>> rose: welcome to the program. tonight from tampa, florida, site of the republican national convention, we begin it this evening with more political analysis from maggie haberman of politico. katty kay, bbc world news america, and dan balz of the "washington post." >> one thing that surprises me walking around tampa is of course mitt romney is the story but there's another story going on and that's paul ryan, who we heard from tonight, of course. and just the excitement about that candidate is palpable when you go around the delegations. and i dont know whether it's because of the weaknesses of mitt romney or because of the strengths of paul ryan, but there is certainly an element of dissatisfaction or lack of excitement about the very top of the ticket that has shined a spotlight on the vice presidential nominee. now, often at these conventions, the vice presidential nominee's speech is sort of an afterthought. that's case here. >> rose: we continue with consideration of foreign policy and other issues with tom friedman, columnist for the "new

york times." >> i would argue foreign policy is not an issue in this campaign because barack obama has been i think a pretty good foreign policy president. i think he's really taken foreign policy off the table. >> rose: we conclude this evening with a friend of governor romney and his lawyer, ben ginsberg. >> to know him as an individual, he's tremendously easy to spend time with, interesting, interested in you. i think that has not been the impression people have always gotten through the filter. it's why i think ann's speech last night was so powerful and so important in terms of presenting that side of him outside of the filter. >> rose: analysis and perspective at the republican national convention in tampa

next.

captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> tonight a special edition of charlie rose. >> rose: tonight, we continue our coverage of the 2012 republican national convention from tampa. last night the main speakers were governor chris christie, the keynoter, and ann romney. meanwhile, hurricane isaac continues to hover over the coast wreaking havoc on louisiana and leaving foyer00,000 people without power. wednesdaya speakers included condoleezza rice, john mccain, the highlight of the evening was vice presidential candidate paul ryan who laid out the case for the republican ticket in the upcoming election. governor romney will address the convention thursday night. joining me here in tampa, maggie haberman, senior writer for politico. katty kay, the anchor of bbc

world news america. dan balz, chief correspondent for the "washington post." i am pleased to have each of you here. let me just throw this open. dan, i'll go to you first. what's the story here? >> the story is mitt romney. i mean, we call this the republican national convention. it's the mitt romney convention, as all conventions are. they're all about the nominee and what we learn about the nominee and what the nominee says about himself. and so everything builds to thursday night and his speech. and ann roam me's speech was part of that. chris christie's speech was a part of that. paul ryan is a part of that. but ultimately it comes down to what mitt romney does for himself. >> rose: is it different because somehow mitt romney has had a problem defining himself so far, even though he's been in the middle of the fight? >> it is different in this respect, charlie, i think, and that is that he seemed to leave himself an awful lot of work to do at the convention. he had a number of months after the primaries to define himself.

instead, they kind of let the obama team define him more than they defined romney. >> rose: and did it stick? >> it appears to have stuck in one way. his unfavorable numbers are back in the range they remember in the middle of the primaries. it has not stuck in another way which is on the ballot. so far the ballot has not moved in anying significant way toward president obama, despite the deterioration in the image of governor romney. so there's this tension. the question is does it not matter this time as much that those unfavorable numbers are high? or will they catch up with him at some point in the fall? >> rose: how do you see it, katty? >> only a fool would ever be presumptionuous about-- to disagree with dan balz. i'll take on the role of the fool for a moment. >> very nice of you. >> i'll be the fool just for a moment, one thing that surprises me walking around tampa is of course mitt romney is the story, but there's another story going on and that's paul ryan who we heard from tonight, of course.

and just the excitement about that candidate is palpable when you go around the delegations. and i don't know whether it's because of the weaknesses of mitt romney or the strengths of paul ryan. but there is certainly an element of dissatisfaction or lack of excitement about the very top of the ticket that has shined a spotlight on the vice presidential nominee. now, often at these conventions, the vice presidential nominee's speech is sort of an afterthought. that's not the case here. people are genuinely excited about paul ryan and they see in him somebody who could be a future leader of the party, a future presidential candidate and who embodied in an easy way the things that perhaps mitt romney has struggled to do. >> rose: some have suggested whether the ticket wins or loses it's a win for paul ryan. >> i would think that is the case. >> rose: perhaps. how do you see it so far? you famously have five things. what are the five things? >> didn't-- didn't come equipped with the full five. i'll give you a few.

