> i think it is important for us to let minimal make his decision and i think the american people will judge over the course of the next couple of years whether they like what they see and whether these are the kinds of policies and this is the direction that they want to see the and my role is to make sure that when i hand off this white house that it is in the best possible shape and that i have been as helpful as i can with him in going forward and building on the progress that we have made.

the president elect when he had our discussions is campaigning is different from government. i think he recognizes that and in se in se sincere in wanting to be president and moving this country forward. i don't think any president comes in and saying i don't want to figure how to make angry and alienate half of the country. he's going to try the best he can to make sure he delivers, not only the people who voted for him but people at large. there is a built-in incentive for him to do that. it is only been six days. i think it will be important for

up and figure out what is priority aies and distinguish w he's campaigning on and what is practical and what he can actually achieve. there are certain thing that is make for good sound byte but don't always transfer in policies. that's something he and his team will wrestle with and in the same way every president will wrestle with. publicly, that because of the nature of the campaigns, and the bitterness and velocity of the campaign, it is really important to try to send some signals of unity and to reach out and to minority groups or women or

the term of the campaign. i think that is something that he will want to do. but, this is all happening real fast. he's got commitment to supporters that helped to get him leer and he's going to have to balance those. and know that over the coming weeks and months, and hope is that those impulses ultimately went out. it is a little too early to start making judgments on that. [ inaudible ] >> i think that he successfully mobilized a big chunk of the

regardless of what experience or assumptions he brought to the office, this office has a wiay f waking up, those aspects of his positions or predispositions that don't match up with reality, he will find shaken up pretty quick because reality has a way of asserting itself. some of his gifts that allowed him to execute one of the biggest political offsets in the history. those are ones that he will put to good use on behalf of all the

>> thank you mr. president. [ inaudible question ] what choice do you think the american people make? and if there is still a chance of what you call a direction before the europeans take some of their choice. >> i think the american people recognize that the world has shru shrunk. it is interconnective. the american people recognize that their careers or kids' careers are going to be more dynamic than they may not be working at a single plant for 30 years.

and get more education and plight have to retool or retrain. they want to make sure the rules of the games are fair. what that means is that if you look at surveys americans' attitudes on trade, the majority of the people still support trades. they are concerned about whether or not trade is fair and whether we got the same access to other countries or they have with us. it relates to the bottom when it comes to wages. i made an argument thus far unsuccessfully that the trade of

strengthen workers' rights and environmental rights and level the plainfield and consequences will be good for american workers and businesses. that's a complex argument to make when people remember plants closing and jobs being off short. part of what i think this election reflected was people wanting that course direction that you message around stopping surges of immigration, not creating new trade deals that may be unfair. i think those were themes that played a prominent role in the campaign. as we shift to government, my

sure we have an orderly, lawful immigration process. if it is orderly, and lawful, immigration is good for our economy. it keeps this country young and dynamic, we have entrepreneurs and strivers who come here will to take risks and that's part of the reason why america's historically has been successful and part of the reason why our economy is stronger and positions than most of our competitors is because we got a younger population that's more dynamic. when it comes to trades, i think when you are governing it will become increasingly apparent or if you eliminate trade deals with mexico, for example, well,

the part that are allowing out plants that are shutting down and employing double shifts because they're bringing in some of those parts to assemble out of mexico. and so it is not as simple as we might have seen. and you know the key for us, when i say us, i say americans. i think particularly for progressives it is to concerns are real and anxiety are real. here is how we fix them, higher minimum wage and stronger worker protection so workers have more leverage to get a bigger piece of the pie. stronger financial regulations and not weaker links. yes to trades, trades ensure that other countries trading

labor. being attentive to quality and not tone deaf to it but offering prescriptions that are going to help folks in communities that you forgotten. that's going to be our most important strategy i think we can successfully do that. people will still be looking to the united states. our examples will still the weight. and, it continues to be my strong belief that the way we are going to make sure that everybody feels 'port of this global economy is not by shutting ourselves off even if we could but rather than working together more effectively than we have in the past.

had about mr. trump and you calling him unfit being commander chief, did anything surprise you when you met with president elect trump and anything concerns you about a trump presidency? >> well, we had a very cordial conversation and that did not surprise me to some degree because i think that he's obvious obviously a aggregarious person and he's somebody that likes to mix it up and have a big debate. and, what's clear is he was able to tap in -- yes, the anxiety

in a way that was impressive and i said so to him because i think that to the extent that there were a lot of folks who missed the trump's phenomenon. that connection he was able to make with his supporter that might have sunk another candidate, that's powerful stuff. i also think that he's coming to this office with fewer sets of harden fast prescriptions than a lot of president maybe rocking with.

i think he's pragmatic that way. that can serve him well as long as he got good people around him and he has a clear sense of direction. do i have concerns? >> absolutely. of course, i got concerns. he and i differ on a whole bunch of issues. but, the federal government and ou discovered when i came to office. it took a lot of really hard work for us to make significant policy changes and 9/11 our first two years when we had larger majorities than mr. trump will enjoy when he comes into office. and, you know one of the things i advised him to do was to make sure that before he commits to

really dug in and fought true how various issues play themselves out. i will use an obvious example where we had a difference but it will be interesting to see what happens in the coming year and that's the affordable care act. obviously, this has been the wholly braille for republicans over the last six or sev was we got to kill obamacare. now, that's been taken as an art c article of faith. now, republicans that are in charge and they are going to look and see, lets see, we have 20 million who have health insurance who did not have before. healthcare costs generally have

