. >> welcome to the program. i'm lesley stahl of cbs news and "60 minutes" sitting in for charlie rose who is away this weekment tonight we look at the presidential election. we begin with deborah tannen, a professor of linguistics at georgetown university. >> when you think about qualities required of a leader and qualities required of a man, they're similar. not now everyone is going to fulfill those requirements, but if you do, you are fulfilling both. for women, the requirements of being a woman are at odds with our requirements for being a good leader. so whatever she does to be a good leader, for example, be confident, talk about what you are really good at, that is going to be offensive if it kms from a woman because the requirements of a woman are the opposite. >> we continue with cbs news

elections director anthony salvanto. >> there is a dynamic here that i think we have to watch. and it's not just the electoral college. we will go back and forth at which states are flipping which way over the next weeks. there is that larger dimek that you mentioned and it's that call for change. and although clinton is leading, what you see is that she has not yet matched the voter desire for change. and that's been the case all through the year. they think dn ald trump is more likee-- donald trump is more likely to bring change than she is. >> we conclude with a look ahead to monday's presidential debate with james fall owe, frank bruni and dana perino. >> the thing that concerned me most watching her campaign and one of what i think is one of her greate vulnerabilities, donald trump seems to understand intuitively just how gloomy many americans feel, just how angry they feel, how much unease they are. and sometimes i feel like in trying not to be donald trump, in trying not to be a scare

amonger she goes too much in the other direction and americans don't hear from her. i get how uneasy you feel about this country's future, how uneasy you feel about this country's place in the world. i think she needs to nail this emotion in this debate. >> analysis of the presidential race when we continue. >> rose: funding for charlie rose is provided by the following: and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. > captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> good evening, i'm lesley stahl of cbs news and 60-- "60

minutes" filling in for charlie rose who is away this week. we begin tonight with deborah tannen. she is a professor of length business particulars at georgetown university. she's written extensively about language and its effect on lipps. her book-- and its effect on relationships, her book you just don't understand men and women in conversation is a new york times best seller for four years. it brought to life the differences between men and women's communication styles and the implications of gender for leadership. she has written about hillary clinton for a long time, as well as about the challenge of sexism in the presidential election. i'm pleased to welcome her to this table. i've been following you for years, as you've been following hillary for years. because you write about the bind, women are in because if they are too assertive, it's a turnoff. if they're too gentle, it's a turnoff. women in leadership, they just can't win. tell us what you found.

>> and it is even more complicated than just the idea of damned if you do, damned if you don't which is certainly part of it. it is a situation where you have two requirements that you must fulfill. but anything that you do to fulfill one actually violates the other. when you think about qualities required of a leader and qualities required of a man, they're similar. now not everyone is going to fulfill those requirements. but if you do, you are fulfilling both. ing a woman are at odds withf our requirements for being a good leader. so whatever she does to be a good leader, for example, be confident, talk about what you are really good at, that's going to be offensive ifit comes from a woman because the requirements of a woman are the opposite. you should be self-deprecating. you should downplay what you have done. i will give you a quick example. i wrote a book about women and men in the workplace.

and all these same things apply to women in positions of authority at work. so there was a woman high up in management and she tended to talk about things she had accomplished by saying "we" and that's something that i found in my research. women were uncomfortable saying, i did this, i did that. so they tended to say we. but they figured people really knew that they were the ones who had done it. well, she was told, you really should own your accomplishments. you know, you lack confidence when you say "we" and we know you did it. so she listened to that advice and she began saying "i" and then she began hearing, you know, she isn't as great as she thinks she is. it just rubs people. >> she just can't win. >> that's it. >> hear is something you wrote about that. this is about hillary. you said when clinton sounds tough, it doesn't feel real cuz she's a woman and women aren't supposed to sound tough. and so the translation is that she's not authentic. >> yeah. now does her authentic problem come from that?

>> well, there's been these two ongoing complaints. she doesn't seem trust worthy, she doesn't seem authentic. what is authenticity really mean? it means it feels right, it feels like the way this person is speaking is how i would expect somebody in that position to be presenting themselves. and so the double is definitely playing a role. there it is not going to quite feel right if she as a leader is self-deprecating. it is not going to quite feel right. she has actually gone in the direction of being a leader, talking with confidence, and that is, i think, one of the things that has kind of lead to her-- people feeling uncomfortable. >> not liking her. >> yeah, and dislikability thing came up way back in 2008, remember, where barack obama during a debate, i guess, people said why aren't you-- liked.

