible at golf for as long as i can. new patented ensure enlive has hmb plus 20 grams of protein to help rebuild muscle. for the strength and energy to do what you love. new ensure enlive. always be you. whoa. what's going on here? oh hey allison. i'm val, the orange money retirement squirrel from voya. val from voya? yeah, val from voya. quick question, what are voya retirement squirrels doing in my house?

we're putting away acorns. you know, to show the importance of saving for the future. so you're sort of like a spokes person? no, i'm more like a metaphor. okay, a spokes-metaphor. no, i'm... you're a spokes-metaphor. yeah. ok. see how voya can help you get organized at voya.com.

stephen hawking wrote that

tran century dense looks at the implications of artificial intelligence. but then he wrote, we ought to be spending more time and money on a.i., not just speedinging i. i talked to the chief about this. listen along. we have been talking about the dangers of artificial intelligence. the machines are getting too smart and we will lose control of it. do worry about that at all? >> no, fareed. part of it has to do with what is your goal for this. i wouldn't call it artifici intelligence alone. it is one element of what we're doing. this is about much more than

that and the goal is very different. the goal is to help you make better decisions. and i believe in years in front of us, every important decision you make will be aided by this sort of technology. every important decision will be aided by it, because you'll have the cognitive overload. and those benefits will far outstrip and outweigh some of what will be impact. and so i think the world we envisioned is assisted by this, by things we do best, that humans do best. this is man and machine, not man versus machine. >> will we always be able to turn the machine off? >> i think you and i will be in charge for the foreseeable future. we do believe that. in fact, people talk about jobs and the technology and say, what about the impact on jobs? you and i have talked about progress and transformations of companies over years of

economies. you go back in time, i mean, technology has always had this impact. where certain jobs will be impacted, but then another class of new jobs will be created. and if you go back in time, whether it was when people started farming, it put a premium on mechanical skills. then we had a flourishing of vocational skills. whatever we call this era in retrospect, it puts a premium on the nextlevel of education chr and open up a whole new set of skills.

>> you are the ceo of one of the largest companies in the world. and you are among a handful of women in that position. do you think that even at this high level, there are different standards for women that you still have to deal with the kind of a double standard? >> no, i don't think of it that way at all, actually. and it has been true my whole career, but particularly as i took on this whole role. on one hand, it is important to be a role model. each one of us is a role model to some constituent and you have to internalize that. on the other hand, what i focus the most on and the standard i set myself to is being the steward of a company, arguably one of the greatest companies on this planet. and to steward it, make the right decisions for the long-term. that's what i need to be a role model about. i need to be a role model about doing the best thing i can and be the best ceo that i can be. and ibm has lived 105 years and

that it will live another 100 years. >> does it break a barrier to have a woman as president of the united states? >> i think we all want the best person to be president of the united states. and breaking a barrier, i think it would set a great role model and there are other great role models around the world that run countries and states. >> pleasure to have you on. >> thank you, fareed. next on "gps," the important lesson italian minister renzi may have learned from the british prime minister david cameron. what was it? i will tell you when we come back. well that's nice! and checking your score won't hurt your credit. oh! (to dog)i'm so proud of you. well thank you. get your free credit scorecard at discover.com. even if you're not a customer.

upgrade your phone system and learn how you could save at vonage.com/business

sharing a ten by ten room,ng threestruggling.nding, i rent this place and then i started home sharing. my roommates help out all the time. they are glad to meet the guests and that opportunity that

airbnb has given me is such a priceless gift. i was able to take three months off to take car of my family during a family tragedy. the extra income that i get from airbnb has been a huge impact in my life. u. n. secretary ban ki moon is the eighth secretary and the eight leaders have hailed from four continents which brings me to my question. three continents have yet to be the birthplace of the secretary of general of the united nations. they are australia, antarctica and is it europe, south america, north america or africa? stay tuned and we'll tell you the correct answer. this week's book of the week is actually a magazine, not a

book. in the 24/7 hour of trump, i have enjoyed stepping back to read "the new yorker." the sly take on the controversy. a great magazine like "the new yorker" is one of the best bargains. go online, read some of it and buy a copy of the magazine. now for the last look, last week we reported that the columbians were likely to approve a peace deal with the group farc. that same day hungarian voters headed to the polls and rejected

the european quotas. and then there was the big british shocker earlier this year. citizens vote to exit the european union upsetting pollsters, prediction markets and david cameron. perhaps the italian prime minister has learned a thing or two walking the trend this year and repeatedly promised to resign the referendum to reform them if the constitution failed. but reuters reports that he backed down from the pledge. the lesson is clear, in today's climate, if you give people a chance to register a protest with their votes, they will. the correct answer to the gps question is c, north america. there's been no u.s. secretary from north america. the top three candidates in the security council vote were all

men. and the council eventually chose former portuguese prime minister and u.n. commissioner fantonio gerish. that's all for my program. see you next week. ♪ yes, that's a marching band. and yes, they know our song. hello, everyone. i'm kate bolduan. >> i'm john berman. what day it is? >> it's debate day. >> 90 minutes is what donald trump has if he