i also would not agree with mr. balz. >> rose: you would not disagree with mr. balz. >> i do agree with you. i think the heat is getting to me. i think that this is about mitt romney. i think this is also not about mitt romney in the sense it's about paul ryan. it's about the future stars of the party as well, not just paul ryan. you're seeing a lot of focus on the governors here. you saw focus on chris christie last night. scott walker. i think that there is a struggle here where there is really not mitt romney's party yet, anyway. he is not a party man. he is not an establishment man. he doesn't have deep ties to this party and i think that is part of the rest of the story of this convention. i thinka as dan said how he defines himself is going to be incredibly important. we have the sense he is going to try to define himself sort of more emotionally, more as a person, more as a father. this is not something he does naturally. he's not a gifted orator. that is going to be something to watch. i think how excited people get

about paul ryan versus mitt romney is going to be something to watch. i think coming out of this convention, whether the party feels unified in a very strong way or whether we're still seeing people more excited about paul ryan than mitt romney, that to me has been the sense the last few days. >> charlie, i was struck by one thing on tuesday night, and that is the hall was flat through much of the evening. it-- it got a little bit more energized when ann romney came on and a little bit more energized through parts of governor christie's speech. but the early speeches did not do to that audience what i would have expected. we know this is a party that has divisions and as maggie said is not wild about mitt romney or hasn't been. but they are passionate about defeating president obama, and in one way or another, that-- nobody quite tapped into that on tuesday night, and so the opening was a little flatter than i would have expected. >> rose: i've had a number of people say that to me who were on the floor that day. one issue here is women. we're going to hear on wednesday night and have heard-- we're

taping this, obviously, i don't want to go through this. we're taping this before we hear the speeches tonight so we can show it to you tonight-- women. we'll hear from condoleezza rice. we will hear from nicki haley. we'll hear from the governor of the new mexico. what's the problem between the nominee and the party and women? >> it's more broadly, i think, between the party and women, particularly the issue of health care which is why when the akin stuff happened you heard barack obama move from akin's comments on rape and abortion in a heartbeat to health care, to health care, because women have gone through periods during the course of the year of losing trust in the republican's party to take care of their health, to put their health first and foremost. and they have concerns, and i think less with mitt romney than with the party platform more generally. and it's interest-- you know, that's going to be an interesting issue for paul ryan, whether actually he loses votes

amongst women. i know the white house is particularly looking at certain states where they feel they have a female advantage, like colorado, where they feel paul ryan's nomination could tip the state in their favor specifically because of the female vote. that's what ann romney was there to do. she made a speech directly targeted at women. i have rarely heard a political speech that was targeted so carefully and so specifically at female voters. it felt like she was talking to women. and women do not often get speeches targeted at them. >> rose: was it effective, do you think, on that point? >> we'll see when the votes happen in november. i think it was actually almost more effective in filling in some of the blanks about mitt romney than it was in the targeting of women. i mean, there were times when it was so clearly focusing on women's issues that i wonder whether some people might not feel it was a little bit too obvious. whereas i think the way she talked about her relationship with mitt romney helped soften him.

and that's what this convention needs to do, right? it needs to be to give mitt romney a bit of heart for american voters. and i think that's where ann romney's speech was effective. >> rose: i think what the country needs to see about him is who is he? >> in terms of women, the female-- the gender gap on that side has generally been offset for mitt romney by president obama's problem with a certain group of men. i think to your point about not knowing who mitt romney is, i think that's as much a problem with the republican party brand or platform or specific fights about health care. mitt romney has taken a couple of different positions on certain issues, like abortion, for instance. un, he was prochoice when he ran for governor in massachusetts. he has since throughout the primaries taken a much harder line i think to the extent women are focus the on where mitt romney is focused on things, i think it's knowing where he stands. >> rose: is that at the core of part of his problem, not just being liked because he's bye-bye all over the place on certainly

criewcialg issues, whether abortion, immigration, or other issues. >> that's absolutely right, and it's a problem they've known about since the end of the 2008 election and in a sense either haven't tried to solve it or didn't quite know how to solve it. i don't think that's going to go away as a result of this convention. >> rose: will the idea of being very rich and having worked at bain capital in the end simply fade away or will that be at the core of what the democrats will try to wrap in him? by definition if you do what he did in our capitalist society, you're uncaring and intense tit to the polite of working people? >> in the end i think the question he's going to have to end for voters is he the c.e.o. who fired people that they knew, or is he the businessperson who was successful in a way that built companies that would create some new jobs? and, you know, we've talked about the many things he wants to do, but i think your point earlier was right, in the end the key for him is to convince

people not that he's the most likable because he's not going to win that battle but he is the most competent to deal with the issue of the economy which is by far the overriding issue in this election. >> charlie, isn't that part of why it is important for him to come out of this-- maybe he's not going to win the likeability battle, but to come out of this as somebody who voters think-- actually, all the attacks being thrown at mitt romney i don't believe them. actually, he seems to me like a decent guy. he's not going to slash my medicare or take away my social security or cut my entitleiments. i don't believe those accusations. i think he's an okay person. he's not going to win the likeability but there is some value in him in countering the attacks of the obama by coming across as somebody the voters think wouldn't do those things. >> no question about that. >> rose: go ahead. >> i think the only other piece of that as he tries to do some of that, he's also trying to make this a very big election about some very big ideas, and