the whole question of the requirement to be likable is applied far more to women than to men, right or wrong. >> can we talk about voice for a minute. >> yes. >> the quality of a woman's voice and how much that is playing into i just don't like her. >> well, the one we hear oftentimes is why does she yell. >> yes. >> and i have heard people say, it is not even sexism, i just wish she would stop yelling. well, if you listen to any public speaker who is addressing a crowd of thousands who are yelling back, they have to raise their voices. they have to yell. and all candidates yell because they are talking over a crowd. but it doesn't sit right when it's a woman. the thing for women, is especially to be emotional but the emotion must not be anger. >> somebody wrote, i read it recently, that when men hear a woman who is speablging just a

teeny bit harshly, what they hear in their heads is their mother saying henry! tbet back in this house right now slm, you know, that scolding voice. >> or scolding, strie dent, shrill. i have heard pem say this is not anything to do with her being female trk is just she is shrill. what is, when you hear that word, it is not applied to men. >> you think it is the female. >> i do. and i think it's so important to-- we're not talking about sexism as a kind of smeer. you know, you are sexist. even-- if we only had to worry about people who were out and out sexist, they really want to hold women back, we wouldn't have this problem. it's that we all talk through language. and the lan gaining and the perceptions of women and men are influenced by expectations. how we expect women and men to speak. how we expect women to come across. and like the language that we're given is different, you have

studied the difference between men and women going back to when we were four, five years old. >> yes. >> and i asked you to bring some tapes because i've seen what you have taped with children. and we're going to run. first we're going to run boys and how they talk to each other. >> mine is up to there. >> mine is up to the sky. >> oh! mine is up to heaven. >> oh! >> mine is all the way up to the sky. >> mine is too. >> they're competing about how high they can throw a ball. >> and it is often pointed out, they are competitive where girls are cooperative. and and it is true, their talk is competitive but also cooperative. >> the girls. >> the boys too. they are cooperating in the understanding that topping each other and being competitive is a

way to have fun. so yeah, i think there is definitely accuracy to that. but we have to keep in mind that girls and boys are both cooperative, both competitive, but we do it in different ways. >> and how are the girls, when you take them? >> two little girls i often compare with this one. so they are sitting there, drawing and girls do spend more time sitting and talking where the boys spend more time doing things. and one says, did you know the babysitter called amber has already contacts. you can think what i boy would say to that, because who knows what they would say. the other little girl says my mom has already contacts. my dad does too. and then the first girl is so pleased. and she said, the same? >> and i have found in all my research with friends, sisters, mothers, daughters, they spend a lot of effort to emphasize ways they're the same. and if one woman says they have

a problem, the other one says oh yeah, i know, i have the same problem, then they both feel like they are more connected. that is where kind of the focus on the connection, rather than topping each other. and i have heard women complain that if, my friend says i have a problem and i say that is not a problem for me, she will say, stop putting me down. >> oh. >> because you are supposed to say you are the same. and think about it for a minute what an issue this is for hillary, other women in positions of authority, where women in particular will have a negative reaction if you seem to be talking about how great or better, girls don't like girls that seem to think they are better. >> does hillary as the first woman who is the nominee in a party, does she have to work on this? does she have to do things to change, to accommodate the public's feelings about men versus women? >> i think it's something she has dealt with her entire

career. i first wrote an op ed piece about this in 1992. and i called it the hillry factor. >> she is first lady. >> she was running, yeah, bill clinton was running for president. >> that is when she was changing her hair every week. >> and that is a perfect example right there. she was-- we talk about authentic, right. she was so authentic she had that mowsy brown hair, she kept it off her face with a headband and she was criticized tor that. made fun of for that. so she got her hair colored and she got it styled and then she was vilified for being man i latif. and that was just a little micros could am of what we have seen. >> i have a question to you ask about sort of what i consider an index plainable paradox. women in power to a lot of people, sub liminally, i'm not saying they are sexist or whatever, subliminally, there is a power there. women in power, even the

president mentioned this the other day, but women run households, completely. nobody questions it. i only do what my wife tells me. my wife decides how we spend the money. my wife decides where we are going. the woman is totally in command at home. i know, okay, the woman has, that is her domain but there is something even more than that is just her domain. she is running decisions about money. why doesn't that translate into the outside world. >> yeah, it's such a good question. i remember years ago there was a candidate for mayor in d.c. that i'm going to clean house with a broom. and that did transfer to, i'm going to clean up the mess in government. for the most part, though, our associations with the power at home and our associations with the power in the real world are different. it's all so interesting. >> so interesting.

and i'm going to be think being all this when i'm home watching the debate monday night. thank you so much, deborah tannen. brilliant. >> it's been a pleasure, thank you. >> seven weeks remain in the 2016 presidential campaign. hillary clinton leads donald trump fatly according to an nbc news survey monkey weekly election tracking poll. among likely voters, 50% support clinton and 45% back trump. last week the tracking poll found clinton lead trump by only four points nationally. the race across the combined battleground states, however, is tied, 42-42 percent. voters in these states say they are still looking for change while the partisan divide remains deep. cbs news elections director anthony salvanto joins me now to discuss these developments and more. anthony, that poll, the nbc poll

says 50% for hillary clinton. is that the first time she's hit that mark? >> just about. i mean this race is tight. this race is tight. i think you characterize the overall as tight because the polls are going to move around a little bit. not just because of sampling but because there are some, not many but there are some undecided voters still out there. and i think what is really happening in these poll numbers too is that hillary has been the fronted runner but sheses' kind of an uncertain frontrunner, in that her favorable numbers have been high. in fact, the highest we've seen for someone in the lead. >> higher than his? >> higher than his. but they both have in some polls, but they both have high unfavourables. and that has added some uncertainty to this as well. so that you have got a candidate in the lead but so much of each of their vote says that they're just voting for clinton po to oppose trump. and they are just voting for trump to oppose clinton.