slower rate since obamacare was passed than they did before which is saved the federal treasury hundreds of billions of dollars. people who have health insurance are benefiting in all sorts of way. anything from no longer having lifetime limits on the claims that they can make so seniors getting prescription discounts under medicare to free mammograms. now, that's one thing to characterize this thing is not working to an abstraction. okay, now you are going to repeal it, okay, what happens to those 20 millions people who have insurance? are you going to just kick them off and suddenly they don't have health insurance? in what ways are their lives

are you going to repeal the provision that ensures that if you do have health insurance on your job and you lose your job or change jobs or -- start a small business that you are not discriminating against. that's pretty popular. how are you going to replace it? >> are you going to change the policy that kids can stay on their parents' health insurance plans until they are 26? how are you going all these issues? now, my view is if they can come up with something better that actually works and a year or two after they replaced the affordable care act with their own plan, that 25 million people have health insurance and that's cheaper and better and running

one to say that's great. congratulations. if on the other end, whatever the proposing resulting and millions of people losing coverage, and results in people who already had health insurance losing protection and contained in the legislation, then -- we are going to have a problem. i think that's not going to be unique to people will respond that way. so, i think on a lot of issues where you are going to see now comes the hard part. now is government. we are going to be able to present to the in coming administration a country that is stronger, a federal government that's work ing better and

that is both more effective and true to our values and energy policies that are resulting, not just less pollution but also more jobs and president elect trump rightly would inspect that he will judge on that improve line and those metrics that things get worse. if things get worse than the american people will figure that out quickly. if things get better than more power to him and i will be the first to congratulate him. >> mr. president, you talked specifically about his temperament. do you have any concerns about his temperament?

asked the question. whatever you bring to this office, this office has a habit of magnifying and pointing out and hopefully you correct for and this may seem like a perfect example but i know myself well enough that i cannot keep track of the papers and not organized in that way and quickly after i am getting stack books coming every night, i say to myself that i got to figure out a system because i have bad filing sorting and organizing habits. i got to find some people who can help me keep track of this stuff. that seems trivia but it ends up

>> because when you are a candidate and you say something that is inaccurate or controversial, it has less impact than you are when you are president of the united states everybody around the world is paying attention, the markets moves -- i think he's being recognized in that, this is different and so as the american people. all right, i am going to take another question and i will get out of here. nadia. >> thank you, mr. president.

threatened to -- [ inaudible question ] >> what would you advise him considering that of his open views and the syria regime? you talked passionately about it and you ran against the killings of civilians. many people the violence in syria. how do you act to president elect trump's statement that he want to support the syrian opposition, thank you. >> iran is a good example of the

g gap. there was a robust debate of the merits of the iran deal before it was complete. and i actually was proud of how our democracy process that. it was a serious debate and people of goodwill on both sides of the issues. ultimately, we were able to persuade members of the politublic at least enough support him. at the time, the main argument is iran would not abide by the deal that they were cheap. we now have over a year of evidence that they have abide by the president. that's not just my opinion or my administration.

they'll look at the facts because to unravel a deal that's working. keep in mind this was not an agreement between us and the iran people. it is between other countries. some are closest allies. for us to pull out would then require us to start sanctioning

or china or russia that were still abiding booing by the dea because from their perspective, iran had done what they're supposed to do. it becomes more difficult, i think to undo something that's working than undo something that's not working. and, when you are not responsible for it and i think when you are responsible for the deal then preventing iran from getting nuclear weapon, you are more likely to look at the facts. that's going to be true in other circumstances, for example, the paris agreement. there is been a lot of talks about the possibility of undoing this international agreement. you got 200 countries that have

and, the good news is that what we have been able to show the last five-six or eight years it is possible to grow the economy really fast and possible to bring down carbon emissions as well. it is not just a bunch of rules that we set up. you got utilities thatre in solar panels and creating jobs. you got the big three automakers who have seen record sales and are over achieving on the fuel efficiency standards that we set. turns out that people like not having to fill up as often and save money at the pump even if it is good for the environment. you got states like california

a clean energy agenda separate apart from any regulations that's put forward. 40% of the country already lives under, in state that is are actively pursuing what embodies of the paris agreement. even states like texas that politically tend to oppose me, you are wind power and solar power and you got some of the country's biggest companies like google and walmart and all pursuing energy efficiency. what we have been able to do is embed a lot of these practices in to how our economy works and has made our economy more efficient. it has helped the bottom line up

environment. what the paris agreement does is say china and india and other countries that are potentially polluting, come on board. lets work together so you guys do the same thing. and, the biggest threat when it comes to climate change and pollution, does not come from us because we have 300 people coming from china and indiana with over a million people and if they are pursuing the kind of strategies that we did before we became more aware of the environment, then our kids will be choked off. so again, do i think that this new administration will make some changes? absolutely. these national agreements, the tradition has been that you carry them forward across administrations, particularly

it turns out that they are doing good for us and binding other countries in the behavior that'll help us. last question. >> i am sorry -- you are right. >> you are right about that. with respect to syria. in benghazi, we had an international mandate and un secu coalition and we are able to carry out support submission that achieved the initial goal of preventing benghazi from being slaughter fairly quickly. it is no secret. you know this region well that syria is a much more messy situation with proxies coming from every direction. and, so i wish that i could

halt immediately. we have made every effort to bring about a political resolution to this challenge, john kerry, have spent an infinite amount of time trying to negotiate are russian and other pa do we have the capacity to carry out that same kind of military action in syria than we did in libya, the situation is different. we don't have that option easily available to us. we are going to have to continue to try to pursue as best we can and a political solution and in the interim putting as much pressure to the party to arrive

fire that is alleviate the suffer that's on the ground. i recognize that has not worked. and, it is something that i continue to think about everyday. we continue to find some formula that would allow us to see that suffering end. but, i think it is not surprising to you because you study this that if you have a syrian military that is committed to killing its people as necessary and it is supported by russia that now has substantial military answers on the ground and actively