among those big ideas is tackling the fiscal problems of this country. and if you are serious about doing that, you're going to do some things that are going to cause some pain to people. >> there are opportunities he has in terms of the bain issue, in terms of his corporate experience. i think they have tried and sometimes missed mark on their own definition. he had a "wall street journal" op-ed a couple of days ago when he talked about "my time at bain, "and this is the first time i -- >> that probably should have been written about before. >> and probably should have gone into more depth-- i heard from a number of republicans who thought it was good but not great, that it was a double, not a home run, because he didn't talk about what he learned from the failures. he talked about companies that succeeded and one that had had some problems but he didn't say, "this is what i learned when we had to shut down a company. this is what i learned about how we create jobs. it was painful. it was horrible. i understand what people went through." there is a way to talk about it and he only talked about a portion of it. >> rose: can you explain this

stuff in a speech, why i changed my ideas and this is what i believe now? >> no -- >> the message of the speech has to be something else. >> message of the speech does have to be a little bit personal, and it can't be corny, and it can't be contrived. i mean it has to be true to who he is, and we're still struggling to sort of see how he wanthewants to present that. but i think a lot of it really has to do with how he sees the country and where he wants to take the country and can he describe that in both some specifics but also in a compelling enough way that gets people excited. >> rose: i wouldn't-- we do not know because we haven't heard the speech eye repeat that-- but i assume that will be part of what paul ryan will do as well. >> yes. i would definitely assume the same. >> ... in a more positive way than chris christie did tuesday night. i was struck by how, how unjoyous about america chris christie's speech was. >> rose: some people said it

seemedangy. >> and i don't think that's what american voter goes for. they need from the top of the ticket a more positive vision -- >> the country has always preferred the optimistic candidate. >> this has been a problem for mitt romney all the time, not enough happy warrior, a grimness, peevishness -- >> stiff. >> stiffness. and there has been unhappiness with some of the coverage. he voiced it repeatedly in interviews. that is not something people generally want to hear. we were having a conversation about this before. one of the characteristics of, say, barack obama's speech, his keynote speech in 2004 at the democratic national convention was he did the happy warrior thing that chris christie really didn't do last night. people want to see that from mitt romney and they want to hear from him about this grand vision for the country that the paul ryan pick is supposed to be about, but they want to hear mitt romney present it. >> rose: can i argue the following, that that is up for grabs because the president can't do that again. i mean, he had an opportunity to do that in 2008 because he was--

he was a candidate that had not been written on, or became a vessel that people could pour all of their hopes into because there was not much to gain. he can't do, that the president can't, so there is an opportunity to somehow capture the optimism of the country. >> that raises a question of why mitt romney hasn't been able to do that. he has had all these opportunities. he has been running since 2008. this is not new to him. he ought to have been able to craft a speech and he certainly ought to be able to at the convention speech. this is a teleprompter speech. this is not an off-the-cuff remarks that mitt romney stipes fluffs. i think the the hardest thing for mitt romney was something dan talked about earlier, and that is the sense of a person who is fluid. there is so much attention on presidential campaigns and candidates now that-- i-- i would credit american voters with x-ray vision on these things. they see it. they see if somebody is inauthentic and they particularly see it when

somebody is in their living room day after day after day as mitt romney has been. that's a very hard thing for him to explain in a way that is satisfactory. why has he held one opinion on issues and switched his view on others. >> gl where is the race today? >> it is where it's been for months. it's been remarkably static on the top lines. mitt romney's negatives have risen. i think barack obama's have risen as well. essentially, it is a basically tied race. there's a two- to three-point difference. and i think president obama has a stronger path toward 270 than mitt romney does. that has not changed, and that is, i think, of concern for the romney campaign that their path has not gotten much broader. they see stronger numbers in the midwest but they are struggling in ohio. >> rose: in ohio within two or three point? >> most internal points have it not so even.