that adds another layer of uncertainty heading into next week too. >> i have been voting a long time, anthony, and i think i have voted against someone personally more than i have for, in all my years of an american voting citizen. i don't think that is uncommon. >> well, in this election, it's higher than it has been recently. so if you go back even to 2012 and say why did you vote for obama as opposed to romney, it was around 10%. and here you see it is over a third of hillary clinton's vote. >> or nixon. >> there you go. okay. i have some questions about the cbs poll. and about your attitudes in general. actually, based on what you just said, i get the feeling that you e not ready to put any money down on who is going to win this election, that is what it sounds like. >> yeah, i'm not a betting man in that sense. but you know, there is, like i said, there is a dynamic here that i think we have to watch. and it's not just the electoral college. we will go back and forth about which states are flipping which way over the next weeks.

there is that larger dynamic that you mentioned and it is that call for change. and although clinton is leading, what you see is that she has not yet matched the vote are-- voter desire for change. and that's been the case all through the year. they think donald trump is more likely to bring change than she is. so she's gone up in the polls but it's not-- you have to meet that electorate, what they want. and that has been core throughout. >> let me ask you some questions about the theme of the night. so why don't women like trump? what are you finding in the poll, the reason. >> yeah, you start with a context and that is that the republicans have struggled with women for awhile over the last few, the number of elections. so democrats tended to do better with women in general. trump's coalition, if you will, he does pretty well with loyal republican partisans. but the ones that are the holdouts, the thing holding him

back from hitting what mitt romney's numbers say would have been is suburban, moderate, republican-leaning women. they don't think much of hillary clinton, quite frankly. but they're not yet sold on him. they tell you in the polling that they don't really like his policies on immigration, as opposed to the larger core of his voters. they think his rhetoric can be too extreme. and yet, there is a cornel in this that we've seen, even though they do not like hillary clinton, they all are likely to say that they don't always think she's treated fairly. i think what is interesting for donald trump, especially heading into this debate, is that he has got to keep that core base. he's got to keep that fired up, and they are enthusiastic. but he can't necessarily go after hillary clinton because he needs that segment of republican moderate women who might be turned off if in fact he's not treating her fairly. >> but he doesn't have that segment. >> he's got to get them.

>> and he's close. >> i guess my next question, how vital is that segment to him. >> extremely. >> very recently he's been really trying to change his image about his attitudes and feeling towards african-americans. he did a lot of that yesterday. it's so obvious, it is so unsubtle. but can he change his image with these-- with the group we're talking about. the suburban republican women by just saying, you know, i sim pathize so much with the black person who has been shot by a policeman. can he change what he has been saying up to now? like that? >> look, it's been awhile. we've seen everybody, everybody has an opinion about donald trump at this point. he's not an unknown figure. and. >> it suggests women are susceptible to a change.

>> well, at least et cetera's got to try. because what you do say, and that's right, some maybe some would say it's cynical, it is a bank shot, right, he's going after this constituency. he's talking african-americans but he is really trying to signal to these voters over here that he's not. >> it's obvious. but it can work. >> is what i am asking. >> you know, whether or not it, withouts, i think, we know in the next couple of weeks. but so far, it has not. but so far it has not. >> it is just really starting but he's just starting it. he's got to move the needle another few percentage points. he's got to get from. >> with this women. >> with that those women. he has been lagging this who will time on just his base, just the republicans, people who would otherwise be voting for a republican nominee right now, he is getting around the low '80s and he has to get to 90 to get to match where clinton is with democrats. that's the gap. >> what don't men like about

hillary? because she has the mirror problem that he has. >> right. well, again context. democrats don't typically win men and they don't typically win white men. so she starts with a deficit just by virtue of being a democrat. and you've always got to come back to partisanship in this. but there are a few interesting things. you read it sort of indirectly in the polling, from a number of data points. you look at men-- they won't say directly in the poll, oh, we don't want to vote for a woman candidate. everybody answers to the worse kept secret, they won't answer the question if it is impolite. but what they do say is they think cultural change in the u.s. is going a little too fast am and those are men who are less lakely to vote for hillary clinton. >> yeah, because cultural change would mean a woman president, right? >> it could certainly symbolize that, right. and a lot of this is the symbolism of it all. you ask them, what is it, say you are not with hillary clinton. but what is it that her voters

