i mean republican candidate right now, just about any one of them, you know, would be up ten points right now. i mean it is just absolutely astonishing what a missed opportunity this is. >> rose: go ahead. >> i personally know three people and they're on the left, who swor, they don't swear on bibles because they are on the left, but they would never vote for hillary clinton no matter what, and all of them, one of the things they most dislike about the other party is that they have been forced to vote for somebody that they absolutely did not want to vote for, because in their view donald trump is an existential threat to everything. >> but to katty's previous poirnghts i mean will the democratic administration interpret this as a pan date? what this is is a clear repudiation of trump and everything he represents. >> rose: what is the alternative he has a pan date. >> to recognize that it was a repudiation of trump, it wasn't

an endorsement of her and her agenda and she has to work to bring people together. as opposed to this country is getting behind in major numbers the way they did with the two obama elections, behind obama's agenda. >> i think dan makes a really interesting point. i take another-- another chop at that, charlie. is that so the question is, if there is a clinton administration, do they say a the mandate is one question, but the other is do they press the case that the republican party created donald trump? in other words, that this is-- and hillary clinton has been pushing this a little bit on the stump, in order to help democratic candidates. but if she really grinds this in afterward, okay, and tries to delegitimize republicans by saying well, here say bad candidate but it really grew out of a party that really allowed this to fester inside of it, that would be a really-- that would be real hardball. the alternative is that she doesn't do that. that she reaches out, that she allows people like paul rye an and marco rubio if he is

re-elected to kind of put away their embrace of donald trump, than that is perhaps a way that she begins developing a relationship with people who are going to have a hard time working with her because there are still these voters out there who are not going to be happy if their lawmakers on the republican side do deals with hillary clinton. >> and perhaps are pointing some republicans to her administration if she win toos. >> yeah, could be. >> and by the way, i suspect if you look at what hillary clinton did when she got to the senate, she basically said i'm going to go and i'm going to work across the aisle and i'm going to try to actually get some things done. i'm going to build relationships and i'm going to have some trust on the other side so that when we have to cut a deal, we can cut a deal. the fact of the mat certificate most presidents come into office with an approval rating of in the 60st and sometimes 70st when they get there on day one. it's very unlikely that hillary clinton's approval rate on the day she get there is going to be even at 50. so she will northbound a different position in terms of her ability to claim a mandate and the necessity, really, for her to try to figure out how to

move some things forward. because the republicans will be able if they want to, to just dig in and do what they've done for the past fours years to br ak obama and basically waste an opportunity to get some progress made for the country. i'm hopeful they won't do that and i'm hopeful hillary clinton i think you see tonight a sense that she would like to try to get something done as opposed to just fall into this gridlock. >> kathleen. >> the problem s the problem she has is that fine, anything that she can get paul ryan, if he's the speaker, to agree with, bernie sanders and elizabeth warren are not going to agree with. so she is going to be caught in a terrible squeeze. it's just going to make gf earning i think nearly impossible. >> anything paul ryan agrees to, will get squeezed on the other side. that is how we started this conversation by saying they are not really effectively two parts on the left and two parties on the right and they're going to have to try to figure out how to live together. >> pal ryan is going to regret his decision to taking the speak areship, i think. because he hasn't even seen what

is ahead of him with the freedom forum. because those people will not do anything they don't believe in leadership. they don't believe in governance. they believe in opposition. and that's the way it's going to be as soon as-- if hillary clinton becomes the president. they are not going to cooperate at all. and poor paul ryan who i assume has always had higher aspirations is going to be stuck pretty much stuck. and meanwhile, meanwhile, by the way, the thing that i think is most concerning to everyone, i've been out traveling a lot and talking to voters, and several across the country, and what they are so concerned about is what happens afterward. and you know, i don't think hillary clinton as much as she wants to unite the country is going to have that immediate effect. and donald trump, has already paveed the way for this opposition to rise up. we've heard people say we're going to take our country back one way or the other. you know, one woman was quoted as saying we're all second amendment pros around here. i don't know what that means, that they are going to hit the

streets with their guns but in any case, the craziness begins next january. if not before. >> rose: jeffrese, i think you suggested on this program last time we had a debate that maybe she should be reaching out to the trump voters earlier. >> yeah. one of the things i think that has been missed here, and it may just be the clinton campaign's calculations, is i would have thought it would have made sense for her, at least to spend a couple of days, you know, with people that she knows aren't going to vote for her, even to the extent of saying to them, i think i did say this the last time, you know, we have to acknowledge that we blew it with the significant segment of the american people. we thought trade was going to be a win-win for everybody. it didn't. you can look at the economist, that has now said there are a couple of million jobs lost that they can point to in the case of these trade agreements. and some acknowledgment that there is work to be done that, in other words, to say in some sense we have failed.

and that is why donald trump could get as far as he did i think it is critical to try that after the election. look if the republicans do what they did to obama, literally gary on inauguration night in a steakhouse in washington a and say he gets nothing, then at least she knows she has that is the terrain she is fietding on. but at this point, coming too office as somebody said with lower approval ratings probably than any president-elect, i think there has to be a real, honest to god gesture. and as her own campaign said in those wikileaks, apologizing or acknowledging that kind of failure on the part of her own party. that's not necessarily in her dna. >> you know, john, what have we learned about her from the wikileaks? >> disclosures about poddesta's emails. >> well, we've learned essentially what we already knew. that she say very cautious and careful politician. that the system that surrounds her is cautious and careful.