have obama up, not largely ahead but solidly ahead and repeatedly ahead. they are concerned about ohio. >> rose: do they have a path, the republicans, that doesn't include ohio? >> i think it is incredibly hard every time i try to do the math. it's very hard to see how he gets there. >> rose: where do you see it, dan? >> i see it exactly the same way. romney has a more difficult path. on the other hand, if the overall water table rises for him air, lot of states that now look very difficult for him will look a lot easier. the fact that he's put wisconsin in play helps him enormously if they can keep that. we talked to scott walker this morning and he believes the enthusiasm that we all saw during the recall election out there will carry through into november. >> rose: and rob portman believes the same thing in ohio. i haven't heard much about the tea party out here. is it simply because their people, their support, paul ryan being one, marco rubio being another, are the future stars of the party. >> it looked like an angry protest in 2009 when we saw it

in the town hall meetings, but in fact when you look at the republican governors, they are governing in many ways like tea party conservatives -- >> are they governing effectively? >> some are. not in an uncontroversial way. these are not governors with 65% approval rating. they don't. they are governing in a way that is getting their agenda through, and their belief is-- as walker said after he won the recall-- people will reward you if you take strong stands and stick to them and try to get done what you say you're going to do. that's a big task. the question is can romney and ryan do that at a national level. >> rose: that's exactly what chris christie said last night about leadership. >> but chris christie-- he is sort of the other side of scott walker where he has a different type of state, a different type of legislature, and so his approach has been more across the aisle. but i do think that is important because i don't think people think of chris christie as coming from that sort of -- >> he said you have to take hard

positions. >> oh, yeah. >> rose: and tell them what you believe in and if you stick to that you'll be rewarded. >> is that where the vacillating on issues start as well as a problem for mitt romney. when chris christie said last night a strong leader is not somebody who follows the polls. a strong leader is somebody who changes the polls. well, you look at mitt romney's career and political positions and the way he has changed political positions on key issues and it's hard not to think this is somebody who has looked at polls and followed polls, not changed them. >> rose: at the end of the day, as we might say in a cliche-- ( laughter ) >> it's the end of charlie's day. >> rose: mitt romney is the nominee of the republican party, of having failed bat badly in 2008, having been a one-term governor in massachusetts, but he is the nominee of the party and he is an essentially even race, although his path to victory may be more difficult. it's not a wad place to be. >> no, he's in an essentially even race against an incumbent

who has great vulnerabilities because of the economy but nonetheless he is the incumbent and incumbents have traditionally been very hard to beat unless there have been extraordinary circumstances. >> rose: thank you, thank you, thank you. back in a moment. stay with us as we continue our coverage of the republican convention from tampa. tom friedman joins me now in tampa. he is a columnist for the "new york times" and puleiter prize-winning author i am pleased to have him here with me for a conversation about the republican party's convention in tampa. welcome. >> good to be here. >> rose: you write about many things, entrepreneurship, foreign policy, but also domestic issues. here we have a party coming together to talk about how they see the world and nominate a candidate. >> one of the things that struck me last night was that the stories, each of the speakers told, about their immigrant experience, whether it was nicki haley talking about being the

daughter of immigrant parents. others, ann romney referring to her welch. it is a strike contrast between the kind of pride they take in coming from immigrant families who started with nothing and built up significant wealth and achievements all of them, and the party's sort of position on immigration right now. when you looked around the hall -- >> and the nominees during the primary. >> exactly. there is a tension there, charlie, which they clael haven't resolved. the question-- what i felt last night was eye found it a little flat myself. and what i felt since i've been here-- i have a stronger feeling that mitt romney's renting the republican party. and they're kind of renting mitt romney. but the kind of organic connection you found with ronald reagan or george h.w. bush and george w. bush is it of is not

there. you could hear it in the way the different speakers spoke about romney's biography. it was all from a kind of cheat sheet, the same thing. but there was very little i thought truly authentic-- this is the guy. so there is a tension there. and is romney the last of something? you know, a certain generation of really northern liberal republicans? he's now posing as something more conservative. and is-- is ryan the future? or-- and i think it will depend on the election-- if the republicans get smashed in this election-- if you look at the polling now, it's unlikely, but who knows -- do they go through the kind of soul-searching the democrats went through in the late 80s and 90s that gave birth to bill clinton and the whole centrist democrat movement? it's going to be interesting to watch. >> rose: you think there's a possibility if the republicans are defeated badly, they may say we have to rebuild a different

party. and that party might look to itself and say are we part of the future or are we trying to hold the future back? >> that's right. i mean, are we a party that really is going to embrace immigration? are we a party that's really going to embrace minorities? are we a party that believes in fiscal responsibility but with a combination that there has to be some kind of tax revenue, and spending cuts. and i think that's the-- a lot of that will be determined in this election, not entirely, but there clearly is that tension out there. >> rose: where do you think the obama administration is in terms of the handling of this leadership of this nation over the last four years? because there are many people who supported want president enthusiastically last name, are prepared to look at an alternative if they find that alternative acceptable. >> well, here's where -- >> they may not find mitt romney or they may. >> i think that's a good