must see in her, sort of put them in the other person's head a little bit, and men, much more likely than women say her voters must be looking for special privileges. you know, so you start to see-- is there a little bit in there of thinking that this is steering with-- these men are also more likely in the polling to say that their personal culture and values are becoming rarer and less respected. so if you put all those data points together, you start to see maybe the shadow of something that could be interpreted as a resistance. but is not direct. and that's hard. >> you mean resistance to a woman. >> it might be. it might be. the other reason this is hard, s a very long track record.he and so it's hard to disentangle, she is a very well-known figure, is what i am saying. she has been in the public eye for so many years. so it's not again erich woman, it's some person who is very

well-known. >> it's hard to see if it's genderrism. does a man accept hillary clinton as commander in chief? do they accept her as someone who will oversee the military. >> democrats certainly do. men overall yes, but to a lesser extent than women. i think here is another case that is interesting. when you start to unpack, what does it mean to be commander in chief. and everybody starts saying oh, it must be some sort of toughness, right. you have talked about this. men less likely than women to say she would stand up too far-- to foreign leaders. so you know, things that might include that. >> what do each one of them have to do very specifically, the main thing they have to get across that maish change a defer sit, emphasize a positive, each one. >> well, you come back for hillary clinton to this change, right? one of the things that when she-- we talk about the reason she is so well, when she is so

low, on the viewed as authentic, being viewed as honest and trust worthy. we've talked about that all through the summer. one of those drk dsh one of the reasons is you can't necessarily address that all at once in one debate-- debate. but the reasons that that sticks out, is the public has long said throughout this year, that they think, effectively there are two sets of rules. one for politicians and one for people who have a lot of money in this economy. and one for them. and being able to address the idea that she can deliver change, fairness, in an economic and political system that so many people think is rigged, is a central-- is a central way to meet that, to meet that moment. >> okay. i'm going to interrupt for a minute. because you are talking about conveying almost plans, issues, everybody else i have talked to

talked about how much she has to convey a sense of genuineness and being tough but also being soft at the-- they talk about personality issues with her. but you think it's more about issues. >> well, it's issues in the sense of, what can it do for me in this-- in this economy. >> but that's planned, it's not do i like her. >> right. >> so you are thinking that is not as important. >> look, at this point, how much change, how much change in a candidate can you affect in six weeks. >> right. >> right? how much change can you. so i think you know that to me, it always felt like for me it comes back to what is the central thing that voters are looking for this year. and that's been a constant throughout, even no matter who they were picking in the polling. that has been a constant desire. >> what is that guy going to do for me. >> and how can they help me, the voter, faf gate this landscape that i now feel is unfair. and that's why too, every time like last week we got these

economic measures that came out and people asked, oh, if the economy is doing better, why don't people feel it. why are they still angry, why do they still want change. and what the answer is, it's doing better fosh for somebody else who has advantages. and it's not doing better for mere. >> so what does trump have to do. >> well, besides talking to those republicans, those reluctant republicans who haven't come along, mainly women, for one thing, he has lagged on this commander in chief test. and that was the reason that the poll numbers went down so much right after the convention. those numbers went down. at is a cost of entry to the job. you have to be commander in chief to be president. all the other policies, congress passes them, they don't. but you have to meet that. so how is it that you convey that you are ready to be, you are prepared to be commander in chief. that has been his glaring deficit in the polling. >> that is his aim, to look presidential in this debate.

>> right. >> thank you, anthony. >> thank you. the election is now 46 days away. and the first presidential debate between donald 2ru6r7 and hillary clinton is scheduled for monday night. with me to talk about the state of the race and what we might see monday are james fallows, a former speech writer for president cartedder and a national correspondent for the atlantic. dana perino who served as george w. bush's press secretary and has just launched, i'll tell you what, a new weekly political show on fox news. and frank bruni, a columnist for "the new york times." welcome, everybody. >> thank you. >> i thought we would start and just do two rounds. and we'll start with frank. frank, okay, let's go. what is the most important thing that hillary has to do in the debate? >> i think she needs to seem genuine. voters have said time and again they worry about her honesty,

her trust worthiness. i think they also see her as someone who has been in political life for so long. they see her in some ways as just this vessel of ambition and fulfilling a kind of destination charter for herself long ago. i think she needs to convince the american voters that she has a genuine desire to make their lives better. that she is doing this for them and not for her. >> okay. i'm coming back to that. because i think she has stroaf to be genuine. and it's-- how do you go out there to try to be genuine. >> i'm real. what do you think? >> if i were speaking instrumentally, i would say you wouldn't to keep in your mind the benghazi committee hearsfroo give her a hard time. and she very confidently and firmly but not meanly, batted them back one after the other. and had this combination of showing she knows the subject matter. you name a topic, she's going to have given six speeches on it over the last year or two. but also tempermentally she is

calmly in command. that being calmly confident in her mastering that she is not distracked by this spectacle that is donald trump. that will be her goal. >> she'll look presidential. >> but in that benghazi hearing, one of the things hillary clinton was able to do was enjoy herself a little bit. so when she was sparring with the committee members, she said, bring it on, you know, i can take any of these questions. and so can't she have, do all of those things that you mentioned and then appear relatable, likable? i often feel sorry for her, that this is the perception. because i know people who work for her who say she's great. you wouldn't believe it but then i do know what it is like to work for somebody who then on camera, you think, it's not the same thing, like when are you behind the scenes an when are you on camera one of the most important things is if you were to watch the debate on monday night just for five minute, maybe, put it on mute with the closed captioning. and what do you see? and can you relate, and does she appear likable.