that they this prying to fuzzy up her views on trade. that they were trying to divert from her views on the keystone pipeline and on her email server. it pretty much tracks with that there was confusion on whether she was a moderate or a prog resessive. there is an amusing email exchange there where-- asking john poddesta why she would say she say md rate and poddesta reports he asked her and she saidz she didn't remember and he writes back saying i'm not sure i believe her. so if it was difficult for the public to understand whether she was a pod rate or progressive, there was that shall-- this was echoed a little bit in those emails am but they track with basically what has been sort of public view. of hillary clen ton. and so i don't think-- i think we get to see it in a much realer way of something that

feels very, in her speeches, the excerpts of her speeches to wall street. she is more conservative than the person who ran in the democratic primary. everybody kind of knew that. and so we. >> especially dernie sanders. >> yeah, yeah. and we see kind of what has been the kind of conception of her. but it's just very much in black and white. >> rose: so quickly, to katty and then john heilemann, so what's going to happen, assuming the election turns out the way it is now, what happens to donald trump? >> we've had the reports that he is thinking of setting up a tv empire. i mean i think there is a risk to the trump brand at this point. that he has performed so badly in the course of this election that he's always presented himself as somebody who is a winner who could potentially be about to be a loser. and what does that do to you know trump victor yaws-- viblg

torious. that doesn't help him. are you already hearing reports of canceling rooms in trump hotels. if conference bookers start canceling conferences in trump hotels, that will impact his brand and his business. he has got a long period, i think, of rehabilitating himself not just in the public high but potentially in his business empire as well just because his reputation will be damaged, not just by the way he has behaved but by losing the election. >> rose: thank you, katty, john heilemann, if you by chance were writing a book about this, if you by chance were writing a book. >> can i, charlie. >> rose: yes, go ahead, on trump, go ahead. >> i never like to disagree with katty kay, look, the trump brand has been transformed by this. and i agree with her 100 percent that the old trump brand that the hotels and some of the other things trump stood for have now been undermined. and if he wanted to try to be the old trump, he would try to rehabilitate the brand. i think that the new trump, the

at right trump, the breitbart trump, the trump that has been campaigning for months now as if all he cares about is his base, not doing anything that normal presidential nominee was do, reaching out to the vote ares that you would need to win the election, that donald trump is positioning himself to be the leader of something. i don't know if that is a conversation network or an online network or something else, or just a movement. but he's building a potent base of tens of millions of people who he is trying to say hillary clinton is the leader of a criminal enterprise, an international con spirszee, and mile-- and the election is now being stolen from me and from you. and in an environment where you have a very, as everyone has voted on your panel tonight, your wise panel, you have hillary clinton coming in with such high negative rating, donald trump is fertile ground for tump to be-- trump to be the figure head of clinton opposition in the next phase as we go forward. and i see him clearly trying to do that afterwards.

the one thing i know, is that donald trump is not going to go quietly into this good night it would be profoundly against everything in his character to go quietly anywhere. >> go ahead. if you are writing a book, john, and get this started in a wanting moment what is the narrative what is the driving mar tiff of this book, this campaign for 2016? donald trump? >> i think the driving narrative of it would have to be donald trump staging a hostile takeover of the republican partied and in the process, revealing just how deeply divided the republican party is, at least at the national level. obviously the republican party is very strong, it holds the majority of gov norship, state houses around the country, but at the presidential level, the schisms within the republican part and the hollowness of what the party now represents has been laid bare by a man who was not a republican 36 months ago, who road in, and took over this

party, won its nomination with no campaign, spending virtually no money, believing in almost nothing that the republican part has believed in in the post war era and he became its standard bearer. that is an incredible story. and republicans to go to my friend dan senor's point when he asked the question of what the clinton white house will do how 2 will interpret its mandate, the bigger question is how his friend paul ryan and all the other republicans so called leaders will interpreted what happened to their party over the last 18 months that is going to be the fundamental question going forward if hillary clinton does win the presidency, much more so than what kind of pan date they di vine from their what looks like now to be a relatively substantial win in early november. >> jeffrese green feeldz and al hunt what would you add to that? i think that's a wonderful sumation. i think also it raises a broader question as what does it mean to be a political party? there is an influential book that came out some years ago called the party decides that

argues even on a primary system it is the party faithful, the party leaders. i think that theory is going to come under some real heavy analysis. because it wasn't simply that it was a hostile takeover, that is absolutely right. but it was a takeover where the normal structures of a political party that we used to think were in existence absolutely disa breer-- disappeared as every single stage, the constitutional wing-- institutional wing of the republican party that had to look at donald trump and say my lord, no, were absolutely impotent in the face of his rise.-- rise, absolutely startling. and it raises the question if a political party cannot stop that kind of takeover, then what does it mean even to vay political party any more in the sense that we used to understand it. >> charlie, he's a man totally lacking in grace. he always puts self above country or anything else. and i think after this election, where i think he will be soundly

defeated, our long national nightmare will not be over and that will particularly, particularly be bothersome and troubling for the gop. >> that brings us full circle. >> let's not forget, let's not forget all the people that do support donald trump. >> rose: exactly right. >> and who will not have been satisfied. because they have legitimate concerns and are very worried about the future of their children. >> rose: and it's imperative for both parties to speak to them. >> for republicans i think there is an opportunity in all of this. it's okay for republicans to say, republican leaders to say we loathe donald trump, but we recognize the trump unearthed some issues we need to learn about. >> rose: thank you dan and all of you, it has been an hour that i enjoyed and learned. thank you very much. 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.

>> will you ever be able to retire securely and in style? ric edelman is a new york times best-selling author, radio, and tv host. he's been named america's top financial advisor by barron's three times. >> people talk about their worries over the current fluctuation of the marketplace, what are we worried about? >> now he provides you with the same advice he gives his thousands of clients. "ric edelman's truth about retirement" begins now. ♪ [ cheers and applause ] >> thank you. thank you very much. thank you. well, i'm very excited to be here with you today. thank you so much for joining us. we are going to shwi