question, charlie, and i was thinking it of it last night with ann romney's speech. she was attractive and articulate. but i thought she missed-- if i were writing her words as a republican i thought she missed the key vulnerability of barack obama. i think the biggest danger for barack obama is a critical mass of swing voters say the following-- barack obama, good guy, wonderful father. it's been great to have had the first african american president. but just not up to it. and, you know, he's a nice guy. i don't blame him, but i want to try something new. >> rose: right. >> now ann romney had a killer line in her speech last night which she to me completely swallowed. and the line was mitt romney will not fail. to me that whole speech should have been that. had she come out and said, "mom will not fail and i know that because here's what he did in college. i know mitt romney will not fail because here's what he did in his first job. i know mitt romney will not fail because here's how he dealt with

this crise." she did not build on it at all. i think the obama people were very relieved. that's the one big vulnerability of the president. >> rose: i totally agree to is that. i think the argument he has to make has to do with i can succeed where someone else has failed in the judgment of eye number of people. >> exactly. >> rose: in the judgment of perhaps a winning majority in this country, those who were already there before the president did anything, that percentage, and those who made a judgment about the president. it is not about likeability in the end. likeability is good. it is about being able to make the sale they have the right stuff. >> see not just the right stuff, charlie. i think this time is different. i think americans are really worried. i think they get that we have a problem. >> rose: and they're prepared, under the right circumstances, to go for an alternative. >> exactly. if they think, i think, three things. one, you have a plan. that's the scale of the problem. two, it's fair-- rich pay more, everybody pays something.

it's got to be fair. and thirdly, that is aspirational. it's about making america great again, not just balancing the budget. and so i think the election is still wide open -- >> the success of ronald reagan. >> absolutely. to tap into that. >> what we misright now in obama is that kind of message. >> rose: why do you think he doesn't have it? >> so i'm wait ago i feel like-- i came down here-- i came to tampa look, for mitt romney's etch a sketch and all i got was this lousy t-shirt. i came down thinking now we'll see the money where he tacks to the center. we haven't heard his speech and maybe that will come but you certainly don't get the sense that that's coming. with obama, they've clearly made a choice-- which i find baffling because i think he has achievements to run on. i can't -- >> including obamacare.

>> exactly. you put everything into that. you built your whole first two years on it, bragged to historians about it, and how many ads have they taken out selling it, not saying we did it. here's why it is going to be great. >> you basically quoted me in a column about an interview with him saying the thing i have failed at-- >> his narrative. >> rose: the narrative is what got him to the white house. a narrative that began with his telling of the story at the democratic national convention in 2004 and ended with an inaugural speech, and many speeches in between. >> i still believe that-- i still wonder sometimes whether obama understands why he was elected. because i don't think it was just about mccain's failure or sarah palin. i think people really believe we need nation building at home now and they really believe-- he had both the vision and the ability to pull us together for that task. and he's-- he's withdrawn into himself. i think he can still do that -- >> is that the nature of the

man? >> he is a-- we now know a much more private loner kind of person. >> rose: he's not a needy person. >> but i still think he can turn it on if he wants. i do not like the campaign he's running. i don't think it's been at all inspiring. i don't think it's made his best case, and i'm not surprised in some polls, including cbs, that he's behind. >> rose: what is the romney foreign policy? >> that is a really good question. look, the romney foreign policy is-- he's made certain statements. if elected on the first day in office i will declare china a currency manipulator and take action. i will go out on a limb, charlie-- if romney wins he will not do that his first day in office. my guess is, i i don't think he's taken much interest in foreign policy at all. i don't think he has to right now because it's not part of the

campaign. so he's going to the default position, the default position is the dick cheney wing of the party. then i won't get any grievance. i won't have to worry about anything. and i suspect, if elected, he will pivot to the center -- >> what is the continuing of the party? >> the dick cheney wing of the party-- i can describe it by its policies. we should intervene somehow in syria. we should stay in afghanistan until we finish the job, when you and i will be long gone. we should be very aggressive in our approach to russia and to china. i would argue foreign policy is not an issue in this campaign because barack obama has been i think a pretty good foreign policy president. i think he has really taken foreign policy off the table. all in all -- >> i can remind you of columns you have written. >> i have big issues afghanistan and others. all in all, i think he's kept the country safe. he was idealistic where he could be in libya. he's been pragmatic where he had to be-- china and russia.