that would be good for her, because she is going to know the material. that's not her problem, it's just the perception. >> okay, let's talk about what trump has to do. we'll go one more round. >> for him it's much more straight forward. but i don't know that it will be any easier. he needs to sem presidential. he needs to seem like someone who can control himself when he tries to, who has some restraint. i kind of think of him as a toddler in a high chair. and he has to get through the meal without throwing his spaghetti on to the wall. and it's very hard for donald trump to get through-- important to remember here, this meal is a long one, vees a vee the prior ones. i went back and looked. he did 11 primary season debates. in only three of them did he have to speak for longer than 20 minutes. and in only one did he have to speak for longer than 30 minutes, if things go evenly, will have to speak for close to 45 minutes on monday night. he has never done that. >> well, he has done interviews that are long. and he filibusters, and he's pretty effective at it.

>> i think he filibusters, but this is a very different setting, as we know from any other encounter that exists in live tv. in these mass primary debates he could tune out when the topic was something he didn't care about, ie policy, and just sort of emerge and say little marco or whatever, or we're going to build a wall. it's much harder when a question will ask you to fill two minutes, what do you mean by that, how are you going to do that when hillary clinton will come back too. i think his challenge is on one hand he simply cannot learn enough substance in the next tief days to get through that time. so finding some way to seem in command without actually knowing the teeferl. but i think he also-- without knowing the material. but also, his dream, have i a different vision. he would come out best from this if he can make hillary clinton descend to his level, tbet into an insult contest because he will win that. so i think he wants to lure her down to a little marco type slug fest which she will, i think, try to resises. >> he will turn to her and say crooked hillary, do you think

will? >> sure. and she is preparing for that. and all the others in that vein. >> i think she's probably hoping for that but that she is not going to get it. i think his team has said for 90 minutes you are going to not insult and you will just have to be, appear presidential. so the. >> is that what you think he should do yourself? >> here is the thing i think about donald trump. he has tried this year to rewin the primary over and over again. those 40 million people that would vote for him are going to vote for him no matter what. neither of these candidates has been able to show an ability to expand her base. she is getting a little closer on some things. but he has some momentum right now. and so if he can just step over the low bar that is set for him, then he will probably do pretty well. >> if he can restrain himself he gains a lot the moment he steps on to that stage. because i think that most americans can envision hillary clinton in the presidency. it was an interesting poll a couple of weeks ago where a

significant majority of americans, meaning more than were going to vote for her said she was qualified for the presidency. under 40%, i think something like 35% said trump was qualified, which mean he had people voting for him who didn't even think he was qualified. people can't picture him as commander in chief. and if he stands there without great incident, without great fumble, without, you know, throwing too much spaghetti on the wall for 90 minutes, same kind of lecture she's at, you know, same stage, being-- you know, it immediately normalizes him in a way that he has not yet normalized. >> and elevates. >> you can probably poke him well enough to-- she will have things that she can poke him with. but he's very good at figuring out what is the insult that i can deliver to you that will just get under your skin and make you have that moment where you lack like you're irritated. >> but if it comes to that, i mean if it starts to be who is going to get under who's skin, they're both going to lose.

>> yes. and so i think it's interesting to think about the sort of unspoken factors that favor or hamper each one. but for donald trump there is this expectation. hillary clinton should be miles better. she has done a million of these things, knows all the fact and she doesn't explode whereas he does. so if he is respectable, that is i win for him. on the other hand, you two both know from your career the very narrow tight rope that prominent women have to walk in public life, where if you are too held back then are you being meek, if you are too strong, you are harsh and schlittles and lecturing. obviously she is the main case of that. but i think standing up against e did with the benghazit astle commission because she can just-- the ben gadzee commission, she was relaxed when balting them back. i think she has that same advantage with trump. >> i call it the dimension of aggression and strength. and it's just the way that it is.

we have to accept it, that if a man is seen as aggressive that is a positive. if a woman seems overly aggressive that say negative. tanned is just something they have to accept. i don't think that the clinton campaign had the right tactic after their commander in chief with matt lauer when the first thing that they said was that matt was being sectionist. i don't think that he was. and i also think that that doesn't play well, to especially women without might be thinking about vote aring for her. >> you raise a good point about what happened with matt. and that is interrupting let's do i a little bit of rounding on interrupting. can he interrupt her and not look like he's bullying. can she interrupt him and not sound like she's heck torring and for poor lester hold, what a horrible position, can he interrupt without, you know, the next day having everybody come down on his head. >> so my opinion would be that neither of the candidates-- should interrupt the other. that looks bad and the opponent can dress them down in a way, as

hillary clinton did with lasio in the snalt campaign. and as george w. bush was doing with al gore 16 years ago, but lester holt's obligation is to interrupt and to say what do you mean here. and there are precedents for this all down through debate history. the moderator is there as a representative of us, the public and of the truth. do you mean to say, madame secretary, do you mean to say, mr. trump. >> do you remember in the primaries when gingrich kement saying there you go again to marco rubio. i forget what the topic was. but rubio kept repeating whatever it was. and there you go-- and i thought it was very effective. what about a little humor, and point out and interrupts, i'm asking. >> there you go again was not interrupting it was the moderator turn to then governor

reagan. i trl so vividly, that was reagan's beginning of his answer, with jimmy carter, fairly intense. i think that both of them lose me in public performance that donald trump does not stand up well to the physical presence of a strong woman. you recall the minute officer in flint last week and carly fee writteno-- fiorina, dressing down. this is not an ideal dynamic to have a strong woman this far away. >> one of his frs debate moments was when carly fiorina, i think every woman in america heard what you said and his response what sputtering. he never looked weaker or more at a loss. >> you don't use the word histrionics but you talk about, you talk about trump's thee at rickality, operatic. and you seem to suggest it is a plus. >> i was saying that for the primary campaign which was essentially the reality tv and political selection slrks everything about donald trump, a reality performer, all paid off.

i had a face nationalling interview with a body language specialist that said while donald trump's range of emotion seems wide it is much smaller than normal peoples. he's always doing something very broad and therefore he said it is easier for him to convincingly say things that he knows are untrue and we know are untrue because there are no tells like the rest of us would have. >> what about his business acumen and how much he is worth and all that. >> that seems to be what he is most sensitive about a phoney rich guy. i think he can number one read back to him things that he has said himself, either outrageous things or other people's money or quote michael bloomberg. i think that was the actual moment of the democratic convention had probably gotten under his kin. michael bloomberg, i'm a new yorker. we new yorkers know a con when we see one. >> i don't know if it was a repeat of your piece in the atlantic, just a terrific on the debate, nothing is better. >> good call. but whether it was that or

another piece, i read recently and i was fascinated by this that when there was a rose to him some five years ago, was that why in your piece, didn't nix questions about his hair, about all of these other things but his net worth, whether he was as rich as he said he was, he nixed any jokes about that. i am sure the clinton campaign has noticed that. and i'm sure there has been a lot of talk about how to go down that road. >> what if she pulled a trump and said something like, so many people, everybody, everybody, en tell you how high thei can't levels, you didn't pay any taxes last year and are you not even worth a billion dollars what if she pulled a trump and did that. >> i think the risky thing for her is that then you, you are at risk of not seeming genuine. so if she is practiced and she is acting, that will be-- he's really good at it and i think if they do come after him on his wealth, one of the things trump can do is talk about the foundation and the clinton

global initiative. they have-- everybody has something to play here. >> she can go right back, right. >> then if she says where are your tax returns, she will say where are your transkriptds of the goldman sex-- i don't think they are equivalent but that is what he will say. and to jim's excellent point before, once they are both in the mud, they are both in the mud. >> and he's better. >> people have seen trump in the mud. they haven't seen her in the mud to the same degree, wouldn't you agree. >> i agree with you. >> so you are all saying that she should not go on that stage with the goal of getting under his skin. >> i think she should in a way that is clever and but not seeming-- like it is an act or that she is really hoping he responds. because again, i think he is going to be very disciplined and not respond. so. >> so "the wall street journal" nbc just had a poll come out today which i found amazing, because of the things that are not registering. deplorable, not registering, at

all. what is though, her email. that is registering. with him, putin, not really, a little bit. a little bit. his tax returns, nowhere. is that dead? is that dead? if that comes up does she gain anything from it? >> so on the merits, i think she and everybody in the press should press this every single day. because if donald trump doesn't do t never again in the history of presidential politics will there be a expectation, nixon, everybody has done it, even kicking and screamingk romney, four years ago today, put it out late in the cycle but everybody thought they had to do it. so if trump gets away with it, it is bad. maybe it doesn't matter electoral but it matters civicically. >> if he doesn't know something, okay, is that just baked in? i mean we know he doesn't know the capitol of-- fassau, we know he doesn't. >> he doesn't know-- if he

doesn't know aleppo, i mean, does that matter? people know that he's not informed. >> i don't know if that was in the poll or not. but no, that's not-- again, those 40 million people that will vote for him, they don't care about those things. they want change. he has the benefit of being the out party candidate. he is different. he would bring something new. anti-establishment. not going to reward people in washington any more. so if you have, estimates show, a hundred million people watching trk is not like your twitter feed, that is much broader. and so if he doesn't know something, yeah, sure, i think it matters. but it won't necessarily matter to his core group. of questioning saying okay, you say you are prolife. what does that actually mean, who are you going to put in jail. and i think a problem for trump is he has not lived his life in