and i think he's sort of split the baby on afghanistan and whatnot. but he's kept the country safe. that was bush's claim after four years,un, keep the country safe. and i don't think anyone's walking around saying i can't live another day with barack obama as commander in chief. >> rose: syria. regardless of who's president what, should we be doing? >> well, you know, my view, charlie, is very simple, that syria is iraq. it's just the twin sister. it's a ba'athist regime, ruling a multi-ethnic society. iraq had a sunni minority ruling a shiite majority, with kurds and other minorities on the side. syria has a shiite minority ruling a majority. in iraq we pulled the pin. we removed the dictator at the top, and that led to an explosion, and what america did in iraq was the geopolitical

equivalent -- >> we weren't prepared for what would happen-- >> we did the geopolitical equivalent of falling on a grenade. we absorbed the entire explosion-- iraqis, most of all-- but our presence there prevented it from becoming a regional conflagration. and we then preside over-- largely because of mistakes originally but in many cases was probably inevitable-- a civil war as the parties contested the new balance of power. we let them each test each other. they finally reached a point of exhaustion and balance. we then midwived a social contract between them. and on the marge iins, with special forces, we also hunted down and killed some of the most extreme elements. the product of that, 4700 american lives, 20,000 wounded, a trillion dollars, tens of thousands of iraqis-- i don't know how many-- but certainly well-- well-- a very high number. the product of all of that is

iraq today i would argue, charlie, has a one in 10 chance of a decent outcome in the long run. but it's because america there was to midwife this transition. >> rose: the problem with the argument is we don't know what would have happened if america had not done that. >> right. i would argue-- we don't know, but i would argue iraq would look like syria today on steroids. so i think -- >> and might have somehow acquired nuclear weapons, weapons of mass destruction. >> the fact that it played out the way it did, that iraq is resolving its problems today as we speak today by more politics -- >> the arab spring would certainly have come to iraq? >> it would have come to iraq. i'm sure of it. >> rose: if in fact hussein was still in power. >> let's go to syria. the problem is, "everybody says i want to do something." i'd love to do something. but my gut tells me that the only thing to be done is to do

what you-- somebody has to take over the country, okay. somebody has to provide a midwifing role to referee this new balance of power. >> rose: nobody wants the united states to do that. >> no, i know that. that's why-- there's a little bit of disingenuous to me about people pounding the table. what must we do! we must have a-- no fly zone. what happens when the syrians shoot at the no fly zone? what happens when the russians get involved? it's a problem from hell. it's terrible to see what's going on. >> rose: is there any answer in terms of somehow a group of countries getting together, neighbors and others, including iran, even though that would be very difficult for everybody, to come to some kind of solution because they're the only-- russians, iranians, americans, french-- >> people would have -- >> and arabs. >> to the extent that iraq work is because there was one power there. you can imagine a committee -- >> lut butt there will be no one

power there. >> and noose my dilemma with this. i don't know how it will end. i think this could burn on in different forms for a long time. charlie, step back. what are we seeing? we're seeing two huge political orders crumbling at once. one is called european union, where the supranational state has failed. and the other is called arab world where the nation state in certain cases has failed. the monetary union has failed, and, therefore, the nation state has failed. they're both crumbling at the same time. we're more interdependent than ever before. >> rose: the interesting thing is it has consequences for china and the yiewt. >> absolutely. both do. china for energy-- there are problems that don't eye don't have a simple solution. i don't know what to do, okay. i know what i think would be required to basically bring order to syria, and also no one wants to do it.

>> rose: what you long for on part of both leaders who want to be president is for some sense of a vision how to engage these two huge problems and what would do you and what would you do different than what is being done? >> let me talk about syria, and this is applies to the wider arab spring. one of my favorite movies is the movie "in victus" the story of nelson mandela -- >> played brilliantly by morgan freeman. >> and the the rugby team in south africa and how basically members of the african national congress wanted to change the names and uniform, everything when mandela took over. my favorite line, he turns to them, the minister of sport or whoever it was making the demand, "no we must not do that. we must surprise them. we must surprise the white minority by basically our-- by not doing that." it seems what has been missing to me in the whole arab

awakening-- and by the way, in leadership in general in the world, going back to the etch a sketch-- when was the last time somebody surprisedded you, charlie? when was the last time you called your priewrtses and said, "i don't care what it takes. get him or her on the show. did you see that! did you see the risk they took!" in the arab world you have no midwife and no men della. when you have no mendale and no midwife, you have a very difficult situation. and we're dealing here-- at the end of the day we also-- you say what should we do? what should they do? we're dealing here with the oldest civil war on the planet between sunnis and shiites over who is the proper heir to the prophet mohammed from the seventh century. is that my responsibility? >> rose: i do think the united states has a leadership role-- >> i'm all for it. >> rose: it's not that you have to do everything but you can be a catalyst for people doing the right thing. >> and i'm all for it.