the policy world. so he doesn't know that step one means step nine when you go down the dominoes. so i think drawing that as the way as opposed to pop quizes. >> i also don't think voters like a know it all. and i don't think voters like the media. they see it as an intermediary here. i think he can get away without knowing a lot of proper nouns. the question is if he is in one of those areas where he is fumbling for them and he is feeling at a loss, if he doesn't do that confidently, which is weird to have you be confident in your ignorance, but a lot of the most successful politicians are confidently ignorant. if he loses his pois from not knowing something, that matters. but if he is poised in his ignorance, i don't think it will matter that much. >> he is really adept at not answering the questions. and sort of doing curly cu e away from what was asked and moving on to a different plane. and he's actually gifted at itment and you know, it's going to be. >> i think he is gifted and for my sins, i watched i think all

the republican primary debates again for doing this story. and it is amazing how much time he could fill with such a limited repertoire of thoughts it is build a wall, great deal, we always lose. >> and just with five or six things, i think it will be harder to just recycle those in this setting. and that is part of lester holt's obligation. >> the other thing that we-- that will likely happen before monday night is there will be some sort of breaking news development. and so how they think on their feet and respond to something that they might not have been talking about for the last three or four weeks, although it will probably be something relatable that they have talked about. i always like to see how a candidate might respond to breaking news. >> if the debate were tonight and the preparation ended two days ago, they wouldn't have been prepared specifically to talk about charlotte, tulsa, all of that. >> so jim, cuz you studied, whatnot only what goes on in debates and what is important, let's-- can we talk about body

language as being maybe more important than the words they say? so not what they say, the wall and all that, but what is on their face, and how they sound. >> indeed. and so setting a side the last part about how they sound first, something that is striking and we reject the idea but all of us in the political affairs world, but really every moment you can remember from a debate was not the content of what somebody said but how he or she responded. how dan quail looked when lloyd ben son dressed him down, yes. and so, the old maximum just watch the debate with the sound turned off, not to learn but to see who is going to be seen as winning or losing. a person who seems comfortable, seems confident, who is not looking sort of ashen as rick perry did when he couldn't remember his third cabinet department it wasn't he forgot it, but he so obviously knew he made a mistake. turn off the sound and just look at how they look. that works for me up until trump. because when i think of the

republicanrdebates, if i had turned off the sound i would have seen trump pouting, sulking, huffing. i mean he was not a cool cucumber. and other than being along with jeb bush, the tall-- he felt pet you lent, put upon, nasty. all those expresentations. >> the we having turned the sound off, that trump was behaving the way a successful wrestling promoter would. the famous video of him shaving the head of vince mcma hon. >> the new metric for debate. >> if that is-- for the republican primary debate you had a very large field, one person who was a very well trained and famous reality show performer, and a plurality got you ahead. so if you can get 20 or 25% of the people to find you most interesting in wrestling terms, he survived. >> those same poses, those same expressions transfer over to a general election debate where you need more than a plurality, i am not so sure it will serve

trump well. >> it didn't hurt him in the primaries. >> i think people like listening to hmmmm. there are his people, but on television, when you are watching, you kind of get a kick out of, you can believe he just said that i can't believe. >> and he is pretty funny. she can be funny too. it is just a little bit hard for her. and it is almost like for her walk on the high wire without a net. >> is it harder for women to be funny? >> i have heard that. >> i mean i'm hilarious, so-- so-- no, i don't know. it is still new. this say big deal. this is historical moment on monday. and there is a lot of pressure on her. and the women vote is one thing, i was saying earlier that sort of in 2 thousand, you had the soccer mom, in 2004, the security mom. and really this year, i think

based on the polling, you will have another guest on your show talking about this, is that married men with children are kind of the target demographic that both of these campaigns really need to talk to reasons not republican women. >> well, i think that donald trump in some ways, he has tried-- the republicans have pretty much come home for him. not entirely 678 but a lot of republican women have strong feelings against hillary clinton. they have for years. they aric baaed in. but if you look at a state like north carolina, college educated whites, both men and women tend to fall into her camp. then that will be a big battleground state is north carolina for so many reasons. >> i don't think she needs to talk so much to any group as to an o motion-- emotion. the thing concerned me most watching her campaign and one of her greatest vulnerabilities. donald trump seems to understand intuitively just how gloomy many americans feel, just how angry they feel, how much unease they are. and some times i feel like in trying not to be donald trump, in trying not to be a scare amonger, she goes too much in the other direction and

americans don't hear from her. i get how uneasy you feel about this country's future, how uneasy awe feel about this which's place in the world. i think she needs to nail that emotion in this debate in a way i don't think she has nailed it. >> she has been cautious because i don't think she wants to offend president obama. so she is in a tricky position with the party, the democrats have been in power for two determines. do-- terms, do you really want a third democratic term, usually paryns do not do that. they go with another party, this election turned out to be a really fietding for her. >> so she has to walk a little bit. >> and he should give her a bit of a pass. i think president obama should recognize that she is going to have to put some distance between us. just as she had to put distance between herself and her husband on policy. >> i want to do another round. what has surprised each of you the most about what we have experienced in this campaign so

far? >> jim? >> it's hard to see how anybody could avoid the answer of the success of trump, because there has been nobody remotely like him in our national political history. nobody, with public service experience whatsoever. we all know that on any given day he commands a gaffe or an offense that in previous-- it would stop somebody cold, there have been a hundred so far. so what it is in the combination of the entertainment industry and the genuine discontent in the industry and his personality and the strategy of the republicans, they attacked him, they attacked each other. all these different things that allowed him to get this far, i am hoping personally this becomes a theoretical, analytical spers two months from now as opposed to understanding our situation. but i think his has to be the surprise. >> that is a number everybody agrees with, but second to that? >> i would give the same-- that is so-- that is the only answer, a subanswer of that for me, the

utter fusion in this campaign, in it debate we're talking about is a good example of entertainment of politics. i have never seen the media fill an election so hard and sell it with such thee at rickal value. the drum beat, the countdown clocks-- clocks. you see these numbers more than a hundred people people are going to tune in. i would love to think wow, that is a great yard stick for the vy tallity of our democracy. i think they are tuning in to it more like any spectacle in which something ugly could happen. i think like the complete erasure of the line between politics and entertainment is going to be one of the stories of this campaign we will be talking about well into the future. >> i agree with both of those things. i will get began you lar. i think that the fact that he, donald trump has spent so little money on his campaign and on ads and she has spent a ton of money, 50 million dollars and st not moved the needle for her. i don't know what that means.

jeb bush was a great example. a lot of money has been spent. he hasn't really had to spend that much money. and he ask-- he has momentum right now. so i don't know what that means going forward. but here is what. >> i'm going to tell you what surprised me. not as much as trump but this is a little self-serving, but that hillary hasn't talked about her being a grandmother more. because one of her problems maybe sexist reasons, i don't know, but sh risker ll and all that. i went to a focus group. grandmothers have the best reputation in the world. and they are all the qualities that she needs to get. the genuine loving, there was somebody in a focus group that i sat in on asked what comes to mind when you say grandmother. and you know, loving, and wonderful, and trust worthy. i mean all these things. surprised she hasn't played it up a little more. >> i think they are overthinking in brooklyn, overthinking her

age, an her health. age is off the table because he's older. >> but vy tallity and health. >> i don't think health is deservedly on the table it is ridiculous. if health is on the table it does mean it becomes a more loaded thing to use the word grandmother. because people also associate that with mean on in the years. >> she has to decide what her biggest problem is. and if it is that she is not warm and genuine and lovable and delicious and all those things, which is one of her big problems. >> the other thing that is very interesting is the republican party has had to-- had a big fight amongst themselves. but the democrats aren't going to have one. -- is going to have one, that is coming. let's say he had becomes president. she will never be pure enough for the left. and it will be a very difficult presidency. >> right. >> here is what will surprise me, she goes through all of trump's commentary which is that everything in america is just

unprecedently terrible. and that it's-- i think what president obama has been more or less effective in saying is that we have terrible problems, but compared to eight years ago, compared to the rest of the world, there is no other country on earth whose prospects you would change for the united states, china where i used to live, they have way more problems than we do. so why at least half the country has a narrative that the u.s. is like in 1861 or in 1933-- 1933 when things are actually getting better most places. the rep connecticut vengs in a story in the journal said gop delegates convinced economy is a shambles except where they are from. >> everybody happies-- hates congress but they love their congressmen. >> there is a crisis of can confidence, you mentioned china, gallup has been asking every year, when they do this annual poll, they ask americans who has got the biggest economy in the world. since 2008 every year americans for the first time began answering china.

the largest number of americans say china. it speaks volumes about where americans now perceive their place in the world. >> i don't want to interrupt, but you are unfortunately i'm going to have to interrupt you, this is very sad because i would love to go on with this discussion forever. my favorite topic, politics. but we have run out of time, so thank you dana, thank you, jim, thank you, frank. thank you. >> for more about this program and earlier episodes visit us online at pbs.org and charlie rose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. >> you're watching pbs.

man: it's like holy mother of comfort food.ion. kastner: throw it down. it's noodle crack. patel: you have to be ready for the heart attack on a platter. crowell: okay, i'm the bacon guy. man: oh, i just did a jig every time i dipped into it. man #2: it just completely blew my mind. woman: it felt like i had a mouthful of raw vegetables and dry dough. sbrocco: oh, please. i want the dessert first! [ laughs ] i told him he had to wait.