all i'm saying is we shouldn't be the only ones asking that question. what responsibility do they have to say why are we fighting each other? charlie we both have shiite, sunni friends. i can't tell the difference between them. what is this about that people can't live together? so at a certain point, they have a responsibility, too. that's all i'm saying. we must help. >> rose: uponning how strongly you feel, and it's been a central part of what you've been writing about since you wrote "the world is flat" since you made that discovery, after 9/11 you came back and found technology had changed everything. and you have been the person who has been most articulate about entrepreneurship and how it can build societies and how it can give people a future. could mitt romney make an argument o i'm that man. i'm more in tune with those

ideas that you have than the other guy? >> got it going out, charlie. >> rose: it's a hard question. >> it's a very hard question for me because i do think in terms of things that float my boat. i love being with inventors. >> rose: right. >> and innovators and people trying to change the world and leverage technologies to do good things. and i, that does probably resonate more with romney than it does with barack obama. i think other things are important -- >> that's central to his argument. >> yeah, but at the same time, you know, what bothered me here last night, it's all related. so they had the "we built it," playing off on obama's statement -- >> "they didn't build it. >> was he was talking about horizon, roads and infrastructure -- >> which is essential for entrepreneurs to have. >> i give obama credit for that.

his investment in innovation, in technology. we're one day after-- barack obama will never takeab ad out on this and i think i'm the only columnanist this hemisphere who wrote a column about it, but barack obama put in place new mileage standards that were required by the 20ed 25, the doubling, basically, of mileage -- >> more fuel-efficient cars. >> 54 miles per gallon. that is a huge deal. that is going to drive incredible innovation in the auto industry. so that's why there's-- there's a lot of ways to get at, you know, those things that-- basically i see obama is the guy interested in the enabling environment--ñr romney is the gy who want -- >> back to my central point, when you listen to a lot of people like paul ryan, i mean, they do sing-- they sing the song. >> oh, yeah. >> rose: the innovative power of america. >> exactly. and i have to tell you that resonates with me. and i think it resonates with a lot of americans. it's part of obama's voice that

has been missing for me from the very beginning. >> rose: one of the baffling things for me is how he's allowed-- t tresidentnt otherr people to define him. >> yeah. >> rose: you know? and because the most important thing you need to do is to create the narrative that defines who you are, rather than allow-- >> sure. take health care. obama is being called a euro-socialist. no, no, no. socialism in health care is what we have now. i get sick. i have no health care. i just walk down to that tampa hospital right there, i go -- >> into the emergency room. >> into the emergency ward, they treat me, and basically they divide up the cost on everyone who has health insurance. that's called socialism. what obama is saying is i want everyone to have to buy insurance basically and we'll subsidize people who can't. that's called capitalism. now how can you be the guy who is promoting basically a market-based solution to this problem and you're carrying the cross was euro-socialist.

you have to work at that, charlie. you have to work at being defined that way. >> rose: it's great to have you. >> we were just getting going. >> rose: i want to make sure we can conclude what we already said. >> great to be here, pal. >> rose: tom friedman, columnist for the "new york times." back in a moment. stay with us. ben ginsberg is here. he is the chief attorney for the romney campaign. when electoral recount are at an issue he is the g.o.p.'s go-to man. as counsel to the bush-cheney presidential campaign he played a central role in the 2000 florida recount. if romney become president he would obviously play an important role in the administration. i am pleased to have him here to talk about many issues, including the candidate, welcome. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: it's good to see you. one magazine described you as one of the most important and powerful people that were not well known in washington. if i were you, i'd take great credit for na. >> i was flattered by tile may question the accuracy a little.

>> rose: of least known or more powerful. >> more powerful. >> rose: you worked for mitt romney 2008. you worked for him in 2012, this campaign. how is he different today? >> you know, i think he's learned from the experience, as anyone would, but especially somebody like mitt romney who spent his career kind of analyzing situations and succeeding in them. and so i think any one of us is better a second time around having learned from the experience, even television interviewers, perhaps. >> rose: the thing that hangs over himarchs you well know, is the thing that ann romney sphoak last night. why don't we know him in the way we seem to know other political candidates? >> that's the single most puzzling thing of the coverage i read of him. to know him as an individual, he tremendously easy to spend time with, interesting, interested in you. i think that has not been the impression people have always gotten through the filter.

it's why i think ann's speech last night was so powerful and so important in terms of presenting that side of him outside of the filter. i think you'll see more statements like that tonight from paul ryan and tim pawulenty and other speakers, and certainly governor romney's speech tomorrow night, where he will get to talk in an unfiltered way to the american public in a long format is emendously important with that. but now that people are concentrating on the race, i think they'll get to know the real mitt romney as a person who should be president. >> a piece in the "atlantic monthly" about debate suggesting he probably should be favored in debates with president obama because he is a very good debater and did very well in the primaries. >> i loved the setting of the bar by the media. yes, indeed. >> rose: so? >> well, i think they are both

very intelligent, very talented, very articulate individuals. i think the president is the president who has commanded the stage. he has the experience in the general election debates. he's an excellent, excellent debater. i think governor romney welcomes the opportunity to be able to present his vision on ideas and issues and problems of the country and post up directly against president obama. i think caring for people in situation. i think so it is a mind who loves to take a problem and analyze it and fix it that goes from small things around the house to big problems of the world and the country. and i think it's that combination of both of inner person plus the intellectual desire to just see problems and make situations better.

>> rose: when he comes to the stage and when he leaves the stage on thursday night, what do you hope will have been accomplished here? >> well, i think a number of things. first of all, is what you spoke about before which is to give the country a better feeling and a better picture for him as an individual. and secondly to articulate his.

>> i think the burden is on governor romney.

>> rose: he's been on different places in different issues in his political career, sometimes being called a flip-flopper, that there would be that perception. >> charges get hurle hured in government all the time. we're more than willing to examine the massachusetts record, which counter-acts that in a large-- to a large degree. and certainly the way he's comported his life is the essence of the values that i suspect the person you talk to holds. and we'll be able to talk about the way to fix the problems that face the country, which i also think will be pleasing to your-- to your source. >> rose: help us understand how he's going to fix the country. >> well, there are intractable problems. part of it is being-- and this is the way he conducted himself in business and conducted himself in the olympics and conducted himself as governor. it's a matter of really taking an analytical look at what the problem is, and he is a consumer of data and a studier of

different points of view. one of the things that he's done in the campaign repeatedly is bring lots of competing views together to talk to him about policy and ideas and the free interchange of those ideas i think has made him much stronger as a candidate and as somebody who can fix those problems. so after he analyzes the problems with lots of facts and data, it's a matter of sitting down and analyzing how you fix those problems. that's a multistep process that's different in sort of every situation. so it's not easy to give a blanket answer. but it is a step-by-step analytical process, and, you know, he's somebody who i think knows how to make tough decisions. part of the problem that we've had in the country is that there's a consensus that there may be probms in areas but the tough love, if you will, of how to solve those problems has been

a little bit absent in the last four years -- >> meaning the president what? >> meaning that the president was unwilling to actually go out and go after some of the-- some of these entrenched institutions that have caused the problem. we've never had a budget out of this president, for example. i'm not sure how you lead on questions of fiscal cliffs and economic policy without ever presenting a budget for the country. i do think that if you're going to break the stalemate that's occurring now, it has to stop-- start with leadership at the top, somebody who is willing to make unpopular decisions to fix those problems. i believe mitt romney is that person which is why i support him. >> rose: what-- >> i think on issues of taxing and spending, there are going to have to be unpopular decision made. i think on virtually every one of the-- the whole panoply of problems, whether the structural debt or health care or any of them. they're going to have to be a hard look at the problems and a

willingness in the next president to actually tackle those issues. i think mitt romney is a better candidate and would make a better president to do that than barack obama which is why i'm so excited about his campaign. >> rose: you have been considered by some as a traditional republican-- whatever that means. >> i was going to ask for a definition. >> rose: i think it does not mean a member of the tea party. i think it does not mean-- my understanding it might mean sort of a central, moderate republican. you might say, no, i'm right center, center-right, whatever that might be. but where is the republican party because people look at-- hear paul ryan tonight. there's no question where he is. ask people will look at him tonight and they'll look at marco rubio on thursday night as he introduces the nominee, and they'll say here are two young leaders who represent the future of the country, and it is in fact becoming more and more conservative.

on social issues and economic issues. >>un, charlie, one of the great things about being a lawyer who gets to work for the republican party is that i've got candidates all across, what you would call the spectrum of the republican party. what i find in common in those candidates and once they become elected officials, is a conservative approach that if you want to strip away all the other things that are different from republicans and democrats, the concept of what the government should be and how it tackles problems and what the role of the government should be in the country, and i think that's very different from the democrats'. i think there is an honest debate in this country to be had between whether the role of the government is a large one, as i think envisioned by the democratic party. or a much smaller one, as envisioned by republicans, the

more conservative party. and i think essentially that's what the division in voters' minds, the choice voters have, is coming down to in this campaign. >> rose: who is he going to surround himself with? what kind of people will he go to for advice? that's essential to the heart of an administration. >> it is. and i think you can look to the way he staffed his massachusetts government with a wide variety of voices. and really the best and the brightest. what his private sector experience, i think, has taught him, and the people who i've gotten to know from being with his two campaigns are such a broad real estatbroad array of y intecialght incredibly accomplished individuals from a whole variety of attitudes and viewpoints. and so the answer to your question is probably not the traditional washington folks,

quite as much as i think some have been writing and would expect. but really the best and the brightest who are willing to come in and solve problems based on the conservative principles that mitt romney has. >> rose: good to have you here. thank you for joining us for the republican national convention in tampa. we'll be back tomorrow night. see you